70.3 average across 2 concepts
Local operating-model alignment analysis
Best Franchise Opportunities We Assessed in Plano, Texas
We compared 14 franchise concepts for Plano, Texas. Local business demand was a leading positive mechanism. Service-base space scarcity 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
26Sources used
19Primary sources
26Local 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 10 affected concepts
0.8 points average reduction among 8 affected concepts
Tested rank range spans 11 positions
Executive conclusion
What the ranking means for Plano, Texas
City Wide, ActionCOACH, and Jan-Pro International produced the highest modeled local-alignment scores in the evaluated set. Local business demand was the strongest positive scored mechanism among 10 exposed concepts, adding 1.2 points on average. Service-base space scarcity was the broadest operating constraint, reducing exposed concepts by 0.8 points on average. 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 | 73.9Tier 2 · Favorable modeled alignment | +2.5 ptsTarget-market demand | No material negative local adjustment | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 2 | ActionCOACHBusiness coachingInvestment: $71,668–$303,513 | 73.2Tier 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 | 72.5Tier 2 · Favorable modeled alignment | +2.2 ptsTarget-market demand | No material negative local adjustment | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 4 | HomeSmilesProperty maintenance servicesInvestment: $148,110–$201,800 | 72.0Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +1.3 ptsTarget-market demand | -0.4 ptsReal estate and site feasibility | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 5 | FASTSIGNSSigns and graphicsInvestment: $231,226–$386,285 | 71.9Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +2.3 ptsTarget-market demand | -0.9 ptsReal estate and site feasibility | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 6 | ZOOM DRAINDrain and sewer serviceInvestment: $266,250–$570,500 | 71.0Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +0.8 ptsReferral ecosystem | -0.9 ptsReal estate and site feasibility | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 7 | Pillar To Post Home InspectorsHome inspectionInvestment: $102,690–$134,290 | 70.5Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +0.3 ptsProperty replacement-cycle demand | No material negative local adjustment | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 8 | Aire ServHVAC installation, repair, and maintenanceInvestment: $113,308–$271,708 | 70.5Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +1.0 ptsProperty replacement-cycle demand | -0.9 ptsReal estate and site feasibility | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 9 | Mr. RooterPlumbingInvestment: $152,900–$298,675 | 70.4Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +0.7 ptsProperty replacement-cycle demand | -0.6 ptsReal estate and site feasibility | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 10 | Tiger AdjustersPublic insurance adjustingInvestment: $43,050–$159,500 | 70.3Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +0.3 ptsTarget-market demand | No material negative local adjustment | Moderate evidence confidence |
Conditions that changed the analysis
What mattered most in Plano, Texas
Large corporate and professional employer concentration supports local B2B and recurring commercial account demand
This relationship affected 10 concepts and added 1.2 points on average among those exposed. Local evidence: Selected headquarters and regional office footprints in Plano: Toyota Motor North America headquarters sqft: 2,100,000; Capital One regional operations sqft: 1,240,000; Bank of America regional operations sqft: 1,000,000; JPMorgan Chase regional operations sqft: 1,000,000; PepsiCo Foods North America headquarters sqft: 800,000; Ericsson North America headquarters sqft: 500,000; Liberty Mutual regional operations sqft: 400,000 square feet by named operation. [8] [2] [10]
Small-bay and specialized industrial space is materially tighter than broad DFW industrial supply
This relationship affected 8 concepts and reduced 0.8 points on average among those exposed. Local evidence: DFW overall industrial market conditions in Q2 2026: vacancy percent: 8.6; net absorption sqft: 4,900,000; average asking rent psf: 8.08 market metrics. [22] [21]
asset-light-b2b
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. [8] [10] [9]
Evidence behind the city mechanisms
Large corporate and professional employer concentration supports local B2B and recurring commercial account demand1 modeled effect
Local business demandTarget-market demand
Plano's large 1980s-1990s housing cohort supports current system-repair and replacement demand1 modeled effect
Housing-system replacement demandProperty replacement-cycle demand
Small-bay and specialized industrial space is materially tighter than broad DFW industrial supply1 modeled effect
Service-base space scarcityReal estate and site feasibility
Concentrated finance, technology, professional-services and healthcare employers expand the professional referral base1 modeled effect
Professional and institutional relationship densityReferral ecosystem
Active arterial construction can create route-specific temporary travel-time and access friction1 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 alignment73.9
City Wide
Initial investment: $229,729–$410,730
Increase +2.5 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 |
| +2.5 pts |
| Referral ecosystem |
| +1.4 pts |
| Net local movement | +3.85 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 confused with missing, conditional, or non-applicable evidence.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +2.5 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Not included in the score |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | +1.4 |
| 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 | 73.85 |
| Published local-market alignment | 73.9 |
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
- Adequate
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Target-market demand +2.5 pts
- Tested rank range
- #1–#1
#2Tier 2 · Favorable modeled alignment73.2
ActionCOACH
Initial investment: $71,668–$303,513
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 |
| +1.1 pts |
| Net local movement | +3.15 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 | +2.0 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Not included in the score |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | +1.1 |
| 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 | 73.15 |
| Published local-market alignment | 73.2 |
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 +2.0 pts
- Tested rank range
- #2–#3
#3Tier 2 · Favorable modeled alignment72.5
Jan-Pro International
Initial investment: $130,000–$421,500
Increase +2.2 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 |
| +2.2 pts |
| Referral ecosystem |
| +0.3 pts |
| Net local movement | +2.51 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 | +2.2 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Not included in the score |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| 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 | 72.51 |
| Published local-market alignment | 72.5 |
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
- Target-market demand +2.2 pts
- Tested rank range
- #2–#5
#4Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment72.0
HomeSmiles
Initial investment: $148,110–$201,800
Increase +1.3 pts Target-market demandReduction -0.4 pts Real estate and site feasibility
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 |
| +1.3 pts |
| Referral ecosystem |
| +1.0 pts |
| Real estate and site feasibility |
| -0.4 pts |
| Net local movement | +1.95 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 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 | +1.3 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Not included in the score |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Real estate and site feasibility | -0.4 |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | +1.0 |
| 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 | 71.95 |
| Published local-market alignment | 72.0 |
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
- Adequate
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Adequate
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Target-market demand +1.3 pts
- Tested rank range
- #3–#5
#5Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment71.9
FASTSIGNS
Initial investment: $231,226–$386,285
Increase +2.3 pts Target-market demandReduction -0.9 pts Real estate and site feasibility
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 |
| +2.3 pts |
| Real estate and site feasibility |
| -0.9 pts |
| Referral ecosystem |
| +0.6 pts |
| Net local movement | +1.91 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
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 | +2.3 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Not included in the score |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Real estate and site feasibility | -0.9 |
| 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 | 71.91 |
| 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
- Adequate
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Target-market demand +2.3 pts
- Tested rank range
- #3–#14
#6Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment71.0
ZOOM DRAIN
Initial investment: $266,250–$570,500
Increase +0.8 pts Referral ecosystemReduction -0.9 pts Real estate and site feasibility
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Real estate and site feasibility |
| -0.9 pts |
| Referral ecosystem |
| +0.8 pts |
| Property replacement-cycle demand |
| +0.7 pts |
| Target-market demand |
| +0.5 pts |
| Net local movement | +1.03 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 | +0.5 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | +0.7 |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Not included in the score |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Real estate and site feasibility | -0.9 |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | +0.8 |
| 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 | 71.03 |
| 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
- Real estate and site feasibility -0.9 pts
- Tested rank range
- #4–#10
#7Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment70.5
Pillar To Post Home Inspectors
Initial investment: $102,690–$134,290
Increase +0.3 pts Property replacement-cycle 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 |
|---|---|---|
| Property replacement-cycle demand |
| +0.3 pts |
| Target-market demand |
| +0.2 pts |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Temporary route disruption EvidenceConditional — applicability must be confirmed | Not scored |
| Net local movement | +0.52 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 | +0.2 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | +0.3 |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Not included in the score |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not applicable to this operating model |
| 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 | 70.52 |
| 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 +0.3 pts
- Tested rank range
- #6–#12
#8Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment70.5
Aire Serv
Initial investment: $113,308–$271,708
Increase +1.0 pts Property replacement-cycle demandReduction -0.9 pts Real estate and site feasibility
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 |
| +1.0 pts |
| Real estate and site feasibility |
| -0.9 pts |
| Target-market demand |
| +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
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 | +0.4 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | +1.0 |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Not included in the score |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Real estate and site feasibility | -0.9 |
| 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
- Adequate
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Adequate
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Property replacement-cycle demand +1.0 pts
- Tested rank range
- #7–#14
#9Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment70.4
Mr. Rooter
Initial investment: $152,900–$298,675
Increase +0.7 pts Property replacement-cycle demandReduction -0.6 pts Real estate and site feasibility
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 |
| Real estate and site feasibility |
| -0.6 pts |
| Target-market demand |
| +0.4 pts |
| Net local movement | +0.42 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 | +0.4 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | +0.7 |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Not included in the score |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Real estate and site feasibility | -0.6 |
| 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 | 70.42 |
| 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 +0.7 pts
- Tested rank range
- #8–#12
#10Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment70.3
Tiger Adjusters
Initial investment: $43,050–$159,500
Increase +0.3 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 |
| +0.3 pts |
| Net local movement | +0.30 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 | +0.3 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Not included in the score |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not applicable to this operating model |
| 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 | 70.30 |
| 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
- Adequate
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Adequate
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Target-market demand +0.3 pts
- Tested rank range
- #7–#13
#11Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment70.3
PuroClean
Initial investment: $54,575–$262,145
Increase +0.9 pts Referral ecosystemReduction -0.9 pts Real estate and site feasibility
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 |
| +0.9 pts |
| Real estate and site feasibility |
| -0.9 pts |
| Property replacement-cycle demand |
| +0.2 pts |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Temporary route disruption EvidenceConditional — applicability must be confirmed | Not scored |
| Net local movement | +0.28 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 | +0.2 |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Not included in the score |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Real estate and site feasibility | -0.9 |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | +0.9 |
| 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 | 70.28 |
| 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
- Referral ecosystem +0.9 pts
- Tested rank range
- #7–#14
#12Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment70.3
Rainbow International Restoration
Initial investment: $185,336–$351,900
Increase +0.9 pts Referral ecosystemReduction -0.9 pts Real estate and site feasibility
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 |
| +0.9 pts |
| Real estate and site feasibility |
| -0.9 pts |
| Property replacement-cycle demand |
| +0.2 pts |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Temporary route disruption EvidenceConditional — applicability must be confirmed | Not scored |
| Net local movement | +0.27 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 | +0.2 |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Not included in the score |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Real estate and site feasibility | -0.9 |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | +0.9 |
| 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 | 70.27 |
| 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
- Referral ecosystem +0.9 pts
- Tested rank range
- #8–#13
#13Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment70.2
Mister Sparky Electric
Increase +0.6 pts Property replacement-cycle demandReduction -0.4 pts Real estate and site feasibility
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 |
| Real estate and site feasibility |
| -0.4 pts |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Temporary route disruption EvidenceConditional — applicability must be confirmed | Not scored |
| Net local movement | +0.20 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 | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | +0.6 |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Not included in the score |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Real estate and site feasibility | -0.4 |
| 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 | 70.20 |
| Published local-market alignment | 70.2 |
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
- #9–#13
#14Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment70.0
Workout Anytime
Initial investment: $1,060,850–$1,840,550
No material positive local adjustment identifiedNo 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.
No material scored local adjustment was identified for this concept.
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 | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Not included in the score |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not applicable to this operating model |
| 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 | 70.00 |
| Published local-market alignment | 70.0 |
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
- 0.0 pts
- Tested rank range
- #11–#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 | +2.5 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Not included in the score |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | +1.4 |
| 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 | 73.85 |
| Published local-market alignment | 73.9 |
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 10 of 14 concepts. When we neutralized the factor and recalculated the table, 12 concepts changed position. FASTSIGNS moved from #5 to #14, the largest movement among concepts directly affected by this factor.
Concepts adjusted10 of 14
Average among affected+1.2 pts
Average across all concepts+0.9 pts
Concepts changing rank12
What we observed
- Selected Headquarters And Regional Office Footprints In PlanoToyota Motor North America headquarters sqft: 2,100,000; Capital One regional operations sqft: 1,240,000; Bank of America regional operations sqft: 1,000,000; JPMorgan Chase regional operations sqft: 1,000,000; PepsiCo Foods North America headquarters sqft: 800,000; Ericsson North America headquarters sqft: 500,000; Liberty Mutual regional operations sqft: 400,000 square feet by named operation
- Largest Private Employer Size Bands In Planoemploying 10000 plus: JPMorgan Chase; employing 5000 plus: Bank of America, Capital One Finance, Toyota Motor North America; selected employing 1000 plus: PepsiCo Foods North America, Ericsson North America, Medical City Plano, Liberty Mutual Insurance Company, USAA, JCPenney, Fannie Mae, NTT Data, additional values omitted employment size bands
- Named Industry Clusters Represented In Planofinancial services, software information technology, professional business services, medical health, life sciences, telecommunications, electronics, manufacturing named industry clusters
Concepts helped most
City WideFacility management
+2.5 pts
FASTSIGNSSigns and graphics
+2.3 pts
Jan-Pro InternationalCommercial cleaning
+2.2 pts
ActionCOACHBusiness coaching
+2.0 pts
HomeSmilesProperty maintenance services
+1.3 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, 8 concepts changed position. Aire Serv moved from #8 to #14, the largest movement among concepts directly affected by this factor.
Concepts adjusted7 of 14
Average among affected+0.5 pts
Average across all concepts+0.3 pts
Concepts changing rank8
What we observed
- Owner Occupied Housing Units Built Between 1980 And 1999/200056 percent of owner occupied units
- Rental Housing Units Built Between 1980 And 199957 percent of rental units
- Typical Sewer Line Service Life And Older Home Repair Evidencetypical service life years approximate: 50; affected cohort: many Plano homes built prior to the 1980s are experiencing problems with broken sewer lines service life and observed cohort
Concepts helped most
Aire ServHVAC installation, repair, and maintenance
+1.0 pts
ZOOM DRAINDrain and sewer service
+0.7 pts
Mr. RooterPlumbing
+0.7 pts
Mister Sparky ElectricElectrical
+0.6 pts
Pillar To Post Home InspectorsHome inspection
+0.3 pts
Observed model effectMixed or model dependent
Real estate and site feasibility
We applied site and operating-base constraints only to concepts requiring comparable storefront, production, warehouse, or fleet space.
Why concepts react differently
We applied a measurable adjustment to 8 of 14 concepts. When we neutralized the factor and recalculated the table, 10 concepts changed position. PuroClean moved from #11 to #8, the largest movement among concepts directly affected by this factor.
Concepts adjusted8 of 14
Average among affected-0.8 pts
Average across all concepts-0.4 pts
Concepts changing rank10
What we observed
- Northeast Dallas Flex/r&d Market Conditions In Q2 2026inventory sqft: 20,304,537; direct vacancy percent: 6; overall availability percent: 8.4; q2 net absorption sqft: -178,688; year over year net absorption sqft: -241,869; asking rent psf: 15.9 market metrics
- Dfw Overall Industrial Market Conditions In Q2 2026vacancy percent: 8.6; net absorption sqft: 4,900,000; average asking rent psf: 8.08 market metrics
- Plano Specialized/small Bay Industrial Vacancy And Availability At Mid Year 2026vacancy percent: 1.2; availability percent: 2; specialized inventory sqft: 7,990,000 market metrics
Concepts challenged most
FASTSIGNSSigns and graphics
-0.9 pts
ZOOM DRAINDrain and sewer service
-0.9 pts
PuroCleanRestoration
-0.9 pts
Rainbow International RestorationRestoration
-0.9 pts
Aire ServHVAC installation, repair, and maintenance
-0.9 pts
Observed model effectPositive local support
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, 13 concepts changed position. ZOOM DRAIN moved from #6 to #10, the largest movement among concepts directly affected by this factor.
Concepts adjusted8 of 14
Average among affected+0.9 pts
Average across all concepts+0.5 pts
Concepts changing rank13
What we observed
- Selected Headquarters And Regional Office Footprints In PlanoToyota Motor North America headquarters sqft: 2,100,000; Capital One regional operations sqft: 1,240,000; Bank of America regional operations sqft: 1,000,000; JPMorgan Chase regional operations sqft: 1,000,000; PepsiCo Foods North America headquarters sqft: 800,000; Ericsson North America headquarters sqft: 500,000; Liberty Mutual regional operations sqft: 400,000 square feet by named operation
- Largest Private Employer Size Bands In Planoemploying 10000 plus: JPMorgan Chase; employing 5000 plus: Bank of America, Capital One Finance, Toyota Motor North America; selected employing 1000 plus: PepsiCo Foods North America, Ericsson North America, Medical City Plano, Liberty Mutual Insurance Company, USAA, JCPenney, Fannie Mae, NTT Data, additional values omitted employment size bands
- Named Industry Clusters Represented In Planofinancial services, software information technology, professional business services, medical health, life sciences, telecommunications, electronics, manufacturing named industry clusters
Concepts helped most
City WideFacility management
+1.4 pts
ActionCOACHBusiness coaching
+1.1 pts
HomeSmilesProperty maintenance services
+1.0 pts
PuroCleanRestoration
+0.9 pts
Rainbow International RestorationRestoration
+0.9 pts
Measured but not differentiating in this concept set
- Competitive environmentNo material score adjustment
- Labor and staffing frictionNo material score adjustment
- Transportation, routing, and parkingNo 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 ActionCOACHStable · tested #2–#3
#3 Jan-Pro InternationalModerately sensitive · tested #2–#5
#4 HomeSmilesModerately sensitive · tested #3–#5
#5 FASTSIGNSHighly sensitive · tested #3–#14
#6 ZOOM DRAINHighly sensitive · tested #4–#10
#7 Pillar To Post Home InspectorsHighly sensitive · tested #6–#12
#8 Aire ServHighly sensitive · tested #7–#14
#9 Mr. RooterHighly sensitive · tested #8–#12
#10 Tiger AdjustersHighly sensitive · tested #7–#13
#11 PuroCleanHighly sensitive · tested #7–#14
#12 Rainbow International RestorationHighly sensitive · tested #8–#13
#13 Mister Sparky ElectricHighly sensitive · tested #9–#13
#14 Workout AnytimeModerately sensitive · tested #11–#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] [8] [9] [10] [6] [2]Property replacement-cycle demand: [6] [7] [25] [26] [2]Competitive environment: [12] [24] [10] [9]Labor and staffing friction: [13] [14] [9] [10] [1]Transportation, routing, and parking: [18] [19] [3]Real estate and site feasibility: [20] [21] [22] [23] [2] [11]Sales and customer acquisition: [12] [24] [10] [8]Referral ecosystem: [8] [9] [10] [11]Territory quality: [11] [8] [16] [17] [18] [3]Regulatory and operating friction: [16] [17] [15] [3] [1]
View the chart data as a table
| Concept | Target-market demand | Property replacement-cycle demand | Real estate and site feasibility | Referral ecosystem |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| #1 City Wide | +2.5 pts | — | — | +1.4 pts |
| #2 ActionCOACH | +2.0 pts | — | — | +1.1 pts |
| #3 Jan-Pro International | +2.2 pts | — | — | +0.3 pts |
| #4 HomeSmiles | +1.3 pts | — | -0.4 pts | +1.0 pts |
| #5 FASTSIGNS | +2.3 pts | — | -0.9 pts | +0.6 pts |
| #6 ZOOM DRAIN | +0.5 pts | +0.7 pts | -0.9 pts | +0.8 pts |
| #7 Pillar To Post Home Inspectors | +0.2 pts | +0.3 pts | — | — |
| #8 Aire Serv | +0.4 pts | +1.0 pts | -0.9 pts | — |
| #9 Mr. Rooter | +0.4 pts | +0.7 pts | -0.6 pts | — |
| #10 Tiger Adjusters | +0.3 pts | — | — | — |
| #11 PuroClean | — | +0.2 pts | -0.9 pts | +0.9 pts |
| #12 Rainbow International Restoration | — | +0.2 pts | -0.9 pts | +0.9 pts |
| #13 Mister Sparky Electric | — | +0.6 pts | -0.4 pts | — |
| #14 Workout Anytime | — | — | — | — |
Interpretation
How to interpret the result
City Wide, ActionCOACH, Jan-Pro International led because their operating requirements captured more of the local support from target-market demand while remaining less exposed to real estate and site feasibility. 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 FASTSIGNS, ZOOM DRAIN, 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 Plano, Texas
Category summaries are shown only when at least two concepts qualified. Two-concept comparisons are explicitly labeled as limited.
Limited two-concept comparison
70.3Best Restoration franchise opportunities we assessed in Plano, Texas
2 Restoration concepts qualified for comparison, with scores ranging from 70.3 to 70.3. PuroClean ranked highest at 70.3. Referral ecosystem added 0.9 points on average among the affected concepts. Real estate and site feasibility reduced the exposed concepts by 0.9 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
- 70.3–70.3
- Category average
- 70.3
PuroClean70.3
Rainbow International Restoration70.3
Metric registry
The 26 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 | 293,028people | July 1, 2025 population estimate; 2020-2024 ACS characteristics; 2022 economic measures | Plano, Texas | Context only | [4] |
| Estimated households, 2020-2024 | 112,438households | July 1, 2025 population estimate; 2020-2024 ACS characteristics; 2022 economic measures | Plano, Texas | Context only | [4] |
| Median household income, 2020-2024 | 112,253usd 2024 | July 1, 2025 population estimate; 2020-2024 ACS characteristics; 2022 economic measures | Plano, Texas | Context only | [4] |
| Selected headquarters and regional office footprints in Plano | Toyota Motor North America headquarters sqft: 2,100,000; Capital One regional operations sqft: 1,240,000; Bank of America regional operations sqft: 1,000,000; JPMorgan Chase regional operations sqft: 1,000,000; PepsiCo Foods North America headquarters sqft: 800,000; Ericsson North America headquarters sqft: 500,000; Liberty Mutual regional operations sqft: 400,000square feet by named operation | Current 2026 corporate and regional headquarters roster | Plano, Texas | Used in scoring | [8] [2] |
| Largest private-employer size bands in Plano | employing 10000 plus: JPMorgan Chase; employing 5000 plus: Bank of America, Capital One Finance, Toyota Motor North America; selected employing 1000 plus: PepsiCo Foods North America, Ericsson North America, Medical City Plano, Liberty Mutual Insurance Company, USAA, JCPenney, Fannie Mae, NTT Data, additional values omittedemployment size bands | Current 2026 employer-size bands | Plano, Texas | Used in scoring | [9] |
| Named industry clusters represented in Plano | financial services, software information technology, professional business services, medical health, life sciences, telecommunications, electronics, manufacturingnamed industry clusters | Current industry-cluster descriptions accessed August 2026 | Plano, Texas | Used in scoring | [10] |
| Owner-occupied housing units built between 1980 and 1999/2000 | 56percent of owner occupied units | Primarily ACS 2021/2017-2021 and local housing data through 2024; presented July 28, 2025 | Plano, Texas | Used in scoring | [6] |
| Rental housing units built between 1980 and 1999 | 57percent of rental units | Primarily ACS 2021/2017-2021 and local housing data through 2024; presented July 28, 2025 | Plano, Texas | Used in scoring | [6] |
| Typical sewer-line service life and older-home repair evidence | typical service life years approximate: 50; affected cohort: many Plano homes built prior to the 1980s are experiencing problems with broken sewer linesservice life and observed cohort | Primarily ACS 2021/2017-2021 and local housing data through 2024; presented July 28, 2025 | Plano, Texas | Used in scoring | [6] [7] |
| Great Update Rebate program parameters for older Plano homes | minimum home age years: 35; maximum rebate per property per 12 months usd: 5,000; minimum qualifying update spend usd: 20,000; annual program budget usd: 500,000; households assisted per year approximate: 100; households assisted last decade approximate: 1,000program parameters | Primarily ACS 2021/2017-2021 and local housing data through 2024; presented July 28, 2025 | Plano, Texas | Used in scoring | [6] |
| Selected Dallas-Fort Worth major occupational-group mean hourly wages in May 2025 | all occupations dallas hourly usd: 33.96; all occupations us hourly usd: 33.54; management dallas hourly usd: 69.19; computer mathematical dallas hourly usd: 57.55; food preparation serving dallas hourly usd: 15.74; building grounds cleaning maintenance dallas hourly usd: 17.96; construction extraction dallas hourly usd: 27.03; installation maintenance repair dallas hourly usd: 29.86; additional values omittedusd per hour | May 2025 occupational employment and wage estimates | Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington, Texas | Context only | [13] |
| Collin County labor-market context in 2026 | unemployment rate june 2026 percent: 4.4; covered establishments q4 2025: 35,427; covered employment december 2025: 572,394; average weekly wage q4 2025 usd: 1,786mixed labor market metrics | Employment and unemployment through June 2026; covered employment and wages through Q4 2025 | Collin County, Texas | Context only | [14] |
| Winter Quarter Average sewer methodology is restricted to residential accounts | yesresidential only rule | Current utility billing methodology accessed August 2026 | City of Plano utility customers | Context only | [15] |
| City-listed sign overlay districts | 190 Tollway / Plano Parkway, Dallas North Tollway, Expressway Corridor, Parkway, Preston Road, State Highway 121named overlay districts | Current sign-permit resources and overlay-district documents accessed August 2026 | Plano, Texas | Conditional relationship | [16] |
| Freestanding business and institutional signs in overlay districts must generally be monument type | yesregulatory requirement | Ordinance compilation dated September 1, 2025; accessed August 2026 | Plano sign overlay districts | Conditional relationship | [17] |
| Selected Preston Road and Parkway Overlay monument-sign limits | general business institution max height ft: 8; general business institution max size sqft: 90; identification max height ft: 8; identification max size sqft: 125; multipurpose max height ft: 8; multipurpose max size sqft: 225sign dimension limits | Ordinance compilation dated September 1, 2025; accessed August 2026 | Preston Road and Parkway Overlay districts, Plano, Texas | Conditional relationship | [17] [3] |
| Major Plano arterial projects active or scheduled across 2026-2027 | corridor: Independence Parkway - Spring Creek Parkway to Parker Road, schedule: summer 2026 to fall 2026, corridor: Legacy Drive - Coit Road to Custer Road, schedule: summer 2026 to fall 2026, corridor: Park Boulevard - Midway Road to Preston Road, schedule: summer 2026 to fall 2026, corridor: Parker Road - Independence Parkway to US 75, schedule: June/summer 2026 to fall 2026, corridor: Legacy Drive at Chase Oaks Drive, schedule: summer 2026 to summer 2027, corridor: Park Boulevard - east city limits to Preston Road, schedule: underway with estimated completion summer 2027named projects and schedules | Active and planned projects in 2026-2027 | Plano, Texas major arterial corridors | Conditional relationship | [18] [3] |
| Selected active lane closures in the August 14, 2026 weekly update | corridor: Independence Parkway - Parker Road to Spring Creek Parkway, closure: two northbound and southbound lanes closed overnight with additional daytime milling closures, estimated completion: 2026-10-15, corridor: Legacy Drive - Communications Parkway to Headquarters Drive, closure: turn-lane and through-lane closures, estimated completion: 2026-08-31, corridor: Spring Creek Parkway - Coit Road to Ohio Drive, closure: one westbound lane 24/7 plus possible second daytime lane, estimated completion: 2026-09-01, corridor: Spring Creek Parkway - Preston Road to Preston Meadow Drive, closure: one eastbound lane 24/7 plus second daytime lane, estimated completion: 2026-08-31closure records | Weekly road construction update dated August 14, 2026 | Plano, Texas | Conditional relationship | [19] [3] |
| Plano specialized/small-bay industrial vacancy and availability at mid-year 2026 | vacancy percent: 1.2; availability percent: 2; specialized inventory sqft: 7,990,000market metrics | Mid-year 2026; trailing 12-month market metrics | Plano, Texas specialized and small-bay industrial product | Used in scoring | [20] [2] |
| Northeast Dallas Flex/R&D market conditions in Q2 2026 | inventory sqft: 20,304,537; direct vacancy percent: 6; overall availability percent: 8.4; q2 net absorption sqft: -178,688; year over year net absorption sqft: -241,869; asking rent psf: 15.9market metrics | Q2 2026 | Northeast Dallas Flex/R&D submarket | Used in scoring | [21] |
| DFW overall industrial market conditions in Q2 2026 | vacancy percent: 8.6; net absorption sqft: 4,900,000; average asking rent psf: 8.08market metrics | Q2 2026 | Dallas-Fort Worth industrial market | Used in scoring | [22] |
| Current Plano listing demonstrates some immediately advertised small-bay/flex availability | address: 700 E Plano Pkwy; advertised space min sqft: 253; advertised space max sqft: 4,012; building size sqft: 174,500; docks: 6; drive ins: 5; availability: nowlisting attributes | Current listing availability accessed August 2026 | 700 E Plano Pkwy, Plano, Texas | Used in scoring | [23] |
| Plano SizeUp can map competitors and advertising areas only after a business/industry and trade area are specified | competitor mapping, performance benchmarking, customer supplier lists, advertising target analysis, custom boundary demographicsavailable analytic functions | Current business-analytics tool accessed August 2026 | Plano and user-defined local boundaries | Context only | [12] |
| County Business Patterns provides NAICS establishment detail at county, MSA, and ZIP geographies rather than a direct Plano-place count | county, metropolitan area, zip code industry detailpublished geographies | Calendar year 2023 | U.S | Context only | [24] |
| Houston Black is a deep smectitic clay soil series with slickensides and very slow permeability | taxonomic class: Fine, smectitic, thermic Udic Haplusterts; texture: clayey; permeability: very slow; slickensides present: yessoil series properties | Official series description revised August 2017 | Houston Black series, Texas | Context only | [25] |
| NRCS directs users to define a property-level Area of Interest and notes onsite investigation may be required for engineering applications | yessite specificity requirement | Current authoritative soil survey system accessed August 2026 | USDA Web Soil Survey | Context only | [26] |
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 73.85 after target-market demand +2.5 pts and referral ecosystem +1.4 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.
- 1Structural Constraint and Jurisdictional Risk AuditInternal or supplied research; not publicly accessible.
- 2Utility Delta Audit: Structural Inefficiencies and Asymmetric Opportunities in Local U.S. MarketsInternal or supplied research; not publicly accessible.
Used for: Selected headquarters and regional office footprints in Plano and Plano specialized/small-bay industrial vacancy and availability at mid-year 2026
- 3Franchise data - remake - 142Internal or supplied research; not publicly accessible.
Used for: Selected Preston Road and Parkway Overlay monument-sign limits, Major Plano arterial projects active or scheduled across 2026-2027, and Selected active lane closures in the August 14, 2026 weekly update
- 4QuickFacts: Plano city, Texas
Used for: Resident population estimate on July 1, 2025, Estimated households, 2020-2024, and Median household income, 2020-2024
- 5
- 6City of Plano Housing Study
Used for: Owner-occupied housing units built between 1980 and 1999/2000, Rental housing units built between 1980 and 1999, Typical sewer-line service life and older-home repair evidence, and Great Update Rebate program parameters for older Plano homes
- 7Housing Study - Strategies and Recommendations
Used for: Typical sewer-line service life and older-home repair evidence
- 8Headquarters Regional Offices
Used for: Selected headquarters and regional office footprints in Plano
- 9Largest Private Employers
Used for: Largest private-employer size bands in Plano
- 10Key Industries
Used for: Named industry clusters represented in Plano
- 11
- 12Free Business Growth Tool: SizeUp
Used for: Plano SizeUp can map competitors and advertising areas only after a business/industry and trade area are specified
- 13Occupational Employment and Wages in Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington - May 2025
Used for: Selected Dallas-Fort Worth major occupational-group mean hourly wages in May 2025
- 14Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington Metropolitan Area Data Tables
Used for: Collin County labor-market context in 2026
- 15Rates & Fees
Used for: Winter Quarter Average sewer methodology is restricted to residential accounts
- 16Signs
Used for: City-listed sign overlay districts
- 17Plano Zoning Ordinance
Used for: Freestanding business and institutional signs in overlay districts must generally be monument type and Selected Preston Road and Parkway Overlay monument-sign limits
- 18Major Road Construction
Used for: Major Plano arterial projects active or scheduled across 2026-2027
- 19City Street Updates
Used for: Selected active lane closures in the August 14, 2026 weekly update
- 20Plano Industrial Market Update Mid-Year 2026
Used for: Plano specialized/small-bay industrial vacancy and availability at mid-year 2026
- 21Dallas-Fort Worth Industrial Market - Q2 2026
Used for: Northeast Dallas Flex/R&D market conditions in Q2 2026
- 22DFW Industrial Market Report - 2026 Q2
Used for: DFW overall industrial market conditions in Q2 2026
- 23700 E Plano Pkwy - Industrial For Rent
Used for: Current Plano listing demonstrates some immediately advertised small-bay/flex availability
- 24County Business Patterns: 2023
Used for: County Business Patterns provides NAICS establishment detail at county, MSA, and ZIP geographies rather than a direct Plano-place count
- 25Official Series Description - Houston Black Series
Used for: Houston Black is a deep smectitic clay soil series with slickensides and very slow permeability
- 26Web Soil Survey
Used for: NRCS directs users to define a property-level Area of Interest and notes onsite investigation may be required for engineering applications
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.