69.5 average across 2 concepts
Local operating-model alignment analysis
Best Franchise Opportunities We Assessed in Green Bay, Wisconsin
We compared 14 franchise concepts for Green Bay, Wisconsin. Replacement and repair demand was a leading positive mechanism. Skilled-trade labor competition 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
23Local sources used
2Primary local sources
29Local 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
0.9 points average among 7 affected concepts
0.7 points average reduction among 10 affected concepts
Tested rank range spans 10 positions
Executive conclusion
What the ranking means for Green Bay, Wisconsin
City Wide, Jan-Pro International, and ActionCOACH produced the highest modeled local-alignment scores in the evaluated set. Replacement and repair demand was the strongest positive scored mechanism among 7 exposed concepts, adding 0.5 points on average. One important asymmetry was that the same local condition supported freeze-thaw repair demand while also creating winter route friction. Mister Sparky Electric was especially relationship-sensitive: removing skilled-trade labor competition moved it from #12 to #9 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 | 71.0Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +1.0 ptsTarget-market demand | -0.1 ptsTransportation, routing, and parking | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 2 | Jan-Pro InternationalCommercial cleaningInvestment: $130,000–$421,500 | 70.4Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +0.7 ptsTarget-market demand | -0.3 ptsTransportation, routing, and parking | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 3 | ActionCOACHBusiness coachingInvestment: $71,668–$303,513 | 70.1Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +0.1 ptsTarget-market demand | No material negative local adjustment | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 4 | Workout AnytimeFitnessInvestment: $1,060,850–$1,840,550 | 70.1Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +0.1 ptsTarget-market demand | No material negative local adjustment | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 5 | Pillar To Post Home InspectorsHome inspectionInvestment: $102,690–$134,290 | 70.0Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +0.6 ptsProperty replacement-cycle demand | -0.4 ptsTransportation, routing, and parking | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 6 | Rainbow International RestorationRestorationInvestment: $185,336–$351,900 | 69.7Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +1.1 ptsProperty replacement-cycle demand | -0.6 ptsReal estate and site feasibility | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 7 | Tiger AdjustersBusiness & Professional ServicesInvestment: $43,050–$159,500 | 69.6Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | No material positive local adjustment | -0.2 ptsLabor and staffing friction | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 8 | PuroCleanRestorationInvestment: $54,575–$262,145 | 69.4Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +1.1 ptsProperty replacement-cycle demand | -0.6 ptsReal estate and site feasibility | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 9 | HomeSmilesHome & Property ServicesInvestment: $148,110–$201,800 | 69.3Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +0.4 ptsTarget-market demand | -0.4 ptsLabor and staffing friction | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 10 | FASTSIGNSSigns and graphicsInvestment: $231,226–$386,285 | 69.3Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +0.4 ptsTarget-market demand | -0.7 ptsReal estate and site feasibility | Moderate evidence confidence |
Conditions that changed the analysis
What mattered most in Green Bay, Wisconsin
A large share of Green Bay housing predates 1980, supporting repair and replacement demand without implying uniform system failure
This relationship affected 7 concepts and added 0.5 points on average among those exposed. Local evidence: Approximate share of Green Bay housing stock built before 1980: 68 percent approximate. [5] [4]
Recurring freezing conditions create weatherization/repair demand and winter routing friction
The same local condition created complementary effects: freeze-thaw repair demand supported exposed concepts while winter route friction constrained others. [7]
Green Bay MSA trade occupations show modestly above-national wages and slightly higher employment concentration
This relationship affected 10 concepts and reduced 0.7 points on average among those exposed. Local evidence: July 2026 preliminary Green Bay MSA unemployment and total nonfarm employment: unemployment rate percent: 3.1; total nonfarm jobs thousands: 184 percent and thousand jobs. [9] [8]
Evidence behind the city mechanisms
Recurring freezing conditions create weatherization/repair demand and winter routing friction2 local facts · 2 modeled effects · 1 source
- 1991-2020 annual normal count of days with minimum temperature at or below 32°F: 152.3 days per year [7]
- 1991-2020 annual normal count of days with minimum temperature at or below 0°F: 19.1 days per year [7]
Freeze-thaw repair demandProperty replacement-cycle demand
Winter route frictionTransportation, routing, and parking
Greater Green Bay flex vacancy and availability were tight in 2025, while current listings show some inventory remains1 modeled effect
Service-base space scarcityReal estate and site feasibility
Large healthcare employers and sector activity support institutional service demand1 modeled effect
Healthcare institutional service demandTarget-market demand
Lambeau Field creates recurring high-capacity event spikes rather than uniform year-round stadium demand2 local facts · 2 modeled effects · 2 sources
Green Bay MSA trade occupations show modestly above-national wages and slightly higher employment concentration1 modeled effect
Skilled-trade labor competitionLabor and staffing friction
Active I-41/I-43 and I-41/WIS 29/32 flyover work creates route-specific temporary closures and detours1 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 3 · Mixed modeled alignment71.0
City Wide
Initial investment: $229,729–$410,730
Increase +1.0 pts Target-market demandReduction -0.1 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 |
| +1.0 pts |
| Transportation, routing, and parking |
| -0.1 pts |
| Net local movement | +0.99 pts | |
Net uses full-precision effects; displayed factor and driver rows are rounded.
Franchise evidence
Source material assessed
Item 3 — Litigation
1 image
Item 6 — Other Fees
1 image
Item 7 — Estimated Initial Investment
2 images
Item 12 — Territory
1 image
Item 20 — Outlets and Franchise Information
1 image
Full calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not mistaken for a score-changing effect.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +1.0 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | -0.1 |
| 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 | Measured; no meaningful local adjustment |
| Full-precision calculated score | 70.99 |
| 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
- Limited
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Target-market demand +1.0 pts
- Tested rank range
- #1–#4
#2Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment70.4
Jan-Pro International
Initial investment: $130,000–$421,500
Increase +0.7 pts Target-market demandReduction -0.3 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 | +0.7 pts | |
| Transportation, routing, and parking |
| -0.3 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
Full calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not mistaken for a score-changing effect.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +0.7 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | -0.3 |
| 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 | Measured; no meaningful local adjustment |
| 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
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Limited
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Target-market demand +0.7 pts
- Tested rank range
- #2–#5
#3Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment70.1
ActionCOACH
Initial investment: $71,668–$303,513
Increase +0.1 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 |
| +0.1 pts |
| 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
Full calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not mistaken for a score-changing effect.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +0.1 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Not applicable to this operating model |
| 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 | Measured; no meaningful local adjustment |
| 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
- Limited
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Target-market demand +0.1 pts
- Tested rank range
- #2–#6
#4Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment70.1
Workout Anytime
Initial investment: $1,060,850–$1,840,550
Increase +0.1 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 | +0.1 pts | |
| Net local movement | +0.12 pts | |
Net uses full-precision effects; displayed factor and driver rows are rounded.
Franchise evidence
Source material assessed
Item 3 — Litigation
1 image
Item 6 — Other Fees
1 image
Item 7 — Estimated Initial Investment
2 images
Item 12 — Territory
1 image
Item 20 — Outlets and Franchise Information
1 image
Full calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not mistaken for a score-changing effect.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +0.1 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Not applicable to this operating model |
| 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 | Measured; no meaningful local adjustment |
| Full-precision calculated score | 70.12 |
| 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
- Limited
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Target-market demand +0.1 pts
- Tested rank range
- #3–#7
#5Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment70.0
Pillar To Post Home Inspectors
Initial investment: $102,690–$134,290
Increase +0.6 pts Property replacement-cycle demandReduction -0.4 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 |
|---|---|---|
| Property replacement-cycle demand | +0.6 pts | |
| Transportation, routing, and parking |
| -0.4 pts |
| Labor and staffing friction |
| -0.2 pts |
| Net local movement | 0.00 pts | |
Net uses full-precision effects; displayed factor and driver rows are rounded.
Franchise evidence
Source material assessed
Item 3 — Litigation
1 image
Item 6 — Other Fees
1 image
Item 7 — Estimated Initial Investment
2 images
Item 12 — Territory
1 image
Item 19 — Financial Performance Representation
1 image
Public company data assessed
2 sourcesFull calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not mistaken for a score-changing effect.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | +0.6 |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | -0.2 |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | -0.4 |
| 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 | Measured; no meaningful local adjustment |
| 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
- Limited
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Property replacement-cycle demand +0.6 pts
- Tested rank range
- #1–#6
#6Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment69.7
Rainbow International Restoration
Initial investment: $185,336–$351,900
Increase +1.1 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 | +1.1 pts | |
| Real estate and site feasibility |
| -0.6 pts |
| Labor and staffing friction |
| -0.5 pts |
| Transportation, routing, and parking |
| -0.5 pts |
| Target-market demand |
| +0.1 pts |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Temporary route disruption EvidenceConditional — applicability must be confirmed | Not scored |
| Net local movement | -0.34 pts | |
Net uses full-precision effects; displayed factor and driver rows are rounded.
Franchise evidence
Source material assessed
Item 3 — Litigation
1 image
Item 6 — Other Fees
1 image
Item 7 — Estimated Initial Investment
2 images
Item 12 — Territory
1 image
Item 20 — Outlets and Franchise Information
1 image
Full calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not mistaken for a score-changing effect.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +0.1 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | +1.1 |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | -0.5 |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | -0.5 |
| 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 | Measured; no meaningful local adjustment |
| Full-precision calculated score | 69.66 |
| Published local-market alignment | 69.7 |
Factor calculations use full precision. Contributions and published scores are displayed to one decimal place; ranking order uses the full-precision score.
Evidence confidence
- City Modifier Evidence
- Adequate
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Limited
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Property replacement-cycle demand +1.1 pts
- Tested rank range
- #3–#9
#7Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment69.6
Tiger Adjusters
Initial investment: $43,050–$159,500
No material positive local adjustment identifiedReduction -0.2 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 |
|---|---|---|
| Labor and staffing friction |
| -0.2 pts |
| Transportation, routing, and parking |
| -0.2 pts |
| Net local movement | -0.38 pts | |
Net uses full-precision effects; displayed factor and driver rows are rounded.
Franchise evidence
Source material assessed
Item 3 — Litigation
1 image
Item 6 — Other Fees
1 image
Item 7 — Estimated Initial Investment
2 images
Item 12 — Territory
1 image
Item 19 — Financial Performance Representation
1 image
Public company data assessed
1 sourceFull calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not mistaken for a score-changing effect.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | Effect below the publication threshold |
| 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 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 | Measured; no meaningful local adjustment |
| Full-precision calculated score | 69.62 |
| Published local-market alignment | 69.6 |
Factor calculations use full precision. Contributions and published scores are displayed to one decimal place; ranking order uses the full-precision score.
Evidence confidence
- City Modifier Evidence
- Adequate
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Adequate
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Limited
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Labor and staffing friction -0.2 pts
- Tested rank range
- #5–#10
#8Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment69.4
PuroClean
Initial investment: $54,575–$262,145
Increase +1.1 pts Property replacement-cycle demandReduction -0.6 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 |
|---|---|---|
| Property replacement-cycle demand | +1.1 pts | |
| Real estate and site feasibility |
| -0.6 pts |
| Transportation, routing, and parking |
| -0.6 pts |
| Labor and staffing friction |
| -0.5 pts |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Temporary route disruption EvidenceConditional — applicability must be confirmed | Not scored |
| Net local movement | -0.64 pts | |
Net uses full-precision effects; displayed factor and driver rows are rounded.
Franchise evidence
Source material assessed
Item 3 — Litigation
1 image
Item 6 — Other Fees
1 image
Item 7 — Estimated Initial Investment
2 images
Item 12 — Territory
1 image
Item 20 — Outlets and Franchise Information
1 image
Full calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not mistaken for a score-changing effect.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | +1.1 |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | -0.5 |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | -0.6 |
| 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 | Measured; no meaningful local adjustment |
| Full-precision calculated score | 69.36 |
| Published local-market alignment | 69.4 |
Factor calculations use full precision. Contributions and published scores are displayed to one decimal place; ranking order uses the full-precision score.
Evidence confidence
- City Modifier Evidence
- Adequate
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Limited
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Property replacement-cycle demand +1.1 pts
- Tested rank range
- #7–#10
#9Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment69.3
HomeSmiles
Initial investment: $148,110–$201,800
Increase +0.4 pts Target-market demandReduction -0.4 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 |
|---|---|---|
| Labor and staffing friction |
| -0.4 pts |
| Target-market demand |
| +0.4 pts |
| Transportation, routing, and parking |
| -0.4 pts |
| Real estate and site feasibility |
| -0.3 pts |
| Net local movement | -0.68 pts | |
Net uses full-precision effects; displayed factor and driver rows are rounded.
Franchise evidence
Source material assessed
Item 3 — Litigation
1 image
Item 6 — Other Fees
1 image
Item 7 — Estimated Initial Investment
2 images
Item 12 — Territory
1 image
Item 20 — Outlets and Franchise Information
1 image
Full calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not mistaken for a score-changing effect.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +0.4 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | -0.4 |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | -0.4 |
| Real estate and site feasibility | -0.3 |
| 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 | Measured; no meaningful local adjustment |
| Full-precision calculated score | 69.32 |
| Published local-market alignment | 69.3 |
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
- Limited
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Labor and staffing friction -0.4 pts
- Tested rank range
- #7–#11
#10Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment69.3
FASTSIGNS
Initial investment: $231,226–$386,285
Increase +0.4 pts Target-market demandReduction -0.7 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 |
| -0.7 pts |
| Target-market demand |
| +0.4 pts |
| Labor and staffing friction |
| -0.4 pts |
| Transportation, routing, and parking |
| -0.1 pts |
| Net local movement | -0.75 pts | |
Net uses full-precision effects; displayed factor and driver rows are rounded.
Franchise evidence
Source material assessed
Item 3 — Litigation
1 image
Item 6 — Other Fees
1 image
Item 7 — Estimated Initial Investment
2 images
Item 12 — Territory
1 image
Item 20 — Outlets and Franchise Information
1 image
Item 19 — Financial Performance Representation
2 images
Public company data assessed
3 sourcesFull calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not mistaken for a score-changing effect.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +0.4 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | -0.4 |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | -0.1 |
| Real estate and site feasibility | -0.7 |
| 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 | Measured; no meaningful local adjustment |
| Full-precision calculated score | 69.25 |
| Published local-market alignment | 69.3 |
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
- Limited
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Real estate and site feasibility -0.7 pts
- Tested rank range
- #8–#12
#11Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment69.1
Aire Serv
Initial investment: $113,308–$271,708
Increase +1.4 pts Property replacement-cycle demandReduction -1.1 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 |
|---|---|---|
| Property replacement-cycle demand | +1.4 pts | |
| Labor and staffing friction |
| -1.1 pts |
| Real estate and site feasibility |
| -0.6 pts |
| Transportation, routing, and parking |
| -0.5 pts |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Temporary route disruption EvidenceConditional — applicability must be confirmed | Not scored |
| 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
1 image
Item 12 — Territory
1 image
Item 20 — Outlets and Franchise Information
1 image
Item 19 — Financial Performance Representation
1 image
Public company data assessed
1 sourceFull calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not mistaken for a score-changing effect.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | +1.4 |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | -1.1 |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | -0.5 |
| 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 | Measured; no meaningful local adjustment |
| 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
- Adequate
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Limited
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Property replacement-cycle demand +1.4 pts
- Tested rank range
- #3–#13
#12Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment68.7
Mister Sparky Electric
Increase +0.8 pts Property replacement-cycle demandReduction -1.2 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 |
|---|---|---|
| Labor and staffing friction |
| -1.2 pts |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | +0.8 pts | |
| Transportation, routing, and parking |
| -0.6 pts |
| Real estate and site feasibility |
| -0.3 pts |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Temporary route disruption EvidenceConditional — applicability must be confirmed | Not scored |
| Net local movement | -1.30 pts | |
Net uses full-precision effects; displayed factor and driver rows are rounded.
Full calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not mistaken for a score-changing effect.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | +0.8 |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | -1.2 |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | -0.6 |
| Real estate and site feasibility | -0.3 |
| 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 | Measured; no meaningful local adjustment |
| Full-precision calculated score | 68.70 |
| Published local-market alignment | 68.7 |
Factor calculations use full precision. Contributions and published scores are displayed to one decimal place; ranking order uses the full-precision score.
Evidence confidence
- City Modifier Evidence
- Adequate
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Limited
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Labor and staffing friction -1.2 pts
- Tested rank range
- #9–#12
#13Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment68.4
Mr. Rooter
Initial investment: $152,900–$298,675
Increase +0.6 pts Property replacement-cycle demandReduction -1.1 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 |
| -1.1 pts |
| Transportation, routing, and parking |
| -0.7 pts |
| Property replacement-cycle demand |
| +0.6 pts |
| Real estate and site feasibility |
| -0.5 pts |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Temporary route disruption EvidenceConditional — applicability must be confirmed | Not scored |
| Net local movement | -1.64 pts | |
Net uses full-precision effects; displayed factor and driver rows are rounded.
Franchise evidence
Source material assessed
Item 3 — Litigation
1 image
Item 6 — Other Fees
1 image
Item 7 — Estimated Initial Investment
2 images
Item 12 — Territory
1 image
Item 20 — Outlets and Franchise Information
1 image
Full calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not mistaken for a score-changing effect.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | +0.6 |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | -1.1 |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | -0.7 |
| Real estate and site feasibility | -0.5 |
| 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 | Measured; no meaningful local adjustment |
| Full-precision calculated score | 68.36 |
| Published local-market alignment | 68.4 |
Factor calculations use full precision. Contributions and published scores are displayed to one decimal place; ranking order uses the full-precision score.
Evidence confidence
- City Modifier Evidence
- Adequate
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Limited
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Labor and staffing friction -1.1 pts
- Tested rank range
- #12–#13
#14Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment68.1
ZOOM DRAIN
Initial investment: $266,250–$570,500
Increase +0.6 pts Property replacement-cycle demandReduction -1.1 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 |
| -1.1 pts |
| Transportation, routing, and parking |
| -0.8 pts |
| Real estate and site feasibility |
| -0.7 pts |
| Property replacement-cycle demand |
| +0.6 pts |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Temporary route disruption EvidenceConditional — applicability must be confirmed | Not scored |
| Net local movement | -1.87 pts | |
Net uses full-precision effects; displayed factor and driver rows are rounded.
Franchise evidence
Source material assessed
Item 3 — Litigation
1 image
Item 6 — Other Fees
1 image
Item 7 — Estimated Initial Investment
2 images
Item 12 — Territory
1 image
Item 20 — Outlets and Franchise Information
1 image
Full calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not mistaken for a score-changing effect.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | +0.6 |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | -1.1 |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | -0.8 |
| Real estate and site feasibility | -0.7 |
| 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 | Measured; no meaningful local adjustment |
| Full-precision calculated score | 68.13 |
| Published local-market alignment | 68.1 |
Factor calculations use full precision. Contributions and published scores are displayed to one decimal place; ranking order uses the full-precision score.
Evidence confidence
- City Modifier Evidence
- Adequate
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Limited
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Labor and staffing friction -1.1 pts
- Tested rank range
- #14–#14
No franchise concepts match the selected filters.
Worked score example
How we calculated City Wide
This example uses the same ledger shown for every concept and must reconcile exactly to the published score.
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not mistaken for a score-changing effect.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +1.0 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | -0.1 |
| 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 | Measured; no meaningful local adjustment |
| Full-precision calculated score | 70.99 |
| 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.
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 7 of 14 concepts. When we neutralized the factor and recalculated the table, 9 concepts changed position. City Wide moved from #1 to #4, the largest movement among concepts directly affected by this factor.
Concepts adjusted7 of 14
Average among affected+0.4 pts
Average across all concepts+0.2 pts
Concepts changing rank9
What we observed
- Health Care And Social Assistance Receipts/revenue In 20222,644,171 thousand usd
- July 2026 Preliminary Major Sector Employmentmanufacturing jobs thousands: 34; trade transportation utilities jobs thousands: 33.5; education health services jobs thousands: 29.1; professional business services jobs thousands: 19.1 thousand jobs
- Large Healthcare Employers Listed Among Greater Green Bay Principal EmployersBellin Health: 5,131; Aurora Health Care: 2,376; HSHS St Vincent Hospital: 1,696; Prevea Health: 1,675 employees
Concepts helped most
City WideFacility management
+1.0 pts
Jan-Pro InternationalCommercial cleaning
+0.7 pts
FASTSIGNSSigns and graphics
+0.4 pts
HomeSmilesHome & Property Services
+0.4 pts
Rainbow International RestorationRestoration
+0.1 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, 9 concepts changed position. Rainbow International Restoration moved from #6 to #9, the largest movement among concepts directly affected by this factor.
Concepts adjusted7 of 14
Average among affected+0.9 pts
Average across all concepts+0.4 pts
Concepts changing rank9
What we observed
- Owner Occupied Housing Unit Rate57.9 percent
- Approximate Share Of Green Bay Housing Stock Built Before 198068 percent approximate
Concepts helped most
Aire ServHome & Property Services
+1.4 pts
PuroCleanRestoration
+1.1 pts
Rainbow International RestorationRestoration
+1.1 pts
Mister Sparky ElectricElectrical
+0.8 pts
ZOOM DRAINDrain and sewer service
+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 10 of 14 concepts. When we neutralized the factor and recalculated the table, 9 concepts changed position. Aire Serv moved from #11 to #3, the largest movement among concepts directly affected by this factor.
Concepts adjusted10 of 14
Average among affected-0.7 pts
Average across all concepts-0.5 pts
Concepts changing rank9
What we observed
- Construction/extraction And Installation/maintenance/repair Employment Shares And Mean Wages Versus U.s. Averagesconstruction extraction: green bay employment share percent: 4.2, us share percent: 4.1, green bay mean hourly usd: 33.2, us mean hourly usd: 31.42; installation maintenance repair: green bay employment share percent: 4.2, us share percent: 3.9, green bay mean hourly usd: 31, us mean hourly usd: 30.44 percent and usd per hour
- Production Occupations In The Green Bay Msaemployment: 21,370; employment share percent: 12.2; us share percent: 5.5; location quotient: 2.22; mean hourly usd: 25.05 jobs percent ratio usd per hour
- July 2026 Preliminary Green Bay Msa Unemployment And Total Nonfarm Employmentunemployment rate percent: 3.1; total nonfarm jobs thousands: 184 percent and thousand jobs
Concepts challenged most
Mister Sparky ElectricElectrical
-1.2 pts
Aire ServHome & Property Services
-1.1 pts
Mr. RooterPlumbing
-1.1 pts
ZOOM DRAINDrain and sewer service
-1.1 pts
PuroCleanRestoration
-0.5 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 12 of 14 concepts. When we neutralized the factor and recalculated the table, 8 concepts changed position. Pillar To Post Home Inspectors moved from #5 to #3, the largest movement among concepts directly affected by this factor.
Concepts adjusted12 of 14
Average among affected-0.4 pts
Average across all concepts-0.4 pts
Concepts changing rank8
What we observed
- Brown County I 41 Flyover Ramp Work Serving Green Bay Began July 7, 2026 And Includes Long Term Ramp Closures/detoursbrown county green bay structures: 6; construction start: 2026-07-07; brown county work expected finish: 2026-12-31; traffic impacts: long term ramp closures, single lane closures, detours project scope
Concepts challenged most
ZOOM DRAINDrain and sewer service
-0.8 pts
Mr. RooterPlumbing
-0.7 pts
Mister Sparky ElectricElectrical
-0.6 pts
PuroCleanRestoration
-0.6 pts
Aire ServHome & Property Services
-0.5 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, 9 concepts changed position. Rainbow International Restoration moved from #6 to #3, the largest movement among concepts directly affected by this factor.
Concepts adjusted8 of 14
Average among affected-0.5 pts
Average across all concepts-0.3 pts
Concepts changing rank9
What we observed
- Greater Green Bay Industrial Market Q1 2025 Key Indicatorsmarket: rba sqft: 52,367,099, vacancy percent: 1.8, asking rent usd psf: 6.47, availability percent: 2.8, under construction sqft: 694,895; flex: rba sqft: 2,309,439, vacancy percent: 1.4, asking rent usd psf: 9.6, availability percent: 1.6, deliveries sqft: 0, under construction sqft: 0 square feet percent usd per sqft
- Northeast And Central Wisconsin Industrial Vacancy At Year End/local 2025 Trend Updatevacancy range percent: 2, 3; demand note: strong for last-mile and smaller manufacturing sites; speculative start note: developers limiting new starts percent and context
- Current Green Bay Flex Space Search Inventory Includes Available Space And Multiple Adjacent Municipalitiessearch result count: 10; municipality scope note: Results include Green Bay-addressed properties plus De Pere, Howard, New Franken, and Freedom entries; Green Bay postal addresses can also be outside City of Green Bay corporate limits. listings and scope note
Concepts challenged most
FASTSIGNSSigns and graphics
-0.7 pts
ZOOM DRAINDrain and sewer service
-0.7 pts
PuroCleanRestoration
-0.6 pts
Aire ServHome & Property Services
-0.6 pts
Rainbow International RestorationRestoration
-0.6 pts
Measured but not differentiating in this concept set
- Competitive environmentNo material score adjustment
- Sales and customer acquisitionNo material score adjustment
- Referral ecosystemNo 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 WideModerately sensitive · tested #1–#4
#2 Jan-Pro InternationalModerately sensitive · tested #2–#5
#3 ActionCOACHHighly sensitive · tested #2–#6
#4 Workout AnytimeHighly sensitive · tested #3–#7
#5 Pillar To Post Home InspectorsHighly sensitive · tested #1–#6
#6 Rainbow International RestorationHighly sensitive · tested #3–#9
#7 Tiger AdjustersHighly sensitive · tested #5–#10
#8 PuroCleanModerately sensitive · tested #7–#10
#9 HomeSmilesHighly sensitive · tested #7–#11
#10 FASTSIGNSHighly sensitive · tested #8–#12
#11 Aire ServHighly sensitive · tested #3–#13
#12 Mister Sparky ElectricModerately sensitive · tested #9–#12
#13 Mr. RooterStable · tested #12–#13
#14 ZOOM DRAINStable · tested #14–#14
Neutralizing a factor removes it from every concept. A concept can move down even when its own score improves because competitors may benefit more.
Score-changing factors
Factors that changed the calculated scores
The graph includes the top 14 concepts by local-alignment score. Only nonzero score contributions are plotted. A factor is removed when every displayed concept received 0.0 points from it. Hover or focus a concept name to highlight all of its remaining data points.
Primary source records by factorTarget-market demand: [4] [10] [9] [15] [16] [11] [1]Property replacement-cycle demand: [5] [6] [4] [7] [1]Competitive environment: [4] [23] [8] [11] [3]Labor and staffing friction: [8] [9] [10] [11] [2]Transportation, routing, and parking: [7] [17] [4] [11] [2]Real estate and site feasibility: [12] [13] [14] [18] [19] [1]Sales and customer acquisition: [4] [22] [23] [16] [3]Referral ecosystem: [10] [4] [9] [22] [23]Territory quality: [18] [14] [4] [17] [3] [1]Regulatory and operating friction: [19] [18] [21] [20] [2] [3]
View the chart data as a table
| Concept | Target-market demand | Property replacement-cycle demand | Labor and staffing friction | Transportation, routing, and parking | Real estate and site feasibility |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| #1 City Wide | +1.0 pts | — | — | -0.1 pts | — |
| #2 Jan-Pro International | +0.7 pts | — | — | -0.3 pts | — |
| #3 ActionCOACH | +0.1 pts | — | — | — | — |
| #4 Workout Anytime | +0.1 pts | — | — | — | — |
| #5 Pillar To Post Home Inspectors | — | +0.6 pts | -0.2 pts | -0.4 pts | — |
| #6 Rainbow International Restoration | +0.1 pts | +1.1 pts | -0.5 pts | -0.5 pts | -0.6 pts |
| #7 Tiger Adjusters | — | — | -0.2 pts | -0.2 pts | — |
| #8 PuroClean | — | +1.1 pts | -0.5 pts | -0.6 pts | -0.6 pts |
| #9 HomeSmiles | +0.4 pts | — | -0.4 pts | -0.4 pts | -0.3 pts |
| #10 FASTSIGNS | +0.4 pts | — | -0.4 pts | -0.1 pts | -0.7 pts |
| #11 Aire Serv | — | +1.4 pts | -1.1 pts | -0.5 pts | -0.6 pts |
| #12 Mister Sparky Electric | — | +0.8 pts | -1.2 pts | -0.6 pts | -0.3 pts |
| #13 Mr. Rooter | — | +0.6 pts | -1.1 pts | -0.7 pts | -0.5 pts |
| #14 ZOOM DRAIN | — | +0.6 pts | -1.1 pts | -0.8 pts | -0.7 pts |
Interpretation
How to interpret the result
City Wide, Jan-Pro International, ActionCOACH led because their operating requirements captured more of the local support from property replacement-cycle 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, Workout Anytime, 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 Green Bay, Wisconsin
Category summaries are shown only when at least two concepts qualified. Two-concept comparisons are explicitly labeled as limited.
Limited two-concept comparison
69.5Limited comparison: Restoration franchise opportunities assessed in Green Bay, Wisconsin
2 Restoration concepts qualified for comparison, with scores ranging from 69.4 to 69.7. Rainbow International Restoration ranked highest at 69.7. Property replacement-cycle demand added 1.1 points on average among the affected concepts. Real estate and site feasibility reduced the exposed concepts by 0.6 points on average.
Interpret cautiously: A 0.3-point spread is too small to support a strong brand-level conclusion from city alignment alone.
- Concepts compared
- 2
- Score range
- 69.4–69.7
- Category average
- 69.5
Rainbow International Restoration69.7
PuroClean69.4
Limited two-concept comparison
69.2Limited comparison: Home & Property Services franchise opportunities assessed in Green Bay, Wisconsin
2 Home & Property Services concepts qualified for comparison, with scores ranging from 69.1 to 69.3. HomeSmiles ranked highest at 69.3. Property replacement-cycle demand added 0.7 points on average among the affected concepts. Labor and staffing friction reduced the exposed concepts by 0.8 points on average.
Interpret cautiously: A 0.2-point spread is too small to support a strong brand-level conclusion from city alignment alone.
- Concepts compared
- 2
- Score range
- 69.1–69.3
- Category average
- 69.2
HomeSmiles69.3
Aire Serv69.1
Metric registry
The 29 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 | 106,675people | 2025 population estimate; 2020-2024 ACS; 2022 Economic Census measures | Green Bay, Wisconsin | Context only | [4] |
| Population change from the April 2020 estimate base to July 2025 | -0.6percent | 2025 population estimate; 2020-2024 ACS; 2022 Economic Census measures | Green Bay, Wisconsin | Context only | [4] |
| Households in the 2020-2024 ACS period | 43,790households | 2025 population estimate; 2020-2024 ACS; 2022 Economic Census measures | Green Bay, Wisconsin | Supports research conclusion | [4] |
| Owner-occupied housing unit rate | 57.9percent | 2025 population estimate; 2020-2024 ACS; 2022 Economic Census measures | Green Bay, Wisconsin | Used in scoring | [4] |
| Approximate share of Green Bay housing stock built before 1980 | 68percent approximate | 2025-2029 plan; housing-stock analysis based on recent Green Bay housing studies | Green Bay, Wisconsin | Used in scoring | [5] |
| Health care and social assistance receipts/revenue in 2022 | 2,644,171thousand usd | 2025 population estimate; 2020-2024 ACS; 2022 Economic Census measures | Green Bay, Wisconsin | Used in scoring | [4] |
| Total retail sales in 2022 | 2,244,569thousand usd | 2025 population estimate; 2020-2024 ACS; 2022 Economic Census measures | Green Bay, Wisconsin | Context only | [4] |
| Mean travel time to work | 19.2minutes | 2025 population estimate; 2020-2024 ACS; 2022 Economic Census measures | Green Bay, Wisconsin | Context only | [4] |
| 1991-2020 annual normal count of days with minimum temperature at or below 32°F | 152.3days per year | 1991-2020 climate normals | Green Bay, Wisconsin USW00014898 | Supports modeled relationship | [7] |
| 1991-2020 annual normal count of days with minimum temperature at or below 0°F | 19.1days per year | 1991-2020 climate normals | Green Bay, Wisconsin USW00014898 | Supports modeled relationship | [7] |
| All-occupation mean hourly wage in Green Bay MSA versus the United States | green bay msa: 30.19; united states: 33.54usd per hour | May 2025 OEWS | Green Bay, WI MSA | Context only | [8] |
| Construction/extraction and installation/maintenance/repair employment shares and mean wages versus U.S. averages | construction extraction: green bay employment share percent: 4.2, us share percent: 4.1, green bay mean hourly usd: 33.2, us mean hourly usd: 31.42; installation maintenance repair: green bay employment share percent: 4.2, us share percent: 3.9, green bay mean hourly usd: 31, us mean hourly usd: 30.44percent and usd per hour | May 2025 OEWS | Green Bay, WI MSA | Used in scoring | [8] |
| Production occupations in the Green Bay MSA | employment: 21,370; employment share percent: 12.2; us share percent: 5.5; location quotient: 2.22; mean hourly usd: 25.05jobs percent ratio usd per hour | May 2025 OEWS | Green Bay, WI MSA | Used in scoring | [8] |
| July 2026 preliminary Green Bay MSA unemployment and total nonfarm employment | unemployment rate percent: 3.1; total nonfarm jobs thousands: 184percent and thousand jobs | July 2026 preliminary labor force and nonfarm employment; extracted August 21, 2026 | Green Bay, WI MSA | Used in scoring | [9] |
| July 2026 preliminary major sector employment | manufacturing jobs thousands: 34; trade transportation utilities jobs thousands: 33.5; education health services jobs thousands: 29.1; professional business services jobs thousands: 19.1thousand jobs | July 2026 preliminary labor force and nonfarm employment; extracted August 21, 2026 | Green Bay, WI MSA | Used in scoring | [9] |
| Large healthcare employers listed among Greater Green Bay principal employers | Bellin Health: 5,131; Aurora Health Care: 2,376; HSHS St Vincent Hospital: 1,696; Prevea Health: 1,675employees | Fiscal year ended December 31, 2024 | Greater Green Bay | Used in scoring | [10] |
| Selected logistics, food-processing, paper and packaging employers listed among Greater Green Bay principal employers | Schneider National: 2,383; American Foods Group: 2,059; Green Bay Packaging: 1,495; JBS: 1,428; Georgia Pacific: 1,400employees | Fiscal year ended December 31, 2024 | Greater Green Bay | Context only | [10] |
| City identifies Green Bay as an employment magnet with traded clusters in agriculture/food processing, paper/packaging/printing, advanced manufacturing, and transportation/logistics | employment magnet: yes; clusters: agriculture and food processing, paper packaging and printing, advanced manufacturing, transportation and logisticscategorical | Current city economic-development profile accessed August 2026 | Green Bay, Wisconsin | Context only | [11] |
| Greater Green Bay industrial market Q1 2025 key indicators | market: rba sqft: 52,367,099, vacancy percent: 1.8, asking rent usd psf: 6.47, availability percent: 2.8, under construction sqft: 694,895; flex: rba sqft: 2,309,439, vacancy percent: 1.4, asking rent usd psf: 9.6, availability percent: 1.6, deliveries sqft: 0, under construction sqft: 0square feet percent usd per sqft | Q1 2025 | Greater Green Bay industrial market | Used in scoring | [12] |
| Northeast and Central Wisconsin industrial vacancy at year-end/local 2025 trend update | vacancy range percent: 2, 3; demand note: strong for last-mile and smaller manufacturing sites; speculative start note: developers limiting new startspercent and context | Year-end 2025 / Q1 2026 national context and 2025 local trends | Northeast and Central Wisconsin | Used in scoring | [13] |
| Current Green Bay flex-space search inventory includes available space and multiple adjacent municipalities | search result count: 10; municipality scope note: Results include Green Bay-addressed properties plus De Pere, Howard, New Franken, and Freedom entries; Green Bay postal addresses can also be outside City of Green Bay corporate limits.listings and scope note | Dynamic listing inventory accessed August 21, 2026 | Green Bay flex-space search market | Used in scoring | [14] [18] |
| Lambeau Field capacity after the 2011-2015 renovation | 81,041seats | Lambeau Field history and current capacity context | Lambeau Field, Green Bay, Wisconsin | Supports modeled relationship | [15] |
| Green Bay Packers regular-season home games in 2025 | 8home games | 2025 NFL regular season | Lambeau Field, Green Bay, Wisconsin | Supports modeled relationship | [16] |
| Brown County I-41 flyover ramp work serving Green Bay began July 7, 2026 and includes long-term ramp closures/detours | brown county green bay structures: 6; construction start: 2026-07-07; brown county work expected finish: 2026-12-31; traffic impacts: long term ramp closures, single lane closures, detoursproject scope | Construction beginning July 7, 2026; Brown County work in 2026 and related program extending into 2027 | I-41/I-43 and I-41/WIS 29/32 interchanges, Green Bay/Brown County | Conditional relationship | [17] |
| Green Bay mailing address does not necessarily mean the property is within City of Green Bay permitting jurisdiction | adjacent jurisdictions listed: Allouez, Ashwaubenon, Bellevue, Howard, Oneida, Town of Green Bay, Town of Scott; city instruction: verify physical property location before submitting a permitjurisdiction list and rule | Current permit guidance and 2026 fee implementation | Green Bay mailing area | Conditional relationship | [18] |
| Current commercial construction and plan-review fees distinguish general building fees from signage fees | commercial plan review principal use usd: 125; building group 1 new construction usd per sqft: 0.07; building group 2 new construction usd per sqft: 0.14; subdivision or neighborhood identification sign base usd: 50; subdivision or neighborhood identification sign additional usd per sqft: 0.5usd and usd per sqft | Fees effective January 1, 2026 | Green Bay, Wisconsin | Context only | [19] |
| City streets generally prohibit parking from 3:00 AM to 5:00 AM, and overnight on-street parking is not allowed for businesses or other commercial property | restricted hours: 03:00-05:00; business commercial overnight on street allowed: no; exceptions require prior approval and are limited: yesregulatory rule | Current rule accessed August 2026 | Green Bay, Wisconsin | Context only | [20] |
| City procurement opportunities are published through vendor/bid systems rather than an in-house bidders list | platforms: DemandStar, VendorNet; vendor registration for notifications: yesprocurement process flags | Current procurement process accessed August 2026 | City of Green Bay | Context only | [22] |
| Brown County private-sector reporting units and average employment in 2023 | private reporting units: 7,152; private average employment: 139,556; construction reporting units: 678; construction average employment: 7,642; manufacturing reporting units: 449; manufacturing average employment: 27,813establishments and jobs | Calendar year 2023 | Brown County, Wisconsin | Context only | [23] |
How to use the ranking
What the model can and cannot establish
- Scores measure local operating alignment, not expected financial performance or franchise-system quality.
- Citywide evidence may not describe the exact site or territory ultimately offered.
- Conditional effects are shown for diligence but do not change the published score until their applicability is established.
Methodology
How the local-alignment ranking is calculated
Measure the city
Collect reusable local metrics with source, period, geography, and confidence fields.
Profile each operating model
Map each franchise to controlled operating attributes and local sensitivities.
Apply scoreable effects
Score only effects whose applicability is established at the report’s current geographic and operating scope.
Preserve conditional effects
Keep location- or territory-dependent issues visible for diligence without automatically changing the score.
Test rank sensitivity
Remove one factor at a time from every concept and rerank using full-precision scores.
Generate public output
Create the ranking, factor-status ledger, visuals, metric registry, and automated quality report from the same data.
How the common baseline becomes a city-specific score
Every concept starts from the same 70.0 reference point, so differences come only from modeled local interactions. In this city, City Wide reached 70.99 after target-market demand +1.0 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. Reports are checked for source scope, classification, arithmetic, unsupported claims, duplication, and readability before publication.
Model history
- Model 0.9.0-calibration · August 21, 2026Added compiler-derived decision intelligence and observation usage mapping., Changed factor sensitivity and channel counterfactuals to full model reruns., Added data-dependent city content signals while preserving legacy public report fields., and Added model-owned semantic compatibility gates and backward-compatible channel-level evidence attribution.
Corrections policy
Corrected source, geography, or operating-profile evidence triggers a full compiler rerun so every dependent score and visual is recalculated.
Source registry
Local evidence supporting this report
The city page keeps the local sources used for its visible findings and metrics. Franchise-source provenance stays with the underlying franchise research rather than being duplicated across every city page.
- 1I 192(5).docx — supplied multi-city structural operating-fit researchInternal or supplied research; not publicly accessible.
- 2Structural Constraints and Capital Hazards in Targeted Municipalities: A Forensic AuditInternal or supplied research; not publicly accessible.
- 3Franchise data - remake - 181(20260821-181915).csvInternal or supplied research; not publicly accessible.
- 4QuickFacts: Green Bay city, Wisconsin
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 ACS period, Owner-occupied housing unit rate, and Health care and social assistance receipts/revenue in 2022
- 55-Year Consolidated Plan & 2025 Annual Action Plan
Used for: Approximate share of Green Bay housing stock built before 1980
- 6
- 71991-2020 U.S. Climate Normals: Green Bay, Wisconsin station USW00014898
Used for: 1991-2020 annual normal count of days with minimum temperature at or below 32°F and 1991-2020 annual normal count of days with minimum temperature at or below 0°F
- 8Occupational Employment and Wages in Green Bay — May 2025
Used for: All-occupation mean hourly wage in Green Bay MSA versus the United States, Construction/extraction and installation/maintenance/repair employment shares and mean wages versus U.S. averages, and Production occupations in the Green Bay MSA
- 9Green Bay, WI Economy at a Glance
Used for: July 2026 preliminary Green Bay MSA unemployment and total nonfarm employment and July 2026 preliminary major sector employment
- 10Annual Comprehensive Financial Report for the Fiscal Year Ended December 31, 2024
Used for: Large healthcare employers listed among Greater Green Bay principal employers and Selected logistics, food-processing, paper and packaging employers listed among Greater Green Bay principal employers
- 11About Green Bay / city economic profile
Used for: City identifies Green Bay as an employment magnet with traded clusters in agriculture/food processing, paper/packaging/printing, advanced manufacturing, and transportation/logistics
- 12Industrial Market Report: Greater Green Bay, WI — Q1 2025
Used for: Greater Green Bay industrial market Q1 2025 key indicators
- 13Q4 2025 Commercial Real Estate Update
Used for: Northeast and Central Wisconsin industrial vacancy at year-end/local 2025 trend update
- 14Green Bay Flex Spaces for Lease
Used for: Current Green Bay flex-space search inventory includes available space and multiple adjacent municipalities
- 15Happy 70th season, Lambeau Field!
Used for: Lambeau Field capacity after the 2011-2015 renovation
- 16Press Release: Packers Announce Schedule
Used for: Green Bay Packers regular-season home games in 2025
- 17Governor Evers approves I-41 flyover ramp improvements in Brown and Winnebago counties
Used for: Brown County I-41 flyover ramp work serving Green Bay began July 7, 2026 and includes long-term ramp closures/detours
- 18Permit Guides, Forms & Fees
Used for: Current Green Bay flex-space search inventory includes available space and multiple adjacent municipalities and Green Bay mailing address does not necessarily mean the property is within City of Green Bay permitting jurisdiction
- 19City of Green Bay Fee Schedule
Used for: Current commercial construction and plan-review fees distinguish general building fees from signage fees
- 20City of Green Bay Parking — landlord information and overnight parking rules
Used for: City streets generally prohibit parking from 3:00 AM to 5:00 AM, and overnight on-street parking is not allowed for businesses or other commercial property
- 21
- 22Purchasing
Used for: City procurement opportunities are published through vendor/bid systems rather than an in-house bidders list
- 232023 QCEW Annual Industry Group, Private Ownership
Used for: Brown County private-sector reporting units and average employment in 2023
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.