Repeat Guests Are Costing STR Operators $1B a Year in OTA Fees

Most Operators Don't Know How Much Repeat Revenue They're Losing

Here's a question most short-term rental operators can't answer: What percentage of your guests have stayed with you before? And of those repeat guests, how many booked through Airbnb instead of your direct website?

The answer, for most operators, is uncomfortable.

We analyzed over 230,000 confirmed bookings across 115 vacation rental operators in 2025, spanning urban apartments, beach houses, mountain cabins, and resort destinations. The data reveals a systemic problem: operators are paying OTA commissions on guests they've already acquired.

We call it repeat guest leakage. And it adds up.

Repeat Guests Drive 1-26% of Revenue — Depending on Operator Scale

Across our dataset, repeat guests account for 1% to 26% of total booking value. The median is 5%, but the distribution varies significantly by portfolio size.

Larger operators tend to see higher repeat guest rates—likely due to broader geographic reach, longer operating history, and more opportunities for guests to return. But as we'll see, they also leak more of that repeat revenue to OTAs.

77% of Repeat Guest Revenue Still Goes Through OTAs

In other words, for every dollar of repeat guest revenue, 77 cents flows through Airbnb, VRBO, or Booking.com — with standard OTA commissions of 12-20%.

More than half of operators see 75%+ of their repeat guest revenue go through OTAs. Only 16% have figured out how to capture most of it directly.

Repeat Guest Leakage Is a Measurable, Avoidable Cost

Leakage cost = Total GBV × Repeat Share × OTA Share of Repeat × Commission Rate

Example: $10M GBV × 10% repeat × 80% OTA × 15% commission = $120k re-acquisition cost

Direct Bookings Generate 3x More Repeat Guests Than OTAs

When we look at repeat guest rates by channel, the direct channel stands out:

This reflects a self-reinforcing cycle: guests who book direct are more likely to have discovered the brand independently, and the direct booking experience, with better data capture and communication opportunities, strengthens that relationship.

First Booking Channel Determines Where Guests Rebook

Perhaps the most important finding: booking channel is sticky. Where a guest books their first stay is strongly predictive of where they'll book again.

Two patterns stand out:

Direct booking creates a loyalty flywheel. 86% of guests who first book direct will book direct again. Every direct booking you win today tends to compound into future direct bookings.

Brand visibility on OTAs matters. 89% of guests who first book on Airbnb rebook on Airbnb — unless they remember your brand. The 8% who convert to direct found a reason to seek you out. This isn't an argument against OTAs; it's an argument for making your brand memorable within the OTA experience.

VRBO and Booking.com guests show more willingness to convert — 15-20% book direct on their next stay. These channels may attract more deal-seeking or research-oriented travelers, though more research would be needed to confirm.

As Operators Scale, OTA Leakage Increases Faster Than Loyalty

Larger operators tend to have more repeat guests in absolute terms — but they also leak more to OTAs.

Enterprise operators see roughly double the repeat guest rate of small operators — but over 80% of those repeat bookings go through OTAs. Small operators, often with more personal guest relationships, retain more repeat guests in their direct ecosystem.

One hypothesis: as operators scale on OTAs, they may lose the personal touch that drives direct rebooking. The relationship shifts from the operator to the platform. But other factors — such as marketing investment, brand maturity, and operational focus — likely play a role as well.

Direct Booking Share Is the Strongest Predictor of Low Leakage

The strongest relationship in our data: operators with higher direct booking share also tend to capture more of their repeat guests.

Operators with less than 5% direct bookings see 87% of their repeat guest revenue leak to OTAs. Those with 30%+ direct share tend to see around 10% leakage.

This correlation likely reflects multiple factors. Operators who invest in direct booking infrastructure probably also invest in brand, guest communication, and retention. We can't isolate causation, but the pattern is consistent: the practices that drive direct booking also seem to drive repeat guest capture.

Case Study: 15% Direct Mix Captures 84% of Repeat Revenue

One luxury brand with 30+ listings in Florida illustrates the pattern. Their overall channel mix is roughly 15% direct bookings, 85% OTA. But their repeat guest metrics tell a different story:

Their direct channel represents just 15% of total bookings, but captures 84% of repeat guest revenue. The math: one in four direct bookings is a repeat guest, compared to one in sixty-seven on Airbnb.

How? Two factors appear to contribute:

Direct acquisition through paid search. They invest in Google Ads to drive new guests to book direct. Those direct-acquired guests enter the loyalty flywheel — our data suggests 86% of direct bookers tend to book direct again.

Systematic post-stay marketing. Email campaigns keep the brand top of mind with past guests. When guests plan their next trip, the brand is already in their inbox.

The key insight: they're not primarily converting OTA guests to direct. They've built an alternative acquisition channel that feeds directly into retention.

Why Loyal Guests Keep Rebooking Through Airbnb

If guests have stayed with you before, why do they go back to Airbnb? Three likely factors:

1. Brand Awareness Gap

Guests remember the property, not the operator. They recall "that amazing cabin in Tahoe" but not the company that managed it. When they're ready to rebook, they search Airbnb — because that's where they found it last time.

2. No Compelling Reason to Book Direct

Many operators offer identical pricing on OTAs and direct. Without a loyalty program, repeat guest discount, or exclusive perk, there's little incentive to leave the familiar OTA booking flow.

3. Trust Asymmetry

Guests trust Airbnb's cancellation policies, customer support, and payment protection. Direct websites — especially those that look dated or lack reviews — can create uncertainty.

This Is About Brand Recall — Not Breaking OTA Rules

Direct booking strategies must operate within OTA terms of service. Most platforms restrict off-platform solicitation and link sharing during active bookings. Email marketing must comply with applicable regulations (CAN-SPAM in the US, GDPR in Europe), with a focus on explicit opt-in consent for marketing communications.

The opportunity is in brand recall and post-stay relationship building, not circumventing platform rules.

Five Actions That Reduce Repeat Guest Leakage

For operators looking to capture more repeat guest revenue:

1. Measure Your Repeat Guest Leakage

Most operators don't know this number. Start by calculating what percentage of repeat guests book through OTAs and estimate the commission cost.

2. Build Brand, Not Just Distribution

Your OTA listings, welcome materials, and guest communication should reinforce your brand. Guests should leave knowing who you are, not just which platform they booked on.

3. Create a Reason to Book Direct

Repeat guest discounts, loyalty points, early access to availability, or exclusive perks give guests an incentive to seek out your direct channel.

4. Invest in Direct Acquisition

The operators with the lowest repeat leakage aren't just converting OTA guests — they're acquiring new guests directly through search, content, and referrals.

5. Stay in Touch

Email marketing to past guests is often among the highest-ROI retention channels in hospitality. A guest who stayed with you two years ago might be planning their next trip right now.

Repeat Guest Leakage Is a Compounding Cost — Not a Marketing Tax

Repeat guests represent a meaningful share of revenue for most vacation rental operators — typically 5-8%, and up to 26% for some. But roughly three-quarters of that revenue flows through OTAs.

The operators capturing repeat guests direct tend to share common traits: investment in direct booking infrastructure, systematic guest communication, and brand-building throughout the guest journey. Correlation isn't causation, but the pattern is clear enough to act on.

The question isn't whether you can afford to invest in direct booking. It's whether you can afford the compounding cost of repeat guests lost to OTA commissions.

How the Repeat Guest Leakage Analysis Was Conducted

This analysis is based on 231,150 confirmed reservations from 115 short-term rental operators, spanning January through December 2025. Operators range from 1 to 588 active listings, with annual booking value ranging from $31,000 to $15 million.

Repeat guest definition: A booking is classified as a repeat guest booking if (a) the guest has 2+ bookings with the same operator (all-time), and (b) this is not the guest's first booking. Guest identification is based on name matching (first name + last name), which may undercount repeat guests due to name variations and overcount due to common names. Analysis limited to bookings with valid guest name data.

Channel classification: Direct bookings include reservations from direct websites, booking engines, and direct API integrations. OTA bookings include Airbnb, VRBO/HomeAway, and Booking.com.

Commission estimates: Based on standard OTA commission rates of 12-20%, varying by platform and operator agreement.

Data sourced from hostAI's analytics platform. All client data has been anonymized.

Related research: This report quantified how much repeat and direct demand leaks to the OTAs. Our follow-up study, The Direct-Fit Profile, examines what predicts capturing it — testing price, size, amenities, and scale across 350,000+ bookings.