70.6 average across 2 concepts
Local operating-model alignment analysis
Best Franchise Opportunities We Assessed in Columbia, South Carolina
We compared 14 franchise concepts for Columbia, South Carolina. Household service demand was a leading positive mechanism.
What “best” means in this ranking“Best” means the strongest modeled local operating alignment among the franchise concepts assessed on this page. It does not estimate earnings or determine which franchise is best for a particular candidate.
14Concepts evaluated
28Sources used
20Primary sources
30Local metrics
Evaluation set
Why these concepts were evaluated
This is not a ranking of every franchise that may be offered in the city.
14Concepts assessed
Concepts were included when enough operating-model information existed to assign a provisional local-sensitivity profile. Unresolved inputs reduce confidence or remain conditional rather than automatically excluding a concept.
A brand’s participation in our referral network does not add points or change its position.
City-level conclusions
What stood out in our assessment
1.2 points average among 13 affected concepts
Tested rank range spans 10 positions
Executive conclusion
What the ranking means for Columbia, South Carolina
City Wide, HomeSmiles, and Jan-Pro International produced the highest modeled local-alignment scores in the evaluated set. Household service demand was the strongest positive scored mechanism among 8 exposed concepts, adding 0.9 points on average. City Wide was especially relationship-sensitive: removing university and government account demand moved it from #1 to #2 in the full model rerun. These scores describe local operating alignment, not expected returns or overall franchise quality; the offered territory and franchise economics still require separate diligence.
How this differs from a directory: the model does not award points for brand popularity, advertising placement, or referral compensation. It tests how documented local conditions interact with each concept’s operating requirements.
Best franchise opportunities assessed
Top 10 local-alignment scores from 14 concepts assessed
“Best” refers to modeled local operating alignment among the concepts assessed—not expected earnings, franchise-system quality, or candidate fit.
Rankings use full-precision scores.Displayed values use one decimal place. Identical displayed scores can therefore have different ranks, and close results should be treated as effectively similar.
| Rank | Franchise | Alignment and tier | Largest advantage | Largest constraint | Evidence confidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | City WideFacility managementInvestment: $229,729–$410,730 | 73.1Tier 2 · Favorable modeled alignment | +2.4 ptsTarget-market demand | No material negative local adjustment | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 2 | HomeSmilesProperty maintenance servicesInvestment: $148,110–$201,800 | 72.6Tier 2 · Favorable modeled alignment | +2.0 ptsTarget-market demand | No material negative local adjustment | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 3 | Jan-Pro InternationalCommercial cleaningInvestment: $130,000–$421,500 | 72.1Tier 2 · Favorable modeled alignment | +1.9 ptsTarget-market demand | No material negative local adjustment | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 4 | FASTSIGNSSigns and graphicsInvestment: $231,226–$386,285 | 71.9Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +1.6 ptsTarget-market demand | No material negative local adjustment | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 5 | ActionCOACHBusiness coachingInvestment: $71,668–$303,513 | 71.9Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +1.3 ptsTarget-market demand | No material negative local adjustment | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 6 | ZOOM DRAINDrain and sewer serviceInvestment: $266,250–$570,500 | 71.4Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +1.0 ptsTarget-market demand | No material negative local adjustment | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 7 | Pillar To Post Home InspectorsHome inspectionInvestment: $102,690–$134,290 | 71.4Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +1.4 ptsTarget-market demand | No material negative local adjustment | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 8 | Aire ServHVAC installation, repair, and maintenanceInvestment: $113,308–$271,708 | 71.1Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +1.1 ptsTarget-market demand | No material negative local adjustment | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 9 | Mr. RooterPlumbingInvestment: $152,900–$298,675 | 71.1Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +1.1 ptsTarget-market demand | No material negative local adjustment | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 10 | Mister Sparky ElectricElectrical | 70.8Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +0.8 ptsTarget-market demand | No material negative local adjustment | Moderate evidence confidence |
Conditions that changed the analysis
What mattered most in Columbia, South Carolina
Population growth and active city-permitted housing construction support household-service demand
This relationship affected 8 concepts and added 0.9 points on average among those exposed. Local evidence: Estimated households in the 2020-2024 period: 53,076 households. [4]
USC Columbia enrollment exceeded 40,000 in fall 2025 and Columbia MSA government employment was 85,900 in June 2026
Large university and government scale supports institutional account prospecting and professional referral networks, but it should not be converted directly into general walk-in demand. Public and university customers also use registration, solicitation, and approval procedures that can make the sales process materially different from ordinary consumer acquisition. [9] [7] [11] [13] [15]
recurring-commercial-service
This operating-model cluster separated from the broader set because its exposure to local support and constraints differed. The strongest positive factor was target-market demand, while the main constraint was property replacement-cycle demand. [7] [8] [4] [9] [11]
Evidence behind the city mechanisms
Resident scale, city economic activity, and the primary-county business base support broad local business demand1 modeled effect
Local business demandTarget-market demand
Population growth and active city-permitted housing construction support household-service demand1 modeled effect
Household service demandTarget-market demand
Large government employment and USC Columbia create a concentrated institutional account base1 modeled effect
University and government account demandTarget-market demand
Government, professional-services, financial, and university activity supports referral prospecting while public accounts use formal procurement3 local facts · 2 modeled effects · 2 sources
- Government employment in the Columbia MSA in June 2026: 85,900 jobs preliminary [7]
- Professional/business services and financial activities employment in the Columbia MSA in June 2026: professional business services jobs: 52,800; financial activities jobs: 35,100 jobs preliminary [7]
- USC Columbia preliminary enrollment exceeded 40,000 students in fall 2025: minimum: 40,000; qualifier: exceeded students [9]
Professional and institutional relationship densityReferral ecosystem
Institutional procurement-cycle frictionSales and customer acquisition
Design and historic overlays add site-specific exterior and signage review requirements1 modeled effect
Signage and prototype adaptation burdenRegulatory and operating friction
Long-running Carolina Crossroads construction can disrupt routes using the I-20/I-26/I-126 interchange corridor1 modeled effect
Temporary route disruptionTransportation, routing, and parking
Compare all assessed concepts
Local impact by franchise concept
14 concepts shown. Expand a concept to see the score-changing factors and their modeled drivers; the full audit ledger stays collapsed.
#1Tier 2 · Favorable modeled alignment73.1
City Wide
Initial investment: $229,729–$410,730
Increase +2.4 pts Target-market demandNo material negative local adjustment identified
Rank sensitivity: Stable
Why it ranks here
Score-changing local factors only. Evidence links open the underlying city finding.
| Local factor | Modeled drivers | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +2.4 pts | |
| Referral ecosystem |
| +0.7 pts |
| Net local movement | +3.07 pts | |
Net uses full-precision effects; displayed factor and driver rows are rounded.
Franchise evidence
Source material assessed
Item 3 — Litigation
1 image
Item 6 — Other Fees
1 image
Item 7 — Estimated Initial Investment
2 images
Item 12 — Territory
1 image
Item 20 — Outlets and Franchise Information
1 image
Full calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not mistaken for a score-changing effect.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +2.4 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Not included in the score |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Measured; no meaningful local adjustment |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Referral ecosystem | +0.7 |
| Territory quality | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 73.07 |
| Published local-market alignment | 73.1 |
Factor calculations use full precision. Contributions and published scores are displayed to one decimal place; ranking order uses the full-precision score.
Evidence confidence
- City Modifier Evidence
- Adequate
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Limited
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Target-market demand +2.4 pts
- Tested rank range
- #1–#1
#2Tier 2 · Favorable modeled alignment72.6
HomeSmiles
Initial investment: $148,110–$201,800
Increase +2.0 pts Target-market demandNo material negative local adjustment identified
Rank sensitivity: Stable
Why it ranks here
Score-changing local factors only. Evidence links open the underlying city finding.
| Local factor | Modeled drivers | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +2.0 pts | |
| Referral ecosystem |
| +0.5 pts |
| Net local movement | +2.56 pts | |
Net uses full-precision effects; displayed factor and driver rows are rounded.
Franchise evidence
Source material assessed
Item 3 — Litigation
1 image
Item 6 — Other Fees
1 image
Item 7 — Estimated Initial Investment
2 images
Item 12 — Territory
1 image
Item 20 — Outlets and Franchise Information
1 image
Full calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not mistaken for a score-changing effect.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +2.0 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Not included in the score |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Measured; no meaningful local adjustment |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | +0.5 |
| Territory quality | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 72.56 |
| Published local-market alignment | 72.6 |
Factor calculations use full precision. Contributions and published scores are displayed to one decimal place; ranking order uses the full-precision score.
Evidence confidence
- City Modifier Evidence
- Adequate
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Adequate
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Limited
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Target-market demand +2.0 pts
- Tested rank range
- #2–#3
#3Tier 2 · Favorable modeled alignment72.1
Jan-Pro International
Initial investment: $130,000–$421,500
Increase +1.9 pts Target-market demandNo material negative local adjustment identified
Rank sensitivity: Highly sensitive
Why it ranks here
Score-changing local factors only. Evidence links open the underlying city finding.
| Local factor | Modeled drivers | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +1.9 pts | |
| Referral ecosystem |
| +0.2 pts |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Institutional procurement-cycle friction EvidenceConditional — applicability must be confirmed | Not scored |
| Net local movement | +2.06 pts | |
Net uses full-precision effects; displayed factor and driver rows are rounded.
Franchise evidence
Source material assessed
Item 3 — Litigation
1 image
Item 6 — Other Fees
1 image
Item 7 — Estimated Initial Investment
1 image
Item 12 — Territory
1 image
Item 20 — Outlets and Franchise Information
1 image
Full calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not mistaken for a score-changing effect.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +1.9 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Not included in the score |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Measured; no meaningful local adjustment |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Referral ecosystem | +0.2 |
| Territory quality | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 72.06 |
| Published local-market alignment | 72.1 |
Factor calculations use full precision. Contributions and published scores are displayed to one decimal place; ranking order uses the full-precision score.
Evidence confidence
- City Modifier Evidence
- Adequate
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Limited
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Target-market demand +1.9 pts
- Tested rank range
- #3–#8
#4Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment71.9
FASTSIGNS
Initial investment: $231,226–$386,285
Increase +1.6 pts Target-market demandNo material negative local adjustment identified
Rank sensitivity: Moderately sensitive
Why it ranks here
Score-changing local factors only. Evidence links open the underlying city finding.
| Local factor | Modeled drivers | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +1.6 pts | |
| Referral ecosystem |
| +0.3 pts |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Signage and prototype adaptation burden EvidenceConditional — applicability must be confirmed | Not scored |
| Net local movement | +1.90 pts | |
Net uses full-precision effects; displayed factor and driver rows are rounded.
Franchise evidence
Source material assessed
Item 3 — Litigation
1 image
Item 6 — Other Fees
1 image
Item 7 — Estimated Initial Investment
2 images
Item 12 — Territory
1 image
Item 20 — Outlets and Franchise Information
1 image
Item 19 — Financial Performance Representation
2 images
Public company data assessed
3 sourcesFull calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not mistaken for a score-changing effect.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +1.6 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Not included in the score |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Measured; no meaningful local adjustment |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Referral ecosystem | +0.3 |
| Territory quality | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 71.90 |
| Published local-market alignment | 71.9 |
Factor calculations use full precision. Contributions and published scores are displayed to one decimal place; ranking order uses the full-precision score.
Evidence confidence
- City Modifier Evidence
- Adequate
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Limited
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Target-market demand +1.6 pts
- Tested rank range
- #4–#7
#5Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment71.9
ActionCOACH
Initial investment: $71,668–$303,513
Increase +1.3 pts Target-market demandNo material negative local adjustment identified
Rank sensitivity: Highly sensitive
Why it ranks here
Score-changing local factors only. Evidence links open the underlying city finding.
| Local factor | Modeled drivers | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +1.3 pts | |
| Referral ecosystem |
| +0.6 pts |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Institutional procurement-cycle friction EvidenceConditional — applicability must be confirmed | Not scored |
| Net local movement | +1.85 pts | |
Net uses full-precision effects; displayed factor and driver rows are rounded.
Franchise evidence
Source material assessed
Item 3 — Litigation
1 image
Item 6 — Other Fees
1 image
Item 7 — Estimated Initial Investment
2 images
Item 12 — Territory
1 image
Item 20 — Outlets and Franchise Information
1 image
Full calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not mistaken for a score-changing effect.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +1.3 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Not included in the score |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Measured; no meaningful local adjustment |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Referral ecosystem | +0.6 |
| Territory quality | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 71.85 |
| Published local-market alignment | 71.9 |
Factor calculations use full precision. Contributions and published scores are displayed to one decimal place; ranking order uses the full-precision score.
Evidence confidence
- City Modifier Evidence
- Adequate
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Limited
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Target-market demand +1.3 pts
- Tested rank range
- #2–#6
#6Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment71.4
ZOOM DRAIN
Initial investment: $266,250–$570,500
Increase +1.0 pts Target-market demandNo material negative local adjustment identified
Rank sensitivity: Moderately sensitive
Why it ranks here
Score-changing local factors only. Evidence links open the underlying city finding.
| Local factor | Modeled drivers | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +1.0 pts | |
| Referral ecosystem |
| +0.4 pts |
| Net local movement | +1.40 pts | |
Net uses full-precision effects; displayed factor and driver rows are rounded.
Franchise evidence
Source material assessed
Item 3 — Litigation
1 image
Item 6 — Other Fees
1 image
Item 7 — Estimated Initial Investment
2 images
Item 12 — Territory
1 image
Item 20 — Outlets and Franchise Information
1 image
Full calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not mistaken for a score-changing effect.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +1.0 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Not included in the score |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Measured; no meaningful local adjustment |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | +0.4 |
| Territory quality | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 71.40 |
| Published local-market alignment | 71.4 |
Factor calculations use full precision. Contributions and published scores are displayed to one decimal place; ranking order uses the full-precision score.
Evidence confidence
- City Modifier Evidence
- Adequate
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Limited
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Target-market demand +1.0 pts
- Tested rank range
- #6–#9
#7Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment71.4
Pillar To Post Home Inspectors
Initial investment: $102,690–$134,290
Increase +1.4 pts Target-market demandNo material negative local adjustment identified
Rank sensitivity: Highly sensitive
Why it ranks here
Score-changing local factors only. Evidence links open the underlying city finding.
| Local factor | Modeled drivers | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +1.4 pts | |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Temporary route disruption EvidenceConditional — applicability must be confirmed | Not scored |
| Net local movement | +1.35 pts | |
Net uses full-precision effects; displayed factor and driver rows are rounded.
Franchise evidence
Source material assessed
Item 3 — Litigation
1 image
Item 6 — Other Fees
1 image
Item 7 — Estimated Initial Investment
2 images
Item 12 — Territory
1 image
Item 19 — Financial Performance Representation
1 image
Public company data assessed
2 sourcesFull calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not mistaken for a score-changing effect.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +1.4 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Not included in the score |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Measured; no meaningful local adjustment |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | Not included in the score |
| Territory quality | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 71.35 |
| Published local-market alignment | 71.4 |
Factor calculations use full precision. Contributions and published scores are displayed to one decimal place; ranking order uses the full-precision score.
Evidence confidence
- City Modifier Evidence
- Adequate
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Limited
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Target-market demand +1.4 pts
- Tested rank range
- #5–#13
#8Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment71.1
Aire Serv
Initial investment: $113,308–$271,708
Increase +1.1 pts Target-market demandNo material negative local adjustment identified
Rank sensitivity: Moderately sensitive
Why it ranks here
Score-changing local factors only. Evidence links open the underlying city finding.
| Local factor | Modeled drivers | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +1.1 pts | |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Temporary route disruption EvidenceConditional — applicability must be confirmed | Not scored |
| Net local movement | +1.14 pts | |
Net uses full-precision effects; displayed factor and driver rows are rounded.
Franchise evidence
Source material assessed
Item 3 — Litigation
1 image
Item 6 — Other Fees
1 image
Item 7 — Estimated Initial Investment
1 image
Item 12 — Territory
1 image
Item 20 — Outlets and Franchise Information
1 image
Item 19 — Financial Performance Representation
1 image
Public company data assessed
1 sourceFull calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not mistaken for a score-changing effect.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +1.1 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Not included in the score |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Measured; no meaningful local adjustment |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | Not included in the score |
| Territory quality | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 71.14 |
| Published local-market alignment | 71.1 |
Factor calculations use full precision. Contributions and published scores are displayed to one decimal place; ranking order uses the full-precision score.
Evidence confidence
- City Modifier Evidence
- Adequate
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Adequate
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Limited
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Target-market demand +1.1 pts
- Tested rank range
- #7–#9
#9Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment71.1
Mr. Rooter
Initial investment: $152,900–$298,675
Increase +1.1 pts Target-market demandNo material negative local adjustment identified
Rank sensitivity: Moderately sensitive
Why it ranks here
Score-changing local factors only. Evidence links open the underlying city finding.
| Local factor | Modeled drivers | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +1.1 pts | |
| Net local movement | +1.06 pts | |
Net uses full-precision effects; displayed factor and driver rows are rounded.
Franchise evidence
Source material assessed
Item 3 — Litigation
1 image
Item 6 — Other Fees
1 image
Item 7 — Estimated Initial Investment
2 images
Item 12 — Territory
1 image
Item 20 — Outlets and Franchise Information
1 image
Full calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not mistaken for a score-changing effect.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +1.1 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Not included in the score |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Measured; no meaningful local adjustment |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | Not included in the score |
| Territory quality | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 71.06 |
| Published local-market alignment | 71.1 |
Factor calculations use full precision. Contributions and published scores are displayed to one decimal place; ranking order uses the full-precision score.
Evidence confidence
- City Modifier Evidence
- Adequate
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Limited
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Target-market demand +1.1 pts
- Tested rank range
- #8–#11
#10Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment70.8
Mister Sparky Electric
Increase +0.8 pts Target-market demandNo material negative local adjustment identified
Rank sensitivity: Moderately sensitive
Why it ranks here
Score-changing local factors only. Evidence links open the underlying city finding.
| Local factor | Modeled drivers | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Target-market demand |
| +0.8 pts |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Temporary route disruption EvidenceConditional — applicability must be confirmed | Not scored |
| Net local movement | +0.85 pts | |
Net uses full-precision effects; displayed factor and driver rows are rounded.
Full calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not mistaken for a score-changing effect.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +0.8 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Not included in the score |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Measured; no meaningful local adjustment |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | Not included in the score |
| Territory quality | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 70.85 |
| Published local-market alignment | 70.8 |
Factor calculations use full precision. Contributions and published scores are displayed to one decimal place; ranking order uses the full-precision score.
Evidence confidence
- City Modifier Evidence
- Adequate
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Limited
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Target-market demand +0.8 pts
- Tested rank range
- #10–#12
#11Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment70.7
Workout Anytime
Initial investment: $1,060,850–$1,840,550
Increase +0.7 pts Target-market demandNo material negative local adjustment identified
Rank sensitivity: Moderately sensitive
Why it ranks here
Score-changing local factors only. Evidence links open the underlying city finding.
| Local factor | Modeled drivers | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Target-market demand |
| +0.7 pts |
| Net local movement | +0.67 pts | |
Net uses full-precision effects; displayed factor and driver rows are rounded.
Franchise evidence
Source material assessed
Item 3 — Litigation
1 image
Item 6 — Other Fees
1 image
Item 7 — Estimated Initial Investment
2 images
Item 12 — Territory
1 image
Item 20 — Outlets and Franchise Information
1 image
Full calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not mistaken for a score-changing effect.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +0.7 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Not included in the score |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Measured; no meaningful local adjustment |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | Not included in the score |
| Territory quality | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 70.67 |
| Published local-market alignment | 70.7 |
Factor calculations use full precision. Contributions and published scores are displayed to one decimal place; ranking order uses the full-precision score.
Evidence confidence
- City Modifier Evidence
- Adequate
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Limited
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Target-market demand +0.7 pts
- Tested rank range
- #11–#14
#12Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment70.6
Rainbow International Restoration
Initial investment: $185,336–$351,900
Increase +0.5 pts Referral ecosystemNo material negative local adjustment identified
Rank sensitivity: Highly sensitive
Why it ranks here
Score-changing local factors only. Evidence links open the underlying city finding.
| Local factor | Modeled drivers | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Referral ecosystem |
| +0.5 pts |
| Target-market demand |
| +0.2 pts |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Temporary route disruption EvidenceConditional — applicability must be confirmed | Not scored |
| Net local movement | +0.63 pts | |
Net uses full-precision effects; displayed factor and driver rows are rounded.
Franchise evidence
Source material assessed
Item 3 — Litigation
1 image
Item 6 — Other Fees
1 image
Item 7 — Estimated Initial Investment
2 images
Item 12 — Territory
1 image
Item 20 — Outlets and Franchise Information
1 image
Full calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not mistaken for a score-changing effect.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +0.2 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Not included in the score |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Measured; no meaningful local adjustment |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | +0.5 |
| Territory quality | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 70.63 |
| Published local-market alignment | 70.6 |
Factor calculations use full precision. Contributions and published scores are displayed to one decimal place; ranking order uses the full-precision score.
Evidence confidence
- City Modifier Evidence
- Adequate
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Limited
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Referral ecosystem +0.5 pts
- Tested rank range
- #5–#13
#13Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment70.5
PuroClean
Initial investment: $54,575–$262,145
Increase +0.5 pts Referral ecosystemNo material negative local adjustment identified
Rank sensitivity: Highly sensitive
Why it ranks here
Score-changing local factors only. Evidence links open the underlying city finding.
| Local factor | Modeled drivers | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Referral ecosystem |
| +0.5 pts |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Temporary route disruption EvidenceConditional — applicability must be confirmed | Not scored |
| Net local movement | +0.49 pts | |
Net uses full-precision effects; displayed factor and driver rows are rounded.
Franchise evidence
Source material assessed
Item 3 — Litigation
1 image
Item 6 — Other Fees
1 image
Item 7 — Estimated Initial Investment
2 images
Item 12 — Territory
1 image
Item 20 — Outlets and Franchise Information
1 image
Full calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not mistaken for a score-changing effect.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Not included in the score |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Measured; no meaningful local adjustment |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | +0.5 |
| Territory quality | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 70.49 |
| Published local-market alignment | 70.5 |
Factor calculations use full precision. Contributions and published scores are displayed to one decimal place; ranking order uses the full-precision score.
Evidence confidence
- City Modifier Evidence
- Adequate
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Limited
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Referral ecosystem +0.5 pts
- Tested rank range
- #4–#14
#14Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment70.5
Tiger Adjusters
Initial investment: $43,050–$159,500
Increase +0.5 pts Target-market demandNo material negative local adjustment identified
Rank sensitivity: Highly sensitive
Why it ranks here
Score-changing local factors only. Evidence links open the underlying city finding.
| Local factor | Modeled drivers | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +0.5 pts | |
| Net local movement | +0.45 pts | |
Net uses full-precision effects; displayed factor and driver rows are rounded.
Franchise evidence
Source material assessed
Item 3 — Litigation
1 image
Item 6 — Other Fees
1 image
Item 7 — Estimated Initial Investment
2 images
Item 12 — Territory
1 image
Item 19 — Financial Performance Representation
1 image
Public company data assessed
1 sourceFull calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not mistaken for a score-changing effect.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +0.5 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Not included in the score |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Measured; no meaningful local adjustment |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | Not included in the score |
| Territory quality | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 70.45 |
| Published local-market alignment | 70.5 |
Factor calculations use full precision. Contributions and published scores are displayed to one decimal place; ranking order uses the full-precision score.
Evidence confidence
- City Modifier Evidence
- Adequate
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Adequate
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Limited
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Target-market demand +0.5 pts
- Tested rank range
- #10–#14
No franchise concepts match the selected filters.
Worked score example
How we calculated City Wide
This example uses the same ledger shown for every concept and must reconcile exactly to the published score.
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not mistaken for a score-changing effect.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +2.4 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Not included in the score |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Measured; no meaningful local adjustment |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Referral ecosystem | +0.7 |
| Territory quality | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 73.07 |
| Published local-market alignment | 73.1 |
Factor calculations use full precision. Contributions and published scores are displayed to one decimal place; ranking order uses the full-precision score.
Starting pointThe operating-model baseline shown in the first ledger row.
InteractionsAny interaction or gate is included in the relevant contribution or calibration row.
Confidence treatmentEvidence confidence is disclosed separately unless the model definition explicitly applies a calibration adjustment.
RoundingFull-precision contributions are summed before the final displayed score is rounded to one decimal place; whole-number results are shown without a trailing decimal.
Factor impact
Which local conditions changed scores or rankings?
We neutralized one factor at a time, recalculated every score, and then measured both absolute score movement and changes in rank order.
Observed model effectPositive local support
Target-market demand
We tested how much of the city’s theoretical customer and business demand remained usable after operating friction.
Why concepts react differently
We applied a measurable adjustment to 13 of 14 concepts. When we neutralized the factor and recalculated the table, 12 concepts changed position. Rainbow International Restoration moved from #12 to #5, the largest movement among concepts directly affected by this factor.
Concepts adjusted13 of 14
Average among affected+1.2 pts
Average across all concepts+1.1 pts
Concepts changing rank12
What we observed
- Resident Population Estimate On July 1, 2025147,035 people
- Population Change From The April 2020 Estimate Base To July 20257.5 percent
- Estimated Households In The 2020 2024 Period53,076 households
Concepts helped most
City WideFacility management
+2.4 pts
HomeSmilesProperty maintenance services
+2.0 pts
Jan-Pro InternationalCommercial cleaning
+1.9 pts
FASTSIGNSSigns and graphics
+1.6 pts
Pillar To Post Home InspectorsHome inspection
+1.4 pts
Observed model effectMixed or model dependent
Referral ecosystem
We tested whether the local professional and institutional referral ecosystem materially separated the assessed concepts.
Why concepts react differently
We applied a measurable adjustment to 8 of 14 concepts. When we neutralized the factor and recalculated the table, 8 concepts changed position. ZOOM DRAIN moved from #6 to #9, the largest movement among concepts directly affected by this factor.
Concepts adjusted8 of 14
Average among affected+0.5 pts
Average across all concepts+0.3 pts
Concepts changing rank8
Concepts helped most
City WideFacility management
+0.7 pts
ActionCOACHBusiness coaching
+0.6 pts
HomeSmilesProperty maintenance services
+0.5 pts
PuroCleanRestoration
+0.5 pts
Rainbow International RestorationRestoration
+0.5 pts
Measured but not differentiating in this concept set
- Property replacement-cycle demandNo material score adjustment
- Competitive environmentNo material score adjustment
- Labor and staffing frictionNo material score adjustment
- Transportation, routing, and parkingNo material score adjustment
- Real estate and site feasibilityNo material score adjustment
- Sales and customer acquisitionNo material score adjustment
- Territory qualityNo material score adjustment
- Regulatory and operating frictionNo material score adjustment
Rank stability
Which positions depend most on individual assumptions?
The line shows the best and worst rank reached when one factor was removed from every concept. A narrow range indicates a more stable position.
#1 City WideStable · tested #1–#1
#2 HomeSmilesStable · tested #2–#3
#3 Jan-Pro InternationalHighly sensitive · tested #3–#8
#4 FASTSIGNSModerately sensitive · tested #4–#7
#5 ActionCOACHHighly sensitive · tested #2–#6
#6 ZOOM DRAINModerately sensitive · tested #6–#9
#7 Pillar To Post Home InspectorsHighly sensitive · tested #5–#13
#8 Aire ServModerately sensitive · tested #7–#9
#9 Mr. RooterModerately sensitive · tested #8–#11
#10 Mister Sparky ElectricModerately sensitive · tested #10–#12
#11 Workout AnytimeModerately sensitive · tested #11–#14
#12 Rainbow International RestorationHighly sensitive · tested #5–#13
#13 PuroCleanHighly sensitive · tested #4–#14
#14 Tiger AdjustersHighly sensitive · tested #10–#14
Neutralizing a factor removes it from every concept. A concept can move down even when its own score improves because competitors may benefit more.
Score-changing factors
Factors that changed the calculated scores
The graph includes the top 14 concepts by local-alignment score. Only nonzero score contributions are plotted. A factor is removed when every displayed concept received 0.0 points from it. Hover or focus a concept name to highlight all of its remaining data points.
Primary source records by factorTarget-market demand: [4] [5] [8] [7] [9] [10] [11] [2]Property replacement-cycle demand: [5] [4] [19] [27] [26] [2]Competitive environment: [8] [4] [28] [3]Labor and staffing friction: [6] [7] [8] [1] [2]Transportation, routing, and parking: [25] [4] [1] [3]Real estate and site feasibility: [16] [17] [18] [19] [5] [24] [2]Sales and customer acquisition: [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [28] [8]Referral ecosystem: [7] [6] [9] [11] [15]Territory quality: [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] [25] [3]Regulatory and operating friction: [20] [21] [22] [5] [23] [24] [1] [3]
View the chart data as a table
| Concept | Target-market demand | Referral ecosystem |
|---|---|---|
| #1 City Wide | +2.4 pts | +0.7 pts |
| #2 HomeSmiles | +2.0 pts | +0.5 pts |
| #3 Jan-Pro International | +1.9 pts | +0.2 pts |
| #4 FASTSIGNS | +1.6 pts | +0.3 pts |
| #5 ActionCOACH | +1.3 pts | +0.6 pts |
| #6 ZOOM DRAIN | +1.0 pts | +0.4 pts |
| #7 Pillar To Post Home Inspectors | +1.4 pts | — |
| #8 Aire Serv | +1.1 pts | — |
| #9 Mr. Rooter | +1.1 pts | — |
| #10 Mister Sparky Electric | +0.8 pts | — |
| #11 Workout Anytime | +0.7 pts | — |
| #12 Rainbow International Restoration | +0.2 pts | +0.5 pts |
| #13 PuroClean | — | +0.5 pts |
| #14 Tiger Adjusters | +0.5 pts | — |
Interpretation
How to interpret the result
City Wide, HomeSmiles, Jan-Pro International led because their operating requirements captured more of the local support from target-market demand while remaining less exposed to property replacement-cycle demand. The same city condition can help one operating model and constrain another, so score differences should be read through each concept's factor pattern rather than as a universal franchise-quality verdict. The ordering is most assumption-sensitive for Jan-Pro International, ActionCOACH, Pillar To Post Home Inspectors; their ranks move more widely when individual factors are neutralized.
Local evidence assessed for modeling
Category comparisons
Best franchise categories we assessed in Columbia, South Carolina
Category summaries are shown only when at least two concepts qualified. Two-concept comparisons are explicitly labeled as limited.
Limited two-concept comparison
70.6Limited comparison: Restoration franchise opportunities assessed in Columbia, South Carolina
2 Restoration concepts qualified for comparison, with scores ranging from 70.5 to 70.6. Rainbow International Restoration ranked highest at 70.6. Referral ecosystem added 0.5 points on average among the affected concepts.
Interpret cautiously: A 0.1-point spread is too small to support a strong brand-level conclusion from city alignment alone.
- Concepts compared
- 2
- Score range
- 70.5–70.6
- Category average
- 70.6
Rainbow International Restoration70.6
PuroClean70.5
Metric registry
The 30 local metrics behind this analysis
The registry shows each public metric’s raw value, period, geography, source, and its actual role in the compiled analysis.
View all local metrics
| Metric | Raw value | Period | Geography | Role in analysis | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Resident population estimate on July 1, 2025 | 147,035people | July 1, 2025 population estimate; 2020-2024 ACS characteristics; 2022 economic sales metrics | Columbia, South Carolina | Used in scoring | [4] |
| Population change from the April 2020 estimate base to July 2025 | 7.5percent | July 1, 2025 population estimate; 2020-2024 ACS characteristics; 2022 economic sales metrics | Columbia, South Carolina | Used in scoring | [4] |
| Estimated households in the 2020-2024 period | 53,076households | July 1, 2025 population estimate; 2020-2024 ACS characteristics; 2022 economic sales metrics | Columbia, South Carolina | Used in scoring | [4] |
| Owner-occupied housing unit rate | 45.5percent | July 1, 2025 population estimate; 2020-2024 ACS characteristics; 2022 economic sales metrics | Columbia, South Carolina | Context only | [4] |
| Selected city economic sales and receipts reported in QuickFacts | retail sales thousand usd: 3,476,973; accommodation food sales thousand usd: 858,982; health care social assistance receipts thousand usd: 4,365,619; transportation warehousing receipts thousand usd: 310,130thousand usd | July 1, 2025 population estimate; 2020-2024 ACS characteristics; 2022 economic sales metrics | Columbia, South Carolina | Used in scoring | [4] |
| Covered establishments in Richland County in Q4 2025 | 12,611establishments | Fourth quarter and December 2025 | Richland County, South Carolina | Used in scoring | [8] |
| Covered employment in Richland County in December 2025 | 231,156jobs | Fourth quarter and December 2025 | Richland County, South Carolina | Context only | [8] |
| FY 2025-2026 new residential construction permitted by the City | single two family townhome new construction permits: 919; multifamily new construction permits: 16; multifamily units: 2,338permits and units | June 2026 and FY 2025-2026 totals | Columbia, South Carolina | Used in scoring | [5] |
| Residential building renovation permits issued in FY 2025-2026 | 1,065permits | June 2026 and FY 2025-2026 totals | Columbia, South Carolina | Context only | [5] |
| Commercial building renovation permits issued in FY 2025-2026 | 359permits | June 2026 and FY 2025-2026 totals | Columbia, South Carolina | Context only | [5] |
| Government employment in the Columbia MSA in June 2026 | 85,900jobs preliminary | January-June 2026; data extracted August 7, 2026 | Columbia, SC Metropolitan Statistical Area | Used in scoring | [7] |
| Government employment as a share of Columbia MSA nonfarm employment in June 2026 | 19.7percent derived | January-June 2026; data extracted August 7, 2026 | Columbia, SC Metropolitan Statistical Area | Used in scoring | [7] |
| Professional/business services and financial activities employment in the Columbia MSA in June 2026 | professional business services jobs: 52,800; financial activities jobs: 35,100jobs preliminary | January-June 2026; data extracted August 7, 2026 | Columbia, SC Metropolitan Statistical Area | Used in scoring | [7] |
| USC Columbia preliminary enrollment exceeded 40,000 students in fall 2025 | minimum: 40,000; qualifier: exceededstudents | Fall 2025 preliminary enrollment | University of South Carolina Columbia campus | Used in scoring | [9] |
| Companies that are not current USC suppliers may register as bidders and participate in solicitation events | yesboolean | Current procurement procedures accessed August 2026 | University of South Carolina | Used in scoring | [11] |
| South Carolina state vendors must register before bidding and state procurement opportunities use formal solicitation systems | yesboolean | Current rules accessed August 2026 | South Carolina | Supports modeled relationship | [13] [14] [15] |
| Columbia MSA mean hourly wages for selected major occupational groups versus the national all-occupation mean | all occupations columbia: 28.38; all occupations us: 33.54; food preparation and serving: 14.2; personal care and service: 16.87; building and grounds cleaning maintenance: 17.14; healthcare support: 17.6; management: 59.45usd per hour | May 2025 | Columbia, SC Metropolitan Statistical Area | Context only | [6] |
| Office and administrative support share of Columbia MSA employment | columbia share percent: 14; united states share percent: 11.4percent of employment | May 2025 | Columbia, SC Metropolitan Statistical Area | Context only | [6] |
| Columbia MSA unemployment rate in June 2026 | 4.2percent preliminary not seasonally adjusted | January-June 2026; data extracted August 7, 2026 | Columbia, SC Metropolitan Statistical Area | Context only | [7] |
| CBD Class A office vacancy and upper asking-rent signal in Q1 2026 | cbd class a vacancy percent: 3.46; overall class a vacancy max percent: 5.5; first reported asking rent usd psf: 40; class a asking rent yoy change percent: 22mixed cre metrics | Q1 2026 | Columbia CBD Class A office market | Conditional relationship | [16] |
| Overall Columbia office vacancy in Q2 2026 | 9.3percent | Q2 2026 | Columbia office market | Conditional relationship | [17] |
| Columbia Class A industrial vacancy and available inventory at year-end 2025 | class a vacancy percent: 1.98; available class a sqft max: 300,000; active construction sqft: 4,700,000; active construction delivery status: reported as delivering occupiedmixed cre metrics | Q4 2025 | Columbia industrial market | Conditional relationship | [18] |
| Columbia industrial Class A rent and vacancy-age concentration in Q1 2026 | class a rent usd psf: 7.31; class a rent yoy change percent: 16.4; share of market vacancy in pre 2000 buildings min percent: 90; gross absorption sqft approx: 1,600,000mixed cre metrics | Q1 2026 | Columbia industrial market | Conditional relationship | [19] |
| Current Columbia zoning overlays include design, historic, flood, and airport overlays; the Downtown Columbia Overlay became effective January 5, 2026 | design overlays: OV-5P Five Points Design, OV-DC Downtown Columbia, OV-NMC North Main Corridor Design; other overlays: OV-HP Historic Preservation, OV-A Airport Safety, OV-FW Floodway, OV-FP Floodplain; downtown effective date: 2026-01-05overlay list | Current zoning overlays accessed August 2026 | Columbia, South Carolina | Conditional relationship | [20] [22] |
| Exterior alterations in a Design or Historic Preservation Overlay District require a Certificate of Design Approval | yesboolean | Current permit rules accessed August 2026 | City of Columbia Design and Historic Preservation Overlay Districts | Conditional relationship | [21] [22] [5] |
| Certificates of Design Approval issued in June 2026 | preservation cdas staff: 23; urban design cdas staff: 5; total certificate of design approval permits: 28approvals | June 2026 and FY 2025-2026 totals | City of Columbia urban design and historic preservation overlays | Conditional relationship | [5] |
| Selected in-city Columbia Water base charges effective July 1, 2026 | water base 1 inch usd: 17.31; water base 2 inch usd: 41.48; sewer base 1 inch usd: 10.37; sewer base 2 inch usd: 16.59; sewer use charge per 100 cuft usd: 5.38usd | Rates effective July 1, 2026 | Columbia Water in-city service | Context only | [23] |
| New water/sewer service requires property-owner application and payment at application; Columbia Water advises applicants to confirm current tap fees | payment due at application: yes; meter installation only recommended weeks: 6; missing stubout additional weeks range: 6, 8process and weeks | Current application process and installation guidance accessed August 2026 | Columbia Water service area | Context only | [24] |
| Carolina Crossroads is reconfiguring 14 miles of the I-20/I-26/I-126 corridor; construction began in November 2021 and substantial completion is expected in the mid-2030s | corridor miles: 14; construction start: 2021-11; expected substantial completion: mid-2030sproject scope | Construction began November 2021; current project status accessed August 2026; substantial completion expected mid-2030s | I-20/I-26/I-126 Carolina Crossroads corridor | Conditional relationship | [25] |
| A city-posted geotechnical investigation at 1002 Drake Street found silty sand, clayey sand, and lean-clay materials; selected clayey/sandy lean-clay tests reported plasticity index 25 | project area acres: 6.9; described materials: silty sand, clayey sand, lean clay; selected plasticity index: 25site geotechnical results | Site investigation for proposed development at 1002 Drake Street | 1002 Drake Street, Columbia, South Carolina | Context only | [27] |
How to use the ranking
What the model can and cannot establish
- Scores measure local operating alignment, not expected financial performance or franchise-system quality.
- Citywide evidence may not describe the exact site or territory ultimately offered.
- Conditional effects are shown for diligence but do not change the published score until their applicability is established.
Methodology
How the local-alignment ranking is calculated
Measure the city
Collect reusable local metrics with source, period, geography, and confidence fields.
Profile each operating model
Map each franchise to controlled operating attributes and local sensitivities.
Apply scoreable effects
Score only effects whose applicability is established at the report’s current geographic and operating scope.
Preserve conditional effects
Keep location- or territory-dependent issues visible for diligence without automatically changing the score.
Test rank sensitivity
Remove one factor at a time from every concept and rerank using full-precision scores.
Generate public output
Create the ranking, factor-status ledger, visuals, metric registry, and automated quality report from the same data.
How the common baseline becomes a city-specific score
Every concept starts from the same 70.0 reference point, so differences come only from modeled local interactions. In this city, City Wide reached 73.07 after target-market demand +2.4 pts and referral ecosystem +0.7 pts. The current model caps total local movement at ±18.0 points. The score is not a percentage, probability, or estimate of investment quality.
Precision and materiality
Calculations use full-precision values. Published scores and factor contributions display one decimal place, while ranks use full precision. Effects smaller than 0.1 points are identified as below the publication threshold rather than presented as a meaningful zero.
Score tiers
Tier 1 · Strongest modeled alignment80.0–100.0
Tier 2 · Favorable modeled alignment72.0–<80.0
Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment64.0–<72.0
Tier 4 · Higher-friction modeled alignment0.0–<64.0
How factor rows are classified
Positive local adjustmentNegative local adjustmentMeasured; no meaningful local adjustmentEffect below the publication thresholdNot applicable to this operating modelDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating conditionNot included in the score
What “best” means here
“Best” means the strongest modeled local operating alignment among the franchise concepts assessed on this page.
Model governance
How this report is calculated and corrected
Calculation controls
- Model designer
- Thomas Jepsen
No concept’s final score is manually raised or lowered after calculation. Reports are checked for source scope, classification, arithmetic, unsupported claims, duplication, and readability before publication.
Model history
- Model 0.9.0-calibration · August 19, 2026Added compiler-derived decision intelligence and observation usage mapping., Changed factor sensitivity and channel counterfactuals to full model reruns., Added data-dependent city content signals while preserving legacy public report fields., and Added model-owned semantic compatibility gates and backward-compatible channel-level evidence attribution.
Corrections policy
Corrected source, geography, or operating-profile evidence triggers a full compiler rerun so every dependent score and visual is recalculated.
Source registry
Local evidence supporting this report
The city page keeps the local sources used for its visible findings and metrics. Franchise-source provenance stays with the underlying franchise research rather than being duplicated across every city page.
- 1Forensic Audit of Municipal Structural Constraints and Deal-Killer LiabilitiesInternal or supplied research; not publicly accessible.
- 2Strategic Utility Delta Audit: Structural Inefficiencies and CRE Arbitrage Across Local U.S. MarketsInternal or supplied research; not publicly accessible.
- 3Franchise data - remake - B startInternal or supplied research; not publicly accessible.
- 4QuickFacts: Columbia city, South Carolina
Used for: Resident population estimate on July 1, 2025, Population change from the April 2020 estimate base to July 2025, Estimated households in the 2020-2024 period, Owner-occupied housing unit rate, and Selected city economic sales and receipts reported in QuickFacts
- 5Planning & Development Services Monthly Report, June 2026
Used for: FY 2025-2026 new residential construction permitted by the City, Residential building renovation permits issued in FY 2025-2026, Commercial building renovation permits issued in FY 2025-2026, Exterior alterations in a Design or Historic Preservation Overlay District require a Certificate of Design Approval, and Certificates of Design Approval issued in June 2026
- 6Occupational Employment and Wages in Columbia, SC — May 2025
Used for: Columbia MSA mean hourly wages for selected major occupational groups versus the national all-occupation mean and Office and administrative support share of Columbia MSA employment
- 7Columbia, SC Economy at a Glance
Used for: Government employment in the Columbia MSA in June 2026, Government employment as a share of Columbia MSA nonfarm employment in June 2026, Professional/business services and financial activities employment in the Columbia MSA in June 2026, and Columbia MSA unemployment rate in June 2026
- 8County Employment and Wages in South Carolina — Fourth Quarter 2025
Used for: Covered establishments in Richland County in Q4 2025 and Covered employment in Richland County in December 2025
- 9USC welcomes students back to campus
Used for: USC Columbia preliminary enrollment exceeded 40,000 students in fall 2025
- 10
- 11Purchasing Department
Used for: Companies that are not current USC suppliers may register as bidders and participate in solicitation events
- 12
- 13Vendor Registration
Used for: South Carolina state vendors must register before bidding and state procurement opportunities use formal solicitation systems
- 14New Vendor Information
Used for: South Carolina state vendors must register before bidding and state procurement opportunities use formal solicitation systems
- 15South Carolina Business Opportunities
Used for: South Carolina state vendors must register before bidding and state procurement opportunities use formal solicitation systems
- 16Columbia Office Market Report | 2026 Q1
Used for: CBD Class A office vacancy and upper asking-rent signal in Q1 2026
- 17Columbia MarketBeats
Used for: Overall Columbia office vacancy in Q2 2026
- 182025 Q4 Columbia Industrial Report
Used for: Columbia Class A industrial vacancy and available inventory at year-end 2025
- 19Columbia Industrial Market Report | 2026 Q1
Used for: Columbia industrial Class A rent and vacancy-age concentration in Q1 2026
- 20Districts & Overlays
Used for: Current Columbia zoning overlays include design, historic, flood, and airport overlays; the Downtown Columbia Overlay became effective January 5, 2026
- 21Zoning Permits
Used for: Exterior alterations in a Design or Historic Preservation Overlay District require a Certificate of Design Approval
- 22Design Districts
Used for: Current Columbia zoning overlays include design, historic, flood, and airport overlays; the Downtown Columbia Overlay became effective January 5, 2026 and Exterior alterations in a Design or Historic Preservation Overlay District require a Certificate of Design Approval
- 23Rates
Used for: Selected in-city Columbia Water base charges effective July 1, 2026
- 24Water Meter and Sewer Taps
Used for: New water/sewer service requires property-owner application and payment at application; Columbia Water advises applicants to confirm current tap fees
- 25Carolina Crossroads
Used for: Carolina Crossroads is reconfiguring 14 miles of the I-20/I-26/I-126 corridor; construction began in November 2021 and substantial completion is expected in the mid-2030s
- 26
- 27Geotechnical Engineering Report: Drake Street Development
Used for: A city-posted geotechnical investigation at 1002 Drake Street found silty sand, clayey sand, and lean-clay materials; selected clayey/sandy lean-clay tests reported plasticity index 25
- 28
Before contacting a franchisor
Complete the next layer of due diligence
- Confirm the exact protected territory and neighboring units.
- Review the current Franchise Disclosure Document.
- Validate local staffing, licensing, insurance, and service-base assumptions.
- Obtain location, vehicle, buildout, or working-capital estimates.
- Speak with current and former franchisees.
- Build a candidate-specific financial scenario.
Apply the analysis to your situation
Review how these market findings apply to your budget, role, and proposed territory.
The city score does not include your experience, capital structure, time commitment, financing, or exact territory.
Disclaimer and broker disclosure: This analysis is informational and does not constitute financial, legal, accounting, or investment advice. Market-alignment scores do not predict financial performance or business success. Offers are made only through the delivery of a Franchise Disclosure Document. We may receive referral compensation from participating franchisors; compensation is not an input to the scoring model.