69.8 average across 2 concepts
Local operating-model alignment analysis
Best Franchise Opportunities We Assessed in Albany, New York
We compared 14 franchise concepts for Albany, New York. Household service demand was a leading positive mechanism. Winter parking and access pressure was a leading operating constraint.
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
20Sources used
13Primary sources
33Local 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
0.5 points average among 13 affected concepts
0.4 points average reduction among 13 affected concepts
Tested rank range spans 9 positions
Executive conclusion
What the ranking means for Albany, New York
City Wide, Pillar To Post Home Inspectors, and ActionCOACH 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 0.6 points on average. One important asymmetry was that the same local condition supported replacement and repair demand while also creating legacy-system service complexity. Pillar To Post Home Inspectors was especially relationship-sensitive: removing household service demand moved it from #2 to #4 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 | 71.1Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +0.9 ptsTarget-market demand | -0.2 ptsLabor and staffing friction | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 2 | Pillar To Post Home InspectorsHome inspectionInvestment: $102,690–$134,290 | 71.0Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +0.9 ptsTarget-market demand | -0.2 ptsTransportation, routing, and parking | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 3 | ActionCOACHBusiness coachingInvestment: $71,668–$303,513 | 70.8Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +0.6 ptsReferral ecosystem | -0.1 ptsLabor and staffing friction | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 4 | HomeSmilesProperty maintenance servicesInvestment: $148,110–$201,800 | 70.6Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +1.0 ptsTarget-market demand | -0.2 ptsTransportation, routing, and parking | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 5 | Mr. RooterPlumbingInvestment: $152,900–$298,675 | 70.5Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +0.8 ptsProperty replacement-cycle demand | -0.6 ptsLabor and staffing friction | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 6 | ZOOM DRAINDrain and sewer serviceInvestment: $266,250–$570,500 | 70.4Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +0.8 ptsProperty replacement-cycle demand | -0.6 ptsLabor and staffing friction | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 7 | Aire ServHVAC installation, repair, and maintenanceInvestment: $113,308–$271,708 | 70.4Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +0.7 ptsProperty replacement-cycle demand | -0.7 ptsLabor and staffing friction | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 8 | Mister Sparky ElectricElectrical | 70.3Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +0.7 ptsProperty replacement-cycle demand | -0.6 ptsLabor and staffing friction | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 9 | FASTSIGNSSigns and graphicsInvestment: $231,226–$386,285 | 70.1Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +0.4 ptsTarget-market demand | -0.3 ptsTransportation, routing, and parking | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 10 | Tiger AdjustersPublic insurance adjustingInvestment: $43,050–$159,500 | 70.1Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +0.2 ptsTarget-market demand | -0.1 ptsTransportation, routing, and parking | Moderate evidence confidence |
Conditions that changed the analysis
What mattered most in Albany, New York
Recent household growth and multifamily production expand the addressable residential service base
This relationship affected 8 concepts and added 0.6 points on average among those exposed. Local evidence: Household growth over the decade summarized in the 2025 housing audit: 6 percent. [5]
Very old housing stock supports replacement and repair demand while increasing system complexity
The same local condition created complementary effects: replacement and repair demand supported exposed concepts while legacy-system service complexity constrained others. [5]
Snow-emergency parking shifts and permit-zone constraints can disrupt curb-dependent access
This relationship affected 13 concepts and reduced 0.3 points on average among those exposed. Local evidence: Residential Permit Parking expansion effective February 15, 2026: effective date: 2026-02-15; zones: A, B, C; program year end: 2027-02-15 program terms. [8] [9]
Evidence behind the city mechanisms
Recent household growth and multifamily production expand the addressable residential service base1 modeled effect
Household service demandTarget-market demand
Very old housing stock supports replacement and repair demand while increasing system complexity3 local facts · 2 modeled effects · 1 source
- Housing stock that predates 2010: 95 percent of housing stock [5]
- Housing units built before 1940: 42.9 percent of housing units [5]
- Median year built for the city housing stock: 1,949 year [5]
Replacement and repair demandProperty replacement-cycle demand
Legacy-system service complexityLabor and staffing friction
Housing-cost burden and poverty constrain discretionary spending for exposed consumer concepts1 modeled effect
Discretionary-spending pressureTarget-market demand
State-government and university concentration supports institutional account and professional-referral potential3 local facts · 2 modeled effects · 3 sources
- University at Albany enrollment and employment as of November 1, 2025: total students: 17,426; undergraduate students: 12,889; graduate students: 4,537; employees: 3,642 people [12]
- New York State OGS centralized procurement scale and formal vendor process: centralized contracts approximate: 1,500; process elements: Bid Calendar, solicitations, vendor resources, centralized contracts contracts and process [18]
- Health care and social assistance receipts/revenue in 2022: 4,336,798,000 usd [4]
University and government account demandTarget-market demand
Institutional professional relationship baseReferral ecosystem
Historic-district and landmark sites can require Certificate of Appropriateness review for signage and exterior prototype changes1 modeled effect
Signage and prototype adaptation burdenRegulatory and operating friction
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 3 · Mixed modeled alignment71.1
City Wide
Initial investment: $229,729–$410,730
Increase +0.9 pts Target-market demandReduction -0.2 pts Labor and staffing friction
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 |
| +0.9 pts |
| Referral ecosystem |
| +0.4 pts |
| Labor and staffing friction |
| -0.2 pts |
| Transportation, routing, and parking |
| -0.1 pts |
| Net local movement | +1.09 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 confused with missing, conditional, or non-applicable evidence.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +0.9 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | -0.2 |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | -0.1 |
| 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 | 71.09 |
| 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
- Adequate
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Target-market demand +0.9 pts
- Tested rank range
- #1–#2
#2Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment71.0
Pillar To Post Home Inspectors
Initial investment: $102,690–$134,290
Increase +0.9 pts Target-market demandReduction -0.2 pts Transportation, routing, and parking
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 |
| +0.9 pts |
| Property replacement-cycle demand |
| +0.4 pts |
| Transportation, routing, and parking |
| -0.2 pts |
| Labor and staffing friction |
| -0.1 pts |
| Net local movement | +0.95 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 confused with missing, conditional, or non-applicable evidence.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +0.9 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | +0.4 |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | -0.1 |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | -0.2 |
| 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 | 70.95 |
| Published local-market alignment | 71.0 |
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
- Adequate
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Target-market demand +0.9 pts
- Tested rank range
- #1–#4
#3Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment70.8
ActionCOACH
Initial investment: $71,668–$303,513
Increase +0.6 pts Referral ecosystemReduction -0.1 pts Labor and staffing friction
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 |
| +0.6 pts |
| Target-market demand |
| +0.3 pts |
| Labor and staffing friction |
| -0.1 pts |
| Net local movement | +0.81 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 confused with missing, conditional, or non-applicable evidence.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +0.3 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | -0.1 |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| 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 | 70.81 |
| 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
- Adequate
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Referral ecosystem +0.6 pts
- Tested rank range
- #1–#8
#4Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment70.6
HomeSmiles
Initial investment: $148,110–$201,800
Increase +1.0 pts Target-market demandReduction -0.2 pts Transportation, routing, and parking
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 | +1.0 pts | |
| Transportation, routing, and parking |
| -0.2 pts |
| Labor and staffing friction |
| -0.2 pts |
| Net local movement | +0.59 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 confused with missing, conditional, or non-applicable evidence.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +1.0 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | -0.2 |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | -0.2 |
| 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 | 70.59 |
| 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
- Adequate
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Adequate
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Target-market demand +1.0 pts
- Tested rank range
- #3–#12
#5Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment70.5
Mr. Rooter
Initial investment: $152,900–$298,675
Increase +0.8 pts Property replacement-cycle demandReduction -0.6 pts Labor and staffing friction
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Property replacement-cycle demand |
| +0.8 pts |
| Target-market demand |
| +0.7 pts |
| Labor and staffing friction |
| -0.6 pts |
| Transportation, routing, and parking |
| -0.4 pts |
| Net local movement | +0.48 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 confused with missing, conditional, or non-applicable evidence.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +0.7 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | +0.8 |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | -0.6 |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | -0.4 |
| 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 | 70.48 |
| 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
- Adequate
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Property replacement-cycle demand +0.8 pts
- Tested rank range
- #3–#8
#6Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment70.4
ZOOM DRAIN
Initial investment: $266,250–$570,500
Increase +0.8 pts Property replacement-cycle demandReduction -0.6 pts Labor and staffing friction
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Property replacement-cycle demand |
| +0.8 pts |
| Target-market demand |
| +0.6 pts |
| Labor and staffing friction |
| -0.6 pts |
| Transportation, routing, and parking |
| -0.4 pts |
| Net local movement | +0.44 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 confused with missing, conditional, or non-applicable evidence.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +0.6 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | +0.8 |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | -0.6 |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | -0.4 |
| 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 | 70.44 |
| Published local-market alignment | 70.4 |
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
- Adequate
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Property replacement-cycle demand +0.8 pts
- Tested rank range
- #4–#10
#7Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment70.4
Aire Serv
Initial investment: $113,308–$271,708
Increase +0.7 pts Property replacement-cycle demandReduction -0.7 pts Labor and staffing friction
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Property replacement-cycle demand |
| +0.7 pts |
| Labor and staffing friction | -0.7 pts | |
| Target-market demand |
| +0.7 pts |
| Transportation, routing, and parking |
| -0.4 pts |
| Net local movement | +0.39 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 confused with missing, conditional, or non-applicable evidence.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +0.7 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | +0.7 |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | -0.7 |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | -0.3 |
| 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 | 70.39 |
| Published local-market alignment | 70.4 |
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
- Adequate
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Adequate
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Property replacement-cycle demand +0.7 pts
- Tested rank range
- #2–#11
#8Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment70.3
Mister Sparky Electric
Increase +0.7 pts Property replacement-cycle demandReduction -0.6 pts Labor and staffing friction
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Property replacement-cycle demand |
| +0.7 pts |
| Labor and staffing friction |
| -0.6 pts |
| Target-market demand |
| +0.6 pts |
| Transportation, routing, and parking |
| -0.3 pts |
| Net local movement | +0.32 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 confused with missing, conditional, or non-applicable evidence.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +0.6 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | +0.7 |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | -0.6 |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | -0.3 |
| 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 | 70.32 |
| Published local-market alignment | 70.3 |
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
- Adequate
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Property replacement-cycle demand +0.7 pts
- Tested rank range
- #6–#9
#9Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment70.1
FASTSIGNS
Initial investment: $231,226–$386,285
Increase +0.4 pts Target-market demandReduction -0.3 pts Transportation, routing, and parking
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 |
| +0.4 pts |
| Transportation, routing, and parking |
| -0.3 pts |
| Referral ecosystem |
| +0.1 pts |
| Labor and staffing friction |
| -0.1 pts |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Signage and prototype adaptation burden EvidenceConditional — applicability must be confirmed | Not scored |
| Net local movement | +0.13 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 confused with missing, conditional, or non-applicable evidence.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +0.4 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | -0.1 |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | -0.3 |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | +0.1 |
| 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 | 70.13 |
| Published local-market alignment | 70.1 |
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
- Adequate
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Target-market demand +0.4 pts
- Tested rank range
- #5–#12
#10Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment70.1
Tiger Adjusters
Initial investment: $43,050–$159,500
Increase +0.2 pts Target-market demandReduction -0.1 pts Transportation, routing, and parking
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 |
| +0.2 pts |
| Transportation, routing, and parking |
| -0.1 pts |
| Net local movement | +0.05 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 confused with missing, conditional, or non-applicable evidence.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +0.2 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Effect below the publication threshold |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | -0.1 |
| 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 | 70.05 |
| Published local-market alignment | 70.1 |
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
- Adequate
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Target-market demand +0.2 pts
- Tested rank range
- #6–#13
#11Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment69.8
Rainbow International Restoration
Initial investment: $185,336–$351,900
Increase +0.6 pts Property replacement-cycle demandReduction -0.6 pts Labor and staffing friction
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Property replacement-cycle demand |
| +0.6 pts |
| Labor and staffing friction | -0.6 pts | |
| Transportation, routing, and parking |
| -0.3 pts |
| Target-market demand |
| +0.1 pts |
| Net local movement | -0.18 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 confused with missing, conditional, or non-applicable evidence.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +0.1 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | +0.6 |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | -0.6 |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | -0.3 |
| 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 | 69.82 |
| Published local-market alignment | 69.8 |
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
- Adequate
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Property replacement-cycle demand +0.6 pts
- Tested rank range
- #8–#12
#12Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment69.8
PuroClean
Initial investment: $54,575–$262,145
Increase +0.6 pts Property replacement-cycle demandReduction -0.6 pts Labor and staffing friction
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Property replacement-cycle demand |
| +0.6 pts |
| Labor and staffing friction | -0.6 pts | |
| Transportation, routing, and parking |
| -0.2 pts |
| Net local movement | -0.18 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 confused with missing, conditional, or non-applicable evidence.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | +0.6 |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | -0.6 |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | -0.2 |
| 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 | 69.82 |
| Published local-market alignment | 69.8 |
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
- Adequate
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Property replacement-cycle demand +0.6 pts
- Tested rank range
- #6–#13
#13Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment69.8
Jan-Pro International
Initial investment: $130,000–$421,500
Increase +0.7 pts Target-market demandReduction -0.6 pts Labor and staffing friction
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 |
| +0.7 pts |
| Labor and staffing friction |
| -0.6 pts |
| Transportation, routing, and parking |
| -0.2 pts |
| Net local movement | -0.19 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 confused with missing, conditional, or non-applicable evidence.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +0.7 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | -0.6 |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | -0.2 |
| 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 | 69.81 |
| Published local-market alignment | 69.8 |
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
- Adequate
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Target-market demand +0.7 pts
- Tested rank range
- #7–#14
#14Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment69.1
Workout Anytime
Initial investment: $1,060,850–$1,840,550
No material positive local adjustment identifiedReduction -0.5 pts Labor and staffing friction
Rank sensitivity: Stable
Why it ranks here
Score-changing local factors only. Evidence links open the underlying city finding.
| Local factor | Modeled drivers | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Labor and staffing friction |
| -0.5 pts |
| Target-market demand | -0.3 pts | |
| Transportation, routing, and parking |
| -0.2 pts |
| Net local movement | -0.91 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 confused with missing, conditional, or non-applicable evidence.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | -0.3 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | -0.5 |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | -0.2 |
| 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 | 69.09 |
| Published local-market alignment | 69.1 |
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
- Adequate
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Labor and staffing friction -0.5 pts
- Tested rank range
- #13–#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 confused with missing, conditional, or non-applicable evidence.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +0.9 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | -0.2 |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | -0.1 |
| 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 | 71.09 |
| 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.
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 effectMixed or model dependent
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. HomeSmiles moved from #4 to #12, the largest movement among concepts directly affected by this factor.
Concepts adjusted13 of 14
Average among affected+0.5 pts
Average across all concepts+0.5 pts
Concepts changing rank12
What we observed
- Median Household Income61,986 usd per household 2024 dollars
- Persons In Poverty22.9 percent of persons
- Household Growth Over The Decade Summarized In The 2025 Housing Audit6 percent
Concepts helped most
HomeSmilesProperty maintenance services
+1.0 pts
Pillar To Post Home InspectorsHome inspection
+0.9 pts
City WideFacility management
+0.9 pts
Aire ServHVAC installation, repair, and maintenance
+0.7 pts
Jan-Pro InternationalCommercial cleaning
+0.7 pts
Concepts challenged most
Workout AnytimeFitness
-0.3 pts
Observed model effectMixed or model dependent
Property replacement-cycle demand
We compared the age and condition of relevant property systems with the services each concept is actually equipped to provide.
Why concepts react differently
We applied a measurable adjustment to 7 of 14 concepts. When we neutralized the factor and recalculated the table, 11 concepts changed position. ZOOM DRAIN moved from #6 to #11, the largest movement among concepts directly affected by this factor.
Concepts adjusted7 of 14
Average among affected+0.6 pts
Average across all concepts+0.3 pts
Concepts changing rank11
Concepts helped most
ZOOM DRAINDrain and sewer service
+0.8 pts
Mr. RooterPlumbing
+0.8 pts
Aire ServHVAC installation, repair, and maintenance
+0.7 pts
Mister Sparky ElectricElectrical
+0.7 pts
PuroCleanRestoration
+0.6 pts
Observed model effectMixed or model dependent
Labor and staffing friction
We compared each concept’s frontline and specialist staffing requirements with the local labor environment.
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. Aire Serv moved from #7 to #2, the largest movement among concepts directly affected by this factor.
Concepts adjusted13 of 14
Average among affected-0.4 pts
Average across all concepts-0.4 pts
Concepts changing rank12
What we observed
- Albany Schenectady Troy Msa Unemployment Rate In June 20263.5 percent not seasonally adjusted
- Selected Payroll Employment Levels In The Albany Schenectady Troy Msatotal nonfarm: 486,600; government: 110,300; education and health services: 91,100; professional and business services: 65,200; leisure and hospitality: 41,500 jobs
- General Minimum Wage For The Remainder Of New York State In 202616 usd per hour
Concepts challenged most
Aire ServHVAC installation, repair, and maintenance
-0.7 pts
Mister Sparky ElectricElectrical
-0.6 pts
Jan-Pro InternationalCommercial cleaning
-0.6 pts
Mr. RooterPlumbing
-0.6 pts
Rainbow International RestorationRestoration
-0.6 pts
Observed model effectMixed or model dependent
Transportation, routing, and parking
We recalculated route-dependent models after accounting for travel corridors, parking, and the number of productive stops they require.
Why concepts react differently
We applied a measurable adjustment to 13 of 14 concepts. When we neutralized the factor and recalculated the table, 6 concepts changed position. Mr. Rooter moved from #5 to #3, the largest movement among concepts directly affected by this factor.
Concepts adjusted13 of 14
Average among affected-0.3 pts
Average across all concepts-0.2 pts
Concepts changing rank6
What we observed
- Residential Permit Parking Expansion Effective February 15, 2026effective date: 2026-02-15; zones: A, B, C; program year end: 2027-02-15 program terms
- Parking Side Changes And Towing Exposure During Declared Snow Emergenciesfirst 24 hours: park on even-numbered side; next 24 hours: park on odd-numbered side; enforcement: ticketing, towing; regular parking rules suspended: yes
Concepts challenged most
Mr. RooterPlumbing
-0.4 pts
ZOOM DRAINDrain and sewer service
-0.4 pts
Aire ServHVAC installation, repair, and maintenance
-0.4 pts
FASTSIGNSSigns and graphics
-0.3 pts
Mister Sparky ElectricElectrical
-0.3 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 3 of 14 concepts. When we neutralized the factor and recalculated the table, 10 concepts changed position. ActionCOACH moved from #3 to #8, the largest movement among concepts directly affected by this factor.
Concepts adjusted3 of 14
Average among affected+0.4 pts
Average across all concepts+0.1 pts
Concepts changing rank10
Concepts helped most
ActionCOACHBusiness coaching
+0.6 pts
City WideFacility management
+0.4 pts
FASTSIGNSSigns and graphics
+0.1 pts
Measured but not differentiating in this concept set
- Competitive environmentNo 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–#2
#2 Pillar To Post Home InspectorsModerately sensitive · tested #1–#4
#3 ActionCOACHHighly sensitive · tested #1–#8
#4 HomeSmilesHighly sensitive · tested #3–#12
#5 Mr. RooterHighly sensitive · tested #3–#8
#6 ZOOM DRAINHighly sensitive · tested #4–#10
#7 Aire ServHighly sensitive · tested #2–#11
#8 Mister Sparky ElectricModerately sensitive · tested #6–#9
#9 FASTSIGNSHighly sensitive · tested #5–#12
#10 Tiger AdjustersHighly sensitive · tested #6–#13
#11 Rainbow International RestorationHighly sensitive · tested #8–#12
#12 PuroCleanHighly sensitive · tested #6–#13
#13 Jan-Pro InternationalHighly sensitive · tested #7–#14
#14 Workout AnytimeStable · tested #13–#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.
Original factor comparison
How each factor affected the highest-rated franchise concepts
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] [7] [12] [18] [2] [3]Property replacement-cycle demand: [5] [6] [2] [3]Competitive environment: [20] [4] [7] [15] [3]Labor and staffing friction: [10] [11] [5] [13] [1] [2]Transportation, routing, and parking: [9] [8] [19] [1] [3]Real estate and site feasibility: [14] [15] [5] [7] [8] [17] [2]Sales and customer acquisition: [20] [7] [18] [12] [3]Referral ecosystem: [7] [12] [18] [4] [13] [2]Territory quality: [7] [14] [8] [16] [17] [5] [3]Regulatory and operating friction: [16] [17] [8] [11] [18] [3] [1]
View the chart data as a table
| Concept | Target-market demand | Property replacement-cycle demand | Labor and staffing friction | Transportation, routing, and parking | Referral ecosystem |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| #1 City Wide | +0.9 pts | — | -0.2 pts | -0.1 pts | +0.4 pts |
| #2 Pillar To Post Home Inspectors | +0.9 pts | +0.4 pts | -0.1 pts | -0.2 pts | — |
| #3 ActionCOACH | +0.3 pts | — | -0.1 pts | — | +0.6 pts |
| #4 HomeSmiles | +1.0 pts | — | -0.2 pts | -0.2 pts | — |
| #5 Mr. Rooter | +0.7 pts | +0.8 pts | -0.6 pts | -0.4 pts | — |
| #6 ZOOM DRAIN | +0.6 pts | +0.8 pts | -0.6 pts | -0.4 pts | — |
| #7 Aire Serv | +0.7 pts | +0.7 pts | -0.7 pts | -0.4 pts | — |
| #8 Mister Sparky Electric | +0.6 pts | +0.7 pts | -0.6 pts | -0.3 pts | — |
| #9 FASTSIGNS | +0.4 pts | — | -0.1 pts | -0.3 pts | +0.1 pts |
| #10 Tiger Adjusters | +0.2 pts | — | — | -0.1 pts | — |
| #11 Rainbow International Restoration | +0.1 pts | +0.6 pts | -0.6 pts | -0.3 pts | — |
| #12 PuroClean | — | +0.6 pts | -0.6 pts | -0.2 pts | — |
| #13 Jan-Pro International | +0.7 pts | — | -0.6 pts | -0.2 pts | — |
| #14 Workout Anytime | -0.3 pts | — | -0.5 pts | -0.2 pts | — |
Interpretation
How to interpret the result
City Wide, Pillar To Post Home Inspectors, ActionCOACH led because their operating requirements captured more of the local support from target-market demand while remaining less exposed to labor and staffing friction. 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 ActionCOACH, HomeSmiles, Mr. Rooter; their ranks move more widely when individual factors are neutralized.
Local evidence assessed for modeling
Category comparisons
Best franchise categories we assessed in Albany, New York
Category summaries are shown only when at least two concepts qualified. Two-concept comparisons are explicitly labeled as limited.
Limited two-concept comparison
69.8Best Restoration franchise opportunities we assessed in Albany, New York
2 Restoration concepts qualified for comparison, with scores ranging from 69.8 to 69.8. Rainbow International Restoration ranked highest at 69.8. Property replacement-cycle demand added 0.6 points on average among the affected concepts. Labor and staffing friction reduced the exposed concepts by 0.6 points on average.
Interpret cautiously: A 0.0-point spread is too small to support a strong brand-level conclusion from city alignment alone.
- Concepts compared
- 2
- Score range
- 69.8–69.8
- Category average
- 69.8
Rainbow International Restoration69.8
PuroClean69.8
Metric registry
The 33 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 | 101,698people | July 1, 2025 population estimate; 2020-2024 ACS measures and 2022 economic measures where displayed | Albany, New York | Context only | [4] |
| Population change from the April 2020 estimate base to July 2025 | 2.6percent | July 1, 2025 population estimate; 2020-2024 ACS measures and 2022 economic measures where displayed | Albany, New York | Context only | [4] |
| Households in the 2020-2024 Census estimate period | 44,357households | July 1, 2025 population estimate; 2020-2024 ACS measures and 2022 economic measures where displayed | Albany, New York | Context only | [4] |
| Owner-occupied housing-unit rate | 38.2percent of occupied housing units | July 1, 2025 population estimate; 2020-2024 ACS measures and 2022 economic measures where displayed | Albany, New York | Context only | [4] |
| Median household income | 61,986usd per household 2024 dollars | July 1, 2025 population estimate; 2020-2024 ACS measures and 2022 economic measures where displayed | Albany, New York | Used in scoring | [4] |
| Persons in poverty | 22.9percent of persons | July 1, 2025 population estimate; 2020-2024 ACS measures and 2022 economic measures where displayed | Albany, New York | Used in scoring | [4] |
| Retail sales in 2022 | 2,238,425,000usd | July 1, 2025 population estimate; 2020-2024 ACS measures and 2022 economic measures where displayed | Albany, New York | Context only | [4] |
| Health care and social assistance receipts/revenue in 2022 | 4,336,798,000usd | July 1, 2025 population estimate; 2020-2024 ACS measures and 2022 economic measures where displayed | Albany, New York | Supports modeled relationship | [4] |
| Housing stock that predates 2010 | 95percent of housing stock | Housing conditions, demographics, permits, development, and market indicators compiled through 2025 | Albany, New York housing stock | Supports modeled relationship | [5] |
| Housing units built before 1940 | 42.9percent of housing units | Housing conditions, demographics, permits, development, and market indicators compiled through 2025 | Albany, New York housing stock | Supports modeled relationship | [5] |
| Median year built for the city housing stock | 1,949year | Housing conditions, demographics, permits, development, and market indicators compiled through 2025 | Albany, New York housing stock | Supports modeled relationship | [5] |
| Developed residential properties rated poor or fair in the housing audit | properties approximate: 1,050; share: 4.7properties and percent | Housing conditions, demographics, permits, development, and market indicators compiled through 2025 | Albany, New York developed residential properties | Supports modeled relationship | [5] |
| Household growth over the decade summarized in the 2025 housing audit | 6percent | Housing conditions, demographics, permits, development, and market indicators compiled through 2025 | Albany, New York | Used in scoring | [5] |
| Housing units delivered from 2019 through the 2025 audit period | 2,454housing units | Housing conditions, demographics, permits, development, and market indicators compiled through 2025 | Albany, New York | Used in scoring | [5] |
| Housing development pipeline reported in the 2025 audit | under construction approximate: 310; approved approximate: 1,030housing units | Housing conditions, demographics, permits, development, and market indicators compiled through 2025 | Albany, New York | Used in scoring | [5] |
| Households meeting housing-cost-burden thresholds in the 2025 audit | all households: 39; renter households: 50; owner households: 21percent of household group | Housing conditions, demographics, permits, development, and market indicators compiled through 2025 | Albany, New York households | Used in scoring | [5] |
| Vacancy rate for ETPA-eligible rental buildings in the 2024 city study | 8.3percent | 2024 survey of ETPA-eligible rental buildings | Albany rental buildings built before 1974 with six or more units and otherwise ETPA-eligible | Context only | [6] |
| Downtown employment base and composition in the Downtown Albany Strategy data appendix | jobs approximate: 22,000; public sector share approximate: 50; public or office based share over: 85; jobs added 2019 to 2024 approximate: 850jobs and percent | Strategy research conducted from summer 2025 through early winter 2026; appendix updated February 2026 | Downtown Albany strategy geography | Conditional relationship | [7] |
| Current resident population estimate for the Downtown BID core used in the strategy appendix | 1,150residents approximate | Strategy research conducted from summer 2025 through early winter 2026; appendix updated February 2026 | Downtown Albany BID core | Conditional relationship | [7] |
| Storefronts observed as vacant or low-visibility in the Downtown Heart visual review | 35percent of reviewed storefronts approximate | Strategy research conducted from summer 2025 through early winter 2026; appendix updated February 2026 | Downtown Heart, Albany | Conditional relationship | [7] |
| Albany-Schenectady-Troy MSA unemployment rate in June 2026 | 3.5percent not seasonally adjusted | June 2026 labor-force and payroll-employment data | Albany-Schenectady-Troy, NY MSA | Used in scoring | [10] |
| Selected payroll-employment levels in the Albany-Schenectady-Troy MSA | total nonfarm: 486,600; government: 110,300; education and health services: 91,100; professional and business services: 65,200; leisure and hospitality: 41,500jobs | June 2026 labor-force and payroll-employment data | Albany-Schenectady-Troy, NY MSA | Used in scoring | [10] |
| General minimum wage for the remainder of New York State in 2026 | 16usd per hour | Rate effective January 1 through December 31, 2026 | Remainder of New York State, including Albany | Used in scoring | [11] |
| University at Albany enrollment and employment as of November 1, 2025 | total students: 17,426; undergraduate students: 12,889; graduate students: 4,537; employees: 3,642people | Enrollment and employee data as of November 1, 2025; research expenditures for 2023-2024 | University at Albany | Supports modeled relationship | [12] |
| Albany Med Health System employment scale | 17,000employees over | Current annual impact-report data available in 2026 | Albany Med Health System across the Capital Region | Context only | [13] |
| Capital Region and Albany CBD office vacancy and asking rents in H2 2025 | capital region vacancy: 12; capital region asking rent: 19.03; albany cbd vacancy: 15.2; albany cbd asking rent: 21.66; albany cbd class a vacancy: 32; albany cbd class a asking rent: 24.52percent and usd per square foot full service gross | Second half of 2025 | Capital Region and Albany CBD office market | Conditional relationship | [14] |
| Albany County industrial market metrics in H2 2025 | inventory square feet: 26,639,936; vacant square feet: 769,722; vacancy rate: 2.9; average asking rent: 8; report minimum building size square feet: 10,000square feet percent and usd per square foot nnn | Second half of 2025 | Albany County industrial market | Context only | [15] |
| Residential Permit Parking expansion effective February 15, 2026 | effective date: 2026-02-15; zones: A, B, C; program year end: 2027-02-15program terms | Current 2026-2027 Residential Permit Parking program | Albany Residential Permit Parking zones | Used in scoring | [8] |
| Parking-side changes and towing exposure during declared Snow Emergencies | first 24 hours: park on even-numbered side; next 24 hours: park on odd-numbered side; enforcement: ticketing, towing; regular parking rules suspended: yesrule | Current snow-emergency parking and sidewalk-clearance rules accessed August 2026 | Albany, New York during a declared Snow Emergency | Used in scoring | [9] |
| Certificate of Appropriateness requirement for significant exterior changes to designated historic resources | certificate required: yes; covered examples: exterior alterations, signs, awnings, windows, light fixtures, fencespermit gate | Current preservation-review guidance accessed August 2026 | Albany local historic districts and landmarks | Conditional relationship | [16] [17] |
| New York State OGS centralized procurement scale and formal vendor process | centralized contracts approximate: 1,500; process elements: Bid Calendar, solicitations, vendor resources, centralized contractscontracts and process | Current procurement programs, contracts, and bid resources accessed August 2026 | New York State Office of General Services | Supports modeled relationship | [18] |
| Livingston Avenue Rail Bridge replacement construction and staging | project cost millions usd: 634.8; anticipated completion: summer 2028; new bridge built adjacent to existing: yes; existing bridge remains in service until traffic shift: yes; daily amtrak trains: 12; daily freight trains range: 2, 6project metrics | Livingston Avenue Rail Bridge replacement construction and expected schedule announced July 2024 | Albany-Rensselaer Livingston Avenue Rail Bridge | Context only | [19] [1] |
| County Business Patterns supports detailed public establishment research but does not by itself define a franchise competitor set | industry detail: 2-through-6-digit NAICS; geographies: county, metropolitan area, ZIP code; measures: establishments, employment, first quarter payroll, annual payrolldataset dimensions | Calendar year 2023 | United States subnational geographies including Albany County, Capital Region geographies, and ZIP Codes | Context only | [20] |
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 that apply without an unresolved site, territory, customer, or project gate.
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 71.09 after target-market demand +0.9 pts, referral ecosystem +0.4 pts, labor and staffing friction -0.2 pts, and transportation, routing, and parking -0.1 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. Before this template is activated, the report is reviewed for source scope, classification, arithmetic, unsupported claims, duplication, and readability.
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
Evidence represented in this report
Each source identifies its period, scope, and the local metrics it supports. Internal or supplied research is not presented as independently accessible evidence.
- 1Forensic Audit of Municipal Structural Constraints and Deal-Killer LiabilitiesInternal or supplied research; not publicly accessible.
Used for: Livingston Avenue Rail Bridge replacement construction and staging
- 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: Albany city, New York
Used for: Resident population estimate on July 1, 2025, Population change from the April 2020 estimate base to July 2025, Households in the 2020-2024 Census estimate period, Owner-occupied housing-unit rate, and Median household income
- 52025 Housing Audit Report
Used for: Housing stock that predates 2010, Housing units built before 1940, Median year built for the city housing stock, Developed residential properties rated poor or fair in the housing audit, and Household growth over the decade summarized in the 2025 housing audit
- 6Rental Vacancy Study: Albany, New York
Used for: Vacancy rate for ETPA-eligible rental buildings in the 2024 city study
- 7Downtown Albany Strategy - Data & Methods Appendix
Used for: Downtown employment base and composition in the Downtown Albany Strategy data appendix, Current resident population estimate for the Downtown BID core used in the strategy appendix, and Storefronts observed as vacant or low-visibility in the Downtown Heart visual review
- 8Parking Permits
Used for: Residential Permit Parking expansion effective February 15, 2026
- 9Snow Removal
Used for: Parking-side changes and towing exposure during declared Snow Emergencies
- 10Albany-Schenectady-Troy, NY Economy at a Glance
Used for: Albany-Schenectady-Troy MSA unemployment rate in June 2026 and Selected payroll-employment levels in the Albany-Schenectady-Troy MSA
- 11New York State's Minimum Wage
Used for: General minimum wage for the remainder of New York State in 2026
- 12Data & Overview
Used for: University at Albany enrollment and employment as of November 1, 2025
- 13Annual Impact Report
Used for: Albany Med Health System employment scale
- 14Albany Office Market Outlook H2 2025
Used for: Capital Region and Albany CBD office vacancy and asking rents in H2 2025
- 15Albany Industrial Market Outlook H2 2025
Used for: Albany County industrial market metrics in H2 2025
- 16Historic Districts
Used for: Certificate of Appropriateness requirement for significant exterior changes to designated historic resources
- 17Code of the City of Albany - Historic Resource Protection provisions
Used for: Certificate of Appropriateness requirement for significant exterior changes to designated historic resources
- 18Procurement
Used for: New York State OGS centralized procurement scale and formal vendor process
- 19Governor Hochul Announces Major Capital Region Infrastructure Projects to Improve Rail Service and Boost Economic Development
Used for: Livingston Avenue Rail Bridge replacement construction and staging
- 20County Business Patterns: 2023
Used for: County Business Patterns supports detailed public establishment research but does not by itself define a franchise competitor set
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.