There’s lots of good information on real estate websites, but ratings of individual agents probably aren’t worth much.

According to the latest report from the Consumer Federation of America, you should approach such ratings with a healthy sense of skepticism. “Consumers will learn far more about agents if they read all the customer reviews,” said the study’s author, Stephen Brobeck -- the key word being “all.” Many, or even most, of the reviews on a given site might be positive. You’ll have to read every last one of them to find out if a previous client had problems or issues you should be concerned about.

“There has to be a critical comment in there somewhere,” says Brobeck, who headed the CFA before relinquishing that post to become a senior fellow. “So read all the reviews carefully and look for details.”

Even at that, though, you may not get the full picture of an agent’s prowess.

Most reviews are accurate, at least on Zillow’s website, Brobeck’s study found. The site vets all legitimate reviews that are submitted, and agents are not permitted to remove the negative ones.

However, on the other sites studied -- realtor.com, HomeLight, Yelp and Facebook -- the agent has the option of including only favorable reviews, according to the report. And as this column pointed out in early January, sites operated by agents often include fake reviews from friends, colleagues or the agents themselves.

Customer ratings can be even more bogus, according to the study. Ratings are usually on a scale of 1 to 5, but nearly all of the hundreds of agents studied by the CFA were rated at 4.0 or better, with “a large majority” of the sample receiving a 5.0.

It’s strange, indeed, that there’s not an average agent in the bunch.

The study found numerous cases in which agents with “very few and sometimes only one customer comment” were anointed with a 5.0 rating. A “significant minority” with a 5.0 rating had three or fewer customers.

“The ratings are not that helpful,” Brobeck told me. “They are inflated and do not provide a reliable basis for comparing agents.”

The new report is the fourth in a series on real estate from the CFA. Two of the previous studies dealt with issues concerning agent representation, and the third covered the commissions agents and their brokers charge.

Nine in 10 buyers and sellers use an agent, yet most of them undertake limited searches before hiring one, if they search at all. According to research from the National Association of Realtors, 75% of buyers and sellers interview just one agent.

But, as the CFA report points out, “there can be a huge gulf between the quality of services offered by different agents.” And they usually charge the same, whether they’re experienced or not. That alone is reason enough for buyers and sellers to do their homework.

Unfortunately, most people go with the first agent they speak to, without looking into past sales, when those sales were completed and whom the agent represented -- the buyer or seller. Without that information, Brobeck says, it is difficult to determine whether the agent has had recent clients.

Here, Zillow earns high marks. Based on a sample of active agents in 30 cities, the study found that the popular site is most likely to include date and party represented for past sales. NAR’s website, realtor.com, came in second, but it only listed past sales in little more than half the agent profiles, and only 1 in 5 profiles included customer reviews.

The others were far behind, even worse than the agents’ website themselves, which tended to list past sales and more customer reviews than Yelp, Facebook or HomeLight.

Even at that, Brobeck warned that Zillow’s customer reviews “are not unbiased” because almost all of them are from customers who have been asked by their agents to post their thoughts. Obviously, agents don’t ask their unhappy customers to report how they feel.

The report also notes that some of the sites trade high ratings for advertising dollars. “An agent receiving a rating below 5.0 isn’t likely to cooperate with the site, let alone pay for advertising,” it says.

In studying agent profiles, consumers would be better served by paying particular attention to their recent activity. They should also look at the price history of properties listed by the agents to learn how long it took them to sell and whether the selling price was marked down, and by how much.

Recent sales mean the agent is active in the market, while substantial price reductions could indicate that the agent inflated the original asking price and had to lower it to net the sale. Days on the market can also indicate whether the place was priced right or not.

When you’ve picked a few agents who seem to stand out, interview each one in person. Ask if they are part of a team in which the work is delegated, and ask for an explanation of why the property is worth what the agent believes it to be. Determine how long the agent has been in the business, and whether they have worked in the specific community or neighborhood where you are buying and selling.

As Brobeck points out, it’s far easier for a realty agent to secure a license than it is for hairstylists. In some states, an agent can obtain a permit after only a month or two of training.

Buyers these days go online to discover what’s available. And with the pandemic still very much a concern, they tend to visit the houses they find appealing by taking a virtual tour rather than an in-person look-see.

That’s because many sellers still aren’t comfortable with strangers coming into their homes -- masks or not. But a surprising number of agents -- about 27%, according to a recent National Association of Realtors survey -- aren’t making use of virtual tours at all. Worse, a poll of professionals at a recent town hall sponsored by Inman, a real estate-centric news service, found that 74% had never made a listing video.

Undoubtedly, many of these non-users are part-time agents, or those who only cobble together a few sales a year. So if you’ve mistakenly signed up with such an agent, either jettison him or her as soon as possible or learn how to make your own video. The experts say it isn’t all that difficult. Besides, even top-selling agents may ask you to create a movie of your place because they aren’t crazy about venturing outside yet, either.

Video programs range from the simple to the complex. You can use Facetime, Facebook Live, Google Hangouts, Zoom, YouTube, Instagram or any of a host of other apps. You can opt for something more elaborate, but just remember that your production doesn’t have to be incredibly professional.

A smartphone is the only tool you’ll need, says Patty McNease of listing website Homes.com. (Full disclosure: I contribute content to Homes.com.) If you want to produce something more memorable, you also might want to get your hands on a tripod, microphone and light panel.

Otherwise, make sure to turn all the lights on and open all window coverings to allow as much natural light inside as possible. You might even consider replacing all your light bulbs with high-wattage ones.

Before you start filming, send pictures of your house to your agent for advice on what to highlight, what needs to be painted or otherwise improved, and suggestions of what furniture and personal items to remove.

All in-person tours start at the curb, so start your video there, too. The folks at Home Matters, a real estate e-newsletter, suggest picking an eye-catching location to start: say, a corner of your lot that shows your property’s expanse. Of course, make sure you’ve spruced up the yard and front door; a dull door and shabby shrubs will defeat your purpose.

As you move along to the front door, begin a narration to tell viewers about what they are seeing. But be careful not to divulge negative information. Saying the lot is a half-acre, the largest in the neighborhood, is good. But the fact that you pay someone $100 every other week to mow the lawn is not something a potential buyer needs to know.

Once inside, point out the highlights of each room, both visually and verbally. It’s better to stay focused on an attribute or two for too long than to move through too quickly. And camera angles are important, says Allen Alishahi of ShelterZoom. If you are looking to showcase your stone countertops, prop your camera on one side of the kitchen to show them on the other side of the room.

While you’re discussing certain items, try to build an emotional connection to them, says McNease. For example, at the fireplace, you might mention the many nights you enjoyed reading to your kids or grandkids in front of a roaring fire. Or at the rear deck, casually note how the family enjoyed “picnicking” outside when the weather was nice.

Some desirable items to highlight: The size of rooms, as in 20-by-20 or 400 square feet; ceiling heights; trims and moldings; walk-in closets; dual sinks; expansive windows; hardwood flooring; custom tile work or anything else that might set a buyer’s heart fluttering.

If you have vaulted ceilings, show them, too. But don’t mention what it costs to heat and cool your house until you are asked. And if you redid your kitchen, say, or put on a new roof, then mention that. Tell folks when the job was done, and that you secured a permit from the local authorities.

If you’ve already moved out of the house, consider virtual staging: a process of virtually adding key pieces of furniture to your video. Chicago agent Margaret Goss found several companies online that offer this service. This step can be helpful, since many people have trouble visualizing empty houses, especially remotely.

It’s hard to say how long your video should run. Some buyers will want to see and hear as much as possible, but others will lose interest quickly. Jameson Doris of RISMedia suggests keeping it short -- “a couple of minutes at most” -- unless you are using Facebook Live. Then, it’s the longer, the better.

If your photos and video are good enough, they might be sufficient to nail a sale -- some people these days are buying houses without ever stepping inside them -- or at least to whet someone’s interest enough to see your place in person.

Above all, don’t be overly critical of the quality of your work. You might have to take a couple stabs at it before you get it right. Says David Gumpper of the WAV Group consulting firm: “This approach is new, and will only get better over time.”

If it ain’t broke, why fix it?

That’s what some people in the housing business are thinking about a “fix” to the consumer-friendly Consumer Reinvestment Act. It’s a change that was rushed out during the pandemic without buy-in from federal banking agencies, by a regulator who couldn’t wait to get out of town.

Enacted in 1977, the CRA has done yeoman’s work over the past several decades in forcing lenders to serve all consumers in their banking footprints, not just the high-income, superior-credit borrowers. The net effect of the law has been to fight redlining -- the practice of banks drawing a red line around neighborhoods in which they refuse to lend. Thus, the CRA makes mortgages, car loans and other products more available to a wider array of borrowers.

That’s why many in the business are puzzled as to the reasoning for the changes. Certainly, some of the circumstances don’t pass a sniff test, such as Comptroller of the Currency Joseph Otting’s resignation the day after the final rule was posted, after an abbreviated time to consider public comments.

If this was a boxing match, it likely would be ruled a split decision, since the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and the Federal Reserve Board, the other two major federal banking regulators, have not signed off on the final rule.

Rep. Maxine Waters sums up the naysayers’ opinions pretty succinctly: The new regulation “will be harmful for so many communities across the country at a time when they are under severe distress due to the pandemic,” said the California Democrat, who chairs the House Financial Services Committee. “This ill-advised rule badly weakens the implementation of the law and ultimately turns the Community Reinvestment Act into the Community Disinvestment Act. Gutting CRA has been Otting’s priority from Day 1.”

A former banking executive from Iowa, Otting was a Trump appointee. At OneWest Bank, he worked closely with the bank’s founder, Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin. The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency supervises nearly 1,400 national banks, federal savings associations and federal branches and agencies of foreign banks operating in the United States.

The House has passed a resolution that would prevent the OCC from making any changes in the law, but it’s doubtful the Senate will pass it. And even if it did, the president has said he will veto it.

“The CRA is an essential law that was put in place to prevent redlining and to require banks to invest and lend responsibly in the communities where they are chartered,” said Waters, who introduced the resolution with another House Democrat, Rep. Gregory Meeks of New York. “It is completely unacceptable for the OCC to use the cover of a pandemic to rush out a rule that will be harmful to communities that are already suffering during this crisis.”

Community groups like the National Community Reinvestment Coalition, the California Reinvestment Coalition and legal oversight group Democracy Forward agree that the administration has been keen on gutting the CRA.

In fact, the three groups have given notice they intend to sue the OCC over it.

“The OCC went against the majority of public comments and introduced new, gaping loopholes into the rules that will allow banks to reduce their focus on lower-income borrowers and communities: the very communities the law was intended to protect,” said NCRC’s Jesse Van Tol.

The agency took just 40 days to post the final rule after receiving more than 7,000 public comment letters on the revision.

During a recent seminar, the nonpartisan Urban Institute summarized what’s wrong with the changes:

-- The metric used for assessing CRA compliance neglects community needs.

-- There is no anaylsis of the proposed rule’s impact.

-- It would result in a loss of public data.

Federal Reserve Board Governor Lael Brainard told another UI meeting that CRA reform should not be rushed, and should rather be the result of a united front among financial regulators.

“Given that reforms to the CRA regulations are likely to set expectations for a few decades, it is more important to get the reforms done right than to do them quickly,” Brainard said. “That requires giving external stakeholders sufficient time and analysis to provide meaningful feedback on a range of options for modernizing the regulations.”

Researchers believe it’s way too soon to downshift the fight against redlining, especially at a time when COVID-19 seems only to have widened racial disparities in housing.

According to UI’s Solomon Greene and Alanna McCargo, African Americans and Latinos have been hardest hit by stay-at-home orders and other public health measures put in place to slow the spread of COVID-19.

Because of a legacy of occupational segregation, the two researchers said, minorities are heavily overrepresented in low-wage jobs and in jobs that can’t transition to remote work. In April, Latino unemployment reached a record high of 18.9% and Black unemployment reached 16.7%.

Disinvesting in neighborhoods can add to the problem by causing real economic disparity, according to Redfin’s Dana Anderson: “Redlining remains a major factor in today’s wealth gap between Black and white families across the country.” Over the last 40 years, according to Redfin’s figures, the typical homeowner in a neighborhood that was redlined for mortgage lending by the federal government has gained 52% less in personal wealth generated by property value increases than one in a greenlined neighborhood.

But redlining hurts the entire community, not just owners of color, says Noel Andres Poyo, director of the National Association of Latino Community Asset Builders, testified during a congressional field hearing.

“When people do not have fair access to mainstream financial products and services, they tend to be less economically productive and experience less economic mobility,” he said. “Redlining and other forms of financial discrimination are market distortions, an insidious form of financial inefficiency, that threaten this nation’s economic future.”

-- Freelance writer Mark Fogarty contributed to this column.