Ashton Woods and D.R. Horton are both national homebuilders that compete in multiple U.S. markets. Buyers in states where both builders operate — including Texas, Florida, Georgia, Arizona, North Carolina — may find themselves comparing the two when choosing a new construction home.
Both builders use standardized purchase agreements that contain clauses affecting buyer rights and remedies. This comparison examines documented contract patterns, legal history, and key differences based on publicly available information.
The presence of a contract clause does not mean it appears in every agreement from that builder. Contract terms may vary by state, community, and transaction. This comparison is intended to help buyers ask informed questions, not to recommend one builder over the other.
At a Glance
Ashton Woods
D.R. Horton
Market Position
Top-20 private homebuilder
Largest homebuilder in the United States by volume
Ticker
Private
NYSE: DHI
Headquarters
Atlanta, Georgia
Arlington, Texas
Affiliated Lender
AWC Mortgage
DHI Mortgage
Documented Clauses
14
11
Documented Cases
6
8
Contract Clause Comparison
The following comparison shows documented contract patterns for each builder. A check mark indicates the clause type has been documented; it does not mean it appears in every contract.
Both Ashton Woods and D.R. Horton include restrictive limited warranty language in their documented contract patterns. Buyers considering either builder should be aware that this clause type has been identified in purchase agreements from both companies.
Ashton Woods has been documented using warranty voiding conditions provisions, while D.R. Horton does not have this pattern documented in available contract analyses. This represents a difference in contract risk profiles between the two builders.
Ashton Woods has been documented using preferred lender steering / incentive lock provisions, while D.R. Horton does not have this pattern documented in available contract analyses. This represents a difference in contract risk profiles between the two builders.
Both Ashton Woods and D.R. Horton include independent inspection restriction language in their documented contract patterns. Buyers considering either builder should be aware that this clause type has been identified in purchase agreements from both companies.
Both Ashton Woods and D.R. Horton include material substitution without consent language in their documented contract patterns. Buyers considering either builder should be aware that this clause type has been identified in purchase agreements from both companies.
Both Ashton Woods and D.R. Horton include daily closing penalty language in their documented contract patterns. Buyers considering either builder should be aware that this clause type has been identified in purchase agreements from both companies.
Ashton Woods has been documented using certificate of occupancy override provisions, while D.R. Horton does not have this pattern documented in available contract analyses. This represents a difference in contract risk profiles between the two builders.
Both Ashton Woods and D.R. Horton include punch list / post-closing repair limitation language in their documented contract patterns. Buyers considering either builder should be aware that this clause type has been identified in purchase agreements from both companies.
Both Ashton Woods and D.R. Horton include mandatory binding arbitration language in their documented contract patterns. Buyers considering either builder should be aware that this clause type has been identified in purchase agreements from both companies.
Both Ashton Woods and D.R. Horton include class action lawsuit waiver language in their documented contract patterns. Buyers considering either builder should be aware that this clause type has been identified in purchase agreements from both companies.
Both Ashton Woods and D.R. Horton include deposit forfeiture / earnest money trap language in their documented contract patterns. Buyers considering either builder should be aware that this clause type has been identified in purchase agreements from both companies.
Both Ashton Woods and D.R. Horton include implied warranty of habitability waiver language in their documented contract patterns. Buyers considering either builder should be aware that this clause type has been identified in purchase agreements from both companies.
Both Ashton Woods and D.R. Horton include limitation of liability / no monetary damages language in their documented contract patterns. Buyers considering either builder should be aware that this clause type has been identified in purchase agreements from both companies.
Both Ashton Woods and D.R. Horton include monthly payment suppression / hidden costs language in their documented contract patterns. Buyers considering either builder should be aware that this clause type has been identified in purchase agreements from both companies.
Legal History Comparison
Both builders have documented litigation histories. Ashton Woods has 6 documented cases and investigations; D.R. Horton has 8. The nature and focus of litigation differs between the two builders.
Ashton Woods
Olive v. Ashton Houston Residential LLC — construction defect lawsuit
Bismuth v. Ashton Houston Residential LLC — defect claims
Dixon v. Ashton Orlando Residential LLC — Florida defect claims
WFTV Action 9 investigation into warranty practices
D.R. Horton
Smith v. D.R. Horton (SC Supreme Court, 2016) — Multiple contract provisions found unconscionable
Two active payment suppression lawsuits (Robinson, Santiago — 2025)
$16.1M construction defect settlement in South Carolina
Hunterbrook Media investigation into lending practices
Both Ashton Woods and D.R. Horton have faced litigation related to construction practices and contract terms. Buyers should review the full builder profiles for detailed case information and consider how each builder's legal history may reflect patterns relevant to current purchase agreements.
Ashton Woods is positioned as top-20 private homebuilder. D.R. Horton is positioned as largest homebuilder in the united states by volume.
Documented Contract Patterns
Ashton Woods has 14 documented clause types in our analysis; D.R. Horton has 11. Ashton Woods has a broader set of documented contract patterns, though this does not necessarily indicate greater risk — it may reflect more extensive public documentation.
Affiliated Lender
Ashton Woods uses AWC Mortgage as its affiliated lender. D.R. Horton uses DHI Mortgage. Both builders offer incentives to use their affiliated lenders, which may affect financing terms and closing costs.
Geographic Overlap
Ashton Woods operates in 6 states; D.R. Horton operates in 15 states. They share 6 states where buyers may be choosing between the two.
Litigation History
Ashton Woods has 6 documented cases and investigations; D.R. Horton has 8. The nature and severity of litigation differs between the two builders — review the legal history section for details.
What Buyers Should Consider
Both contracts require careful review.
Whether you are buying from Ashton Woods or D.R. Horton, the purchase agreement contains clauses that may limit your rights. Both builders use standardized contracts that favor the builder.
Check your state's specific protections.
The enforceability of many contract clauses depends on state law. A clause that was struck down in one state may be enforceable in another. Review the state-specific analysis for your location.
Compare affiliated lender terms independently.
Both builders offer incentives to use their affiliated lenders. Get independent quotes from at least two outside lenders before committing, and verify that all quoted payments include taxes, insurance, and HOA fees.
Do not assume one builder's contract is inherently safer.
Both builders use similar clause types. The differences are in specific language and implementation. An independent contract review can identify the specific risks in whichever agreement you are considering.
This article is for informational and educational purposes only. It does not constitute legal advice. Consult a licensed attorney in your state before making legal decisions.