For a Dallas–Fort Worth office owner, the strongest leasing partner depends on the building: a suburban repositioning, a new development, a mature institutional asset, or a property that needs leasing and management to work together. Our 2027 selections focus on the people and assignments behind each platform.
These five firms are our editorial picks for different owner requirements. We considered the site's nine brokerage criteria, with particular attention to documented local assignments, office specialization, transparent supporting material and the services needed to execute the owner's plan. The order below follows the use cases; it is not a numerical performance league table.
How we rank commercial real estate brokerage firms in Dallas–Fort Worth–Arlington, TX
Our 2027 ranking uses the same nine-part methodology as our 2026 guides. We compare local specialists with regional and national firms using current public sources, verified service geography and relevant specialization in office leasing for landlords. We evaluate each candidate using these nine criteria:
- Experience and reputation
- Market knowledge and specialization
- Network and connections
- Technological capabilities
- Data transparency and accuracy
- Online presence and digital marketing
- Local and global reach
- Service range
- Innovation and customer focus
Using these criteria, we identify one #1 editorial recommendation for the assignment described below and compare other qualified options. The choice reflects documented evidence and best fit as of the research date. Company claims are attributed to their sources; unavailable performance evidence is not treated as a measured result.
OUR #1 RECOMMENDATION
#1 — Stream Realty Partners
For 2027, Stream Realty Partners is our #1 editorial recommendation among commercial real estate brokerage firms for office leasing for landlords in Dallas–Fort Worth–Arlington, TX.
Best fit: Repositioning and development
Our #1 editorial recommendation is based on named 2026 local project evidence.
The shortlist at a glance
Our #1 choice and other specialists| Firm or broker | Best fit | Why selected |
|---|---|---|
| #1 Stream Realty Partners | Repositioning and development | Named 2026 local project evidence. |
| Cushman & Wakefield | Structured institutional campaign | Published Dallas agency team and service process. |
| JLL | Leasing-management coordination | North Texas operating scope and named property team. |
| CBRE | Institutional submarket coverage | Local Investor Leasing profile with specified submarkets. |
| Holt Lunsford Commercial | Integrated regional owner relationship | Published project-leasing and management model. |
Stream Realty Partners — best fit for repositioning and development leasing
Stream reported five leases totaling 177,743 square feet at Plano's Sixteen Forty in October 2026. The announcement identifies the owner, individual leasing professionals and the building's transition from a single-tenant property to a multi-tenant office asset. That level of project detail makes Stream a compelling interview candidate when leasing must support a capital-improvement plan. Stream: Sixteen Forty leasing results, October 28, 2026
Its separate appointment at The Offices at The MIC in Mansfield supports consideration for new-development leasing. Delivery is anticipated in 2027; it is a future project, not a completed 2027 result. Stream: The Offices at The MIC assignment, October 21, 2026
Cushman & Wakefield — best fit for a structured institutional leasing campaign
The Dallas agency team publishes its landlord-service scope, named professionals and examples spanning Dallas, Plano, Irving and Richardson. Its stated process includes competitive analysis, positioning, pricing, tenant outreach, negotiations and reporting. This is a useful match for an owner seeking a formal campaign with defined reporting responsibilities. The evidence establishes local capability; portfolio size alone does not establish superior returns. Cushman & Wakefield: Dallas Office Agency Leasing Advisors
JLL — best fit for coordinating office leasing and management
T.D. Briggs' profile describes oversight of North Texas office leasing and management. JLL also provides a property-level example at Two Energy Square, naming Blake Shipley and Jeff Eckert on the assignment. We favor that combination of a local operating platform and visible assignment-level contacts for owners who want to evaluate how leasing decisions connect with building operations. JLL: T.D. Briggs and North Texas leasing and management; JLL: Two Energy Square listing and named leasing team
CBRE — best fit for institutional office assets across several Dallas submarkets
Alexandra Cullins' Investor Leasing profile identifies landlord representation and experience across Uptown, the Knox District, Preston Center, North Central Expressway, the Tollway, Legacy and Las Colinas. The practical reason to include CBRE is that specified local agency expertise, rather than the company's national size. An owner should match the proposed team to the property's submarket and size before selecting the firm. CBRE: Alexandra Cullins, Investor Leasing
Holt Lunsford Commercial — best fit for owners seeking an integrated local relationship
HLC describes project leasing for institutional and individual owners, with an owner-oriented service model and related management capabilities. Its published client examples specifically discuss DFW leasing and management. This makes HLC worth comparing when the owner values a regional operating relationship and coordination among leasing, management and accounting. Client testimonials are supporting statements published by the firm, not independent outcome audits. Holt Lunsford Commercial: Project Leasing
How the nine criteria informed the selections
Experience, specialization, network, technology, transparency, digital marketing, geographic reach, service range and customer focus all matter. The strongest public evidence in this comparison concerns local roles, assignments, marketing material and service scope. Proprietary technology, client satisfaction and negotiation results cannot be fairly scored from these pages alone. We therefore explain the fit and evidence rather than attach invented numerical ratings.
What to request before appointing a leasing team
Ask each finalist for its proposed lead broker, directly comparable recent leases, competing assignments, a building-specific marketing plan, an activity-report example and the assumptions behind achievable rents. Compare expected concessions, improvement costs and downtime alongside headline rent. For a repositioning, ask how the team will sequence marketing with construction and how progress will be measured.
The right appointment is the team whose documented experience matches the building and whose proposed execution plan withstands comparison. These selections are intended to make that comparison more focused; they do not promise a particular occupancy level or investment return.