69.6 average across 2 concepts
Local operating-model alignment analysis
Best Franchise Opportunities We Assessed in Albuquerque, New Mexico
We compared 14 franchise concepts for Albuquerque, New Mexico. University and government account demand was a leading positive mechanism. Territory and submarket uncertainty 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
33Sources used
19Primary sources
30Local metrics
Evaluation set
Why these concepts were evaluated
This is not a ranking of every franchise that may be offered in the city.
14Concepts assessed
Concepts were included when enough operating-model information existed to assign a provisional local-sensitivity profile. Unresolved inputs reduce confidence or remain conditional rather than automatically excluding a concept.
A brand’s participation in our referral network does not add points or change its position.
City-level conclusions
What stood out in our assessment
1 point average among 7 affected concepts
0.5 points average reduction among 14 affected concepts
Tested rank range spans 10 positions
Executive conclusion
What the ranking means for Albuquerque, New Mexico
City Wide, Jan-Pro International, and FASTSIGNS produced the highest modeled local-alignment scores in the evaluated set. University and government account demand was the strongest positive scored mechanism among 6 exposed concepts, adding 0.7 points on average. One important asymmetry was that the same local condition supported event-driven demand upside while also creating event-demand volatility. 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 | 72.6Tier 2 · Favorable modeled alignment | +2.7 ptsTarget-market demand | -0.1 ptsTerritory quality | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 2 | Jan-Pro InternationalCommercial cleaningInvestment: $130,000–$421,500 | 71.5Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +1.9 ptsTarget-market demand | -0.4 ptsTerritory quality | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 3 | FASTSIGNSSigns and graphicsInvestment: $231,226–$386,285 | 70.6Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +1.2 ptsTarget-market demand | -0.6 ptsTerritory quality | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 4 | ActionCOACHBusiness coachingInvestment: $71,668–$303,513 | 70.4Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +0.6 ptsTarget-market demand | -0.1 ptsTerritory quality | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 5 | HomeSmilesProperty maintenance servicesInvestment: $148,110–$201,800 | 70.4Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +0.9 ptsTarget-market demand | -0.5 ptsTerritory quality | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 6 | Rainbow International RestorationRestorationInvestment: $185,336–$351,900 | 69.8Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +0.3 ptsTarget-market demand | -0.5 ptsTerritory quality | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 7 | Tiger AdjustersPublic insurance adjustingInvestment: $43,050–$159,500 | 69.7Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | No material positive local adjustment | -0.3 ptsTerritory quality | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 8 | Pillar To Post Home InspectorsHome inspectionInvestment: $102,690–$134,290 | 69.6Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | No material positive local adjustment | -0.4 ptsTerritory quality | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 9 | Aire ServHVAC installation, repair, and maintenanceInvestment: $113,308–$271,708 | 69.5Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | No material positive local adjustment | -0.5 ptsTerritory quality | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 10 | Mister Sparky ElectricElectrical | 69.5Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | No material positive local adjustment | -0.5 ptsTerritory quality | Moderate evidence confidence |
Conditions that changed the analysis
What mattered most in Albuquerque, New Mexico
Large federal research, defense, university, and municipal procurement institutions support institutional-account demand
This relationship affected 6 concepts and added 0.7 points on average among those exposed. Local evidence: Kirtland AFB contracts awarded to small businesses in FY24: 1.079 USD billions. [14] [15]
Balloon Fiesta creates a large, recurring nine-day visitor-demand spike each October
The same local condition created complementary effects: event-driven demand upside supported exposed concepts while event-demand volatility constrained others. [30]
West-side housing capacity, river-crossing constraints, and divergent commercial submarkets create meaningful territory-level operating variation
This relationship affected 14 concepts and reduced 0.5 points on average among those exposed. Local evidence: Mean travel time to work for workers age 16 and older: 22.4 minutes. [7] [4] [17]
Evidence behind the city mechanisms
Large federal research, defense, university, and municipal procurement institutions support institutional-account demand1 modeled effect
University and government account demandTarget-market demand
I-25 Improved construction creates temporary route and ramp disruption on the Comanche-to-Montgomery corridor1 modeled effect
Temporary route disruptionTransportation, routing, and parking
West-side housing capacity, river-crossing constraints, and divergent commercial submarkets create meaningful territory-level operating variation1 modeled effect
Territory and submarket uncertaintyTerritory quality
Balloon Fiesta creates a large, recurring nine-day visitor-demand spike each October2 local facts · 2 modeled effects · 1 source
- Estimated guest visits to the 2025 Albuquerque International Balloon Fiesta: 851,994 estimated guest visits [30]
- Scheduled 2026 Albuquerque International Balloon Fiesta event window: start date: 2026-10-03; end date: 2026-10-11; duration days: 9 event dates [30]
Event-driven demand upsideTarget-market demand
Event-demand volatilityTarget-market demand
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 alignment72.6
City Wide
Initial investment: $229,729–$410,730
Increase +2.7 pts Target-market demandReduction -0.1 pts Territory quality
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 | +2.7 pts | |
| Territory quality |
| -0.1 pts |
| Net local movement | +2.62 pts | |
Net uses full-precision effects; displayed factor and driver rows are rounded.
Franchise evidence
Source material assessed
Item 3 — Litigation
1 image
Item 6 — Other Fees
1 image
Item 7 — Estimated Initial Investment
2 images
Item 12 — Territory
1 image
Item 20 — Outlets and Franchise Information
1 image
Full calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not mistaken for a score-changing effect.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +2.7 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Measured; no meaningful local adjustment |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | Not included in the score |
| Territory quality | -0.1 |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 72.62 |
| Published local-market alignment | 72.6 |
Factor calculations use full precision. Contributions and published scores are displayed to one decimal place; ranking order uses the full-precision score.
Evidence confidence
- City Modifier Evidence
- Strong
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Adequate
- Geographic applicability
- Adequate
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Target-market demand +2.7 pts
- Tested rank range
- #1–#1
#2Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment71.5
Jan-Pro International
Initial investment: $130,000–$421,500
Increase +1.9 pts Target-market demandReduction -0.4 pts Territory quality
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 | +1.9 pts | |
| Territory quality |
| -0.4 pts |
| Net local movement | +1.51 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 mistaken for a score-changing effect.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +1.9 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Measured; no meaningful local adjustment |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | Not included in the score |
| Territory quality | -0.4 |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 71.51 |
| Published local-market alignment | 71.5 |
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
- Strong
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Adequate
- Geographic applicability
- Adequate
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Target-market demand +1.9 pts
- Tested rank range
- #2–#4
#3Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment70.6
FASTSIGNS
Initial investment: $231,226–$386,285
Increase +1.2 pts Target-market demandReduction -0.6 pts Territory quality
Rank sensitivity: Highly sensitive
Why it ranks here
Score-changing local factors only. Evidence links open the underlying city finding.
| Local factor | Modeled drivers | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +1.2 pts | |
| Territory quality |
| -0.6 pts |
| Net local movement | +0.57 pts | |
Net uses full-precision effects; displayed factor and driver rows are rounded.
Franchise evidence
Source material assessed
Item 3 — Litigation
1 image
Item 6 — Other Fees
1 image
Item 7 — Estimated Initial Investment
2 images
Item 12 — Territory
1 image
Item 20 — Outlets and Franchise Information
1 image
Item 19 — Financial Performance Representation
2 images
Public company data assessed
3 sourcesFull calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not mistaken for a score-changing effect.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +1.2 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Measured; no meaningful local adjustment |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | Not included in the score |
| Territory quality | -0.6 |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 70.57 |
| Published local-market alignment | 70.6 |
Factor calculations use full precision. Contributions and published scores are displayed to one decimal place; ranking order uses the full-precision score.
Evidence confidence
- City Modifier Evidence
- Strong
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Adequate
- Geographic applicability
- Adequate
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Target-market demand +1.2 pts
- Tested rank range
- #3–#13
#4Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment70.4
ActionCOACH
Initial investment: $71,668–$303,513
Increase +0.6 pts Target-market demandReduction -0.1 pts Territory quality
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 | +0.6 pts | |
| Territory quality |
| -0.1 pts |
| Net local movement | +0.44 pts | |
Net uses full-precision effects; displayed factor and driver rows are rounded.
Franchise evidence
Source material assessed
Item 3 — Litigation
1 image
Item 6 — Other Fees
1 image
Item 7 — Estimated Initial Investment
2 images
Item 12 — Territory
1 image
Item 20 — Outlets and Franchise Information
1 image
Full calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not mistaken for a score-changing effect.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +0.6 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Measured; no meaningful local adjustment |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | Not included in the score |
| Territory quality | -0.1 |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 70.44 |
| Published local-market alignment | 70.4 |
Factor calculations use full precision. Contributions and published scores are displayed to one decimal place; ranking order uses the full-precision score.
Evidence confidence
- City Modifier Evidence
- Strong
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Adequate
- Geographic applicability
- Adequate
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Target-market demand +0.6 pts
- Tested rank range
- #2–#5
#5Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment70.4
HomeSmiles
Initial investment: $148,110–$201,800
Increase +0.9 pts Target-market demandReduction -0.5 pts Territory quality
Rank sensitivity: Moderately sensitive
Why it ranks here
Score-changing local factors only. Evidence links open the underlying city finding.
| Local factor | Modeled drivers | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +0.9 pts | |
| Territory quality |
| -0.5 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 mistaken for a score-changing effect.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +0.9 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Measured; no meaningful local adjustment |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | Not included in the score |
| Territory quality | -0.5 |
| 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
- Strong
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Adequate
- Source-evidence confidence
- Adequate
- Geographic applicability
- Adequate
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Target-market demand +0.9 pts
- Tested rank range
- #4–#7
#6Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment69.8
Rainbow International Restoration
Initial investment: $185,336–$351,900
Increase +0.3 pts Target-market demandReduction -0.5 pts Territory quality
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Territory quality |
| -0.5 pts |
| Target-market demand | +0.3 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.
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 | +0.3 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Measured; no meaningful local adjustment |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | Not included in the score |
| Territory quality | -0.5 |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 69.80 |
| Published local-market alignment | 69.8 |
Factor calculations use full precision. Contributions and published scores are displayed to one decimal place; ranking order uses the full-precision score.
Evidence confidence
- City Modifier Evidence
- Strong
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Adequate
- Geographic applicability
- Adequate
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Territory quality -0.5 pts
- Tested rank range
- #6–#9
#7Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment69.7
Tiger Adjusters
Initial investment: $43,050–$159,500
No material positive local adjustment identifiedReduction -0.3 pts Territory quality
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Territory quality |
| -0.3 pts |
| Net local movement | -0.31 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 | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Measured; no meaningful local adjustment |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | Not included in the score |
| Territory quality | -0.3 |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 69.69 |
| 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
- Strong
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Adequate
- Source-evidence confidence
- Adequate
- Geographic applicability
- Adequate
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Territory quality -0.3 pts
- Tested rank range
- #3–#8
#8Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment69.6
Pillar To Post Home Inspectors
Initial investment: $102,690–$134,290
No material positive local adjustment identifiedReduction -0.4 pts Territory quality
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Territory quality |
| -0.4 pts |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Temporary route disruption EvidenceConditional — applicability must be confirmed | Not scored |
| Net local movement | -0.44 pts | |
Net uses full-precision effects; displayed factor and driver rows are rounded.
Franchise evidence
Source material assessed
Item 3 — Litigation
1 image
Item 6 — Other Fees
1 image
Item 7 — Estimated Initial Investment
2 images
Item 12 — Territory
1 image
Item 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 | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Measured; no meaningful local adjustment |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | Not included in the score |
| Territory quality | -0.4 |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 69.56 |
| 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
- Strong
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Adequate
- Geographic applicability
- Adequate
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Territory quality -0.4 pts
- Tested rank range
- #5–#12
#9Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment69.5
Aire Serv
Initial investment: $113,308–$271,708
No material positive local adjustment identifiedReduction -0.5 pts Territory quality
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Territory quality |
| -0.5 pts |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Temporary route disruption EvidenceConditional — applicability must be confirmed | Not scored |
| Net local movement | -0.50 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 | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Measured; no meaningful local adjustment |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | Not included in the score |
| Territory quality | -0.5 |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 69.50 |
| Published local-market alignment | 69.5 |
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
- Strong
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Adequate
- Source-evidence confidence
- Adequate
- Geographic applicability
- Adequate
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Territory quality -0.5 pts
- Tested rank range
- #6–#9
#10Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment69.5
Mister Sparky Electric
No material positive local adjustment identifiedReduction -0.5 pts Territory quality
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Territory quality |
| -0.5 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.
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 | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Measured; no meaningful local adjustment |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | Not included in the score |
| Territory quality | -0.5 |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 69.48 |
| Published local-market alignment | 69.5 |
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
- Strong
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Adequate
- Geographic applicability
- Adequate
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Territory quality -0.5 pts
- Tested rank range
- #8–#11
#11Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment69.5
PuroClean
Initial investment: $54,575–$262,145
No material positive local adjustment identifiedReduction -0.5 pts Territory quality
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Territory quality |
| -0.5 pts |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Temporary route disruption EvidenceConditional — applicability must be confirmed | Not scored |
| Net local movement | -0.54 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 | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Measured; no meaningful local adjustment |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | Not included in the score |
| Territory quality | -0.5 |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 69.46 |
| Published local-market alignment | 69.5 |
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
- Strong
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Adequate
- Geographic applicability
- Adequate
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Territory quality -0.5 pts
- Tested rank range
- #10–#13
#12Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment69.4
Mr. Rooter
Initial investment: $152,900–$298,675
No material positive local adjustment identifiedReduction -0.6 pts Territory quality
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Territory quality |
| -0.6 pts |
| Net local movement | -0.57 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 | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Measured; no meaningful local adjustment |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | Not included in the score |
| Territory quality | -0.6 |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 69.43 |
| 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
- Strong
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Adequate
- Geographic applicability
- Adequate
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Territory quality -0.6 pts
- Tested rank range
- #10–#12
#13Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment69.4
ZOOM DRAIN
Initial investment: $266,250–$570,500
No material positive local adjustment identifiedReduction -0.6 pts Territory quality
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Territory quality |
| -0.6 pts |
| Net local movement | -0.60 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 | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Measured; no meaningful local adjustment |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | Not included in the score |
| Territory quality | -0.6 |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 69.40 |
| 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
- Strong
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Adequate
- Geographic applicability
- Adequate
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Territory quality -0.6 pts
- Tested rank range
- #9–#13
#14Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment68.1
Workout Anytime
Initial investment: $1,060,850–$1,840,550
No material positive local adjustment identifiedReduction -1.1 pts Territory quality
Rank sensitivity: Stable
Why it ranks here
Score-changing local factors only. Evidence links open the underlying city finding.
| Local factor | Modeled drivers | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Territory quality |
| -1.1 pts |
| Target-market demand | -0.8 pts | |
| Net local movement | -1.88 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 | -0.8 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Measured; no meaningful local adjustment |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | Not included in the score |
| Territory quality | -1.1 |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 68.12 |
| 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
- Strong
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Adequate
- Geographic applicability
- Adequate
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Territory quality -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 | +2.7 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Measured; no meaningful local adjustment |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | Not included in the score |
| Territory quality | -0.1 |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 72.62 |
| Published local-market alignment | 72.6 |
Factor calculations use full precision. Contributions and published scores are displayed to one decimal place; ranking order uses the full-precision score.
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, 10 concepts changed position. FASTSIGNS moved from #3 to #11, the largest movement among concepts directly affected by this factor.
Concepts adjusted7 of 14
Average among affected+1.0 pts
Average across all concepts+0.5 pts
Concepts changing rank10
What we observed
- Renter Households Paying More Than 30 Percent Of Income On Housing52 percent of renters
- Kirtland Afb Contracts Awarded To Small Businesses In Fy241.079 USD billions
- Education And Health Services Nonfarm Employment In June 202675.8 thousand jobs
Concepts helped most
City WideFacility management
+2.7 pts
Jan-Pro InternationalCommercial cleaning
+1.9 pts
FASTSIGNSSigns and graphics
+1.2 pts
HomeSmilesProperty maintenance services
+0.9 pts
ActionCOACHBusiness coaching
+0.6 pts
Concepts challenged most
Workout AnytimeFitness
-0.8 pts
Observed model effectMixed or model dependent
Territory quality
We measured whether the territory structure could support the required customer density, service radius, and operating model.
Why concepts react differently
We applied a measurable adjustment to 14 of 14 concepts. When we neutralized the factor and recalculated the table, 9 concepts changed position. PuroClean moved from #11 to #8, the largest movement among concepts directly affected by this factor.
Concepts adjusted14 of 14
Average among affected-0.5 pts
Average across all concepts-0.5 pts
Concepts changing rank9
What we observed
- Mean Travel Time To Work For Workers Age 16 And Older22.4 minutes
- Albuquerque Office Market Vacancy And Asking Rent In Q2 2026overall vacancy percent: 12.9; downtown vacancy percent: 23.6; average direct asking rent usd per sqft fsg: 20.93; location note: Mesa del Sol led absorption while Downtown had the highest vacancy market metrics
- Future Residential Land Capacity Is Concentrated On Albuquerque’s West Sidecitywide land capacity: enough vacant residentially zoned land to meet future housing needs; spatial concentration: almost all of that vacant land is on the West Side; city identified consequences: worsening jobs/housing balance if fully developed as housing, greater river-crossing congestion, more challenging access to services for West Side residents qualitative official finding
Concepts challenged most
Workout AnytimeFitness
-1.1 pts
FASTSIGNSSigns and graphics
-0.6 pts
ZOOM DRAINDrain and sewer service
-0.6 pts
Mr. RooterPlumbing
-0.6 pts
PuroCleanRestoration
-0.5 pts
Measured but not differentiating in this concept set
- Property replacement-cycle demandNo material score adjustment
- Competitive environmentNo material score adjustment
- Labor and staffing frictionNo material score adjustment
- Transportation, routing, and parkingNo material score adjustment
- Real estate and site feasibilityNo material score adjustment
- Sales and customer acquisitionNo material score adjustment
- Referral ecosystemNo 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 Jan-Pro InternationalModerately sensitive · tested #2–#4
#3 FASTSIGNSHighly sensitive · tested #3–#13
#4 ActionCOACHModerately sensitive · tested #2–#5
#5 HomeSmilesModerately sensitive · tested #4–#7
#6 Rainbow International RestorationModerately sensitive · tested #6–#9
#7 Tiger AdjustersHighly sensitive · tested #3–#8
#8 Pillar To Post Home InspectorsHighly sensitive · tested #5–#12
#9 Aire ServModerately sensitive · tested #6–#9
#10 Mister Sparky ElectricModerately sensitive · tested #8–#11
#11 PuroCleanModerately sensitive · tested #10–#13
#12 Mr. RooterModerately sensitive · tested #10–#12
#13 ZOOM DRAINHighly sensitive · tested #9–#13
#14 Workout AnytimeStable · 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.
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: [7] [8] [9] [13] [14] [15] [16] [12] [30] [4] [6]Property replacement-cycle demand: [8] [9] [10] [4]Competitive environment: [31] [32] [7]Labor and staffing friction: [11] [12] [16] [13] [14] [5] [4]Transportation, routing, and parking: [7] [8] [21] [22] [23] [5] [6]Real estate and site feasibility: [17] [18] [19] [20] [26] [27] [28] [4]Sales and customer acquisition: [14] [33] [31] [32]Referral ecosystem: [13] [14] [15] [16] [33]Territory quality: [8] [7] [17] [6]Regulatory and operating friction: [24] [25] [26] [27] [28] [29] [5] [6]
View the chart data as a table
| Concept | Target-market demand | Territory quality |
|---|---|---|
| #1 City Wide | +2.7 pts | -0.1 pts |
| #2 Jan-Pro International | +1.9 pts | -0.4 pts |
| #3 FASTSIGNS | +1.2 pts | -0.6 pts |
| #4 ActionCOACH | +0.6 pts | -0.1 pts |
| #5 HomeSmiles | +0.9 pts | -0.5 pts |
| #6 Rainbow International Restoration | +0.3 pts | -0.5 pts |
| #7 Tiger Adjusters | — | -0.3 pts |
| #8 Pillar To Post Home Inspectors | — | -0.4 pts |
| #9 Aire Serv | — | -0.5 pts |
| #10 Mister Sparky Electric | — | -0.5 pts |
| #11 PuroClean | — | -0.5 pts |
| #12 Mr. Rooter | — | -0.6 pts |
| #13 ZOOM DRAIN | — | -0.6 pts |
| #14 Workout Anytime | -0.8 pts | -1.1 pts |
Interpretation
How to interpret the result
City Wide, Jan-Pro International, FASTSIGNS led because their operating requirements captured more of the local support from target-market demand while remaining less exposed to territory quality. 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, Tiger Adjusters, 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 Albuquerque, New Mexico
Category summaries are shown only when at least two concepts qualified. Two-concept comparisons are explicitly labeled as limited.
Limited two-concept comparison
69.6Best Restoration franchise opportunities we assessed in Albuquerque, New Mexico
2 Restoration concepts qualified for comparison, with scores ranging from 69.5 to 69.8. Rainbow International Restoration ranked highest at 69.8. Target-market demand added 0.2 points on average among the affected concepts. Territory quality reduced the exposed concepts by 0.5 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
- 69.5–69.8
- Category average
- 69.6
Rainbow International Restoration69.8
PuroClean69.5
Metric registry
The 30 local metrics behind this analysis
The registry shows each public metric’s raw value, period, geography, source, and its actual role in the compiled analysis.
View all local metrics
| Metric | Raw value | Period | Geography | Role in analysis | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Resident population estimate on July 1, 2025 | 556,588people | July 1, 2025 population estimate; 2020-2024 ACS-derived characteristics | Albuquerque, New Mexico | Context only | [7] |
| Population change from the April 2020 estimate base to July 2025 | -1.4percent | July 1, 2025 population estimate; 2020-2024 ACS-derived characteristics | Albuquerque, New Mexico | Supports research conclusion | [7] |
| Mean travel time to work for workers age 16 and older | 22.4minutes | July 1, 2025 population estimate; 2020-2024 ACS-derived characteristics | Albuquerque, New Mexico | Used in scoring | [7] [4] |
| Renter households paying more than 30 percent of income on housing | 52percent of renters | 2024 Albuquerque Region Housing Needs Assessment summarized on current 2026 City page | Albuquerque, New Mexico | Used in scoring | [8] |
| Rental housing described by the 2024 housing assessment as older and in need of maintenance | 41percent of rental housing | 2024 Albuquerque Region Housing Needs Assessment summarized on current 2026 City page | Albuquerque, New Mexico rental housing stock | Conditional relationship | [8] [4] |
| Future residential land capacity is concentrated on Albuquerque’s West Side | citywide land capacity: enough vacant residentially zoned land to meet future housing needs; spatial concentration: almost all of that vacant land is on the West Side; city identified consequences: worsening jobs/housing balance if fully developed as housing, greater river-crossing congestion, more challenging access to services for West Side residentsqualitative official finding | 2024 Albuquerque Region Housing Needs Assessment summarized on current 2026 City page | Albuquerque city with West Side concentration | Used in scoring | [8] [6] |
| City research reports housing supply remained flat despite rising prices and smaller renter households | housing supply trend: flat; renter household size 2013: 2.4; renter household size 2023: 1.97city research summary | City research synthesized in 2025-2026; household-size comparison 2013-2023 | Albuquerque, New Mexico | Context only | [9] |
| Sandia National Laboratories Albuquerque site population | 12,915site population | Fiscal year 2025; site population as of September 30, 2025 | Sandia National Laboratories Albuquerque, New Mexico site | Used in scoring | [13] [4] [6] |
| Military and civilian employees included in Kirtland AFB FY24 local economic statement | 22,000employees more than | Fiscal year 2024 | Kirtland Air Force Base, Albuquerque | Used in scoring | [14] [4] |
| Kirtland AFB contracts awarded to small businesses in FY24 | 1.079USD billions | Fiscal year 2024 | Kirtland Air Force Base / Albuquerque local economy | Used in scoring | [14] |
| University of New Mexico Albuquerque campus total enrollment in fall 2025 | 23,955students | Fall 2025 | University of New Mexico Albuquerque campus | Used in scoring | [15] |
| City purchasing described in current vendor guidance | products and services annual: more than 100 million USD; public works annual: more than 100 million USDannual procurement scale | Current procurement guidance accessed August 2026 | City of Albuquerque | Used in scoring | [33] |
| Presbyterian Healthcare Services Albuquerque facility footprint | hospitals: 2; outpatient primary and specialty clinics: 22; administrative center employees approximate: 2,000facilities and employees | Current facility footprint accessed August 2026 | Albuquerque, New Mexico | Used in scoring | [16] [5] |
| Education and health services nonfarm employment in June 2026 | 75.8thousand jobs | Labor force through May 2026 and nonfarm employment through June 2026; preliminary where marked | Albuquerque, NM Metropolitan Statistical Area | Used in scoring | [12] |
| Unemployment rate in May 2026 | 4.4percent | Labor force through May 2026 and nonfarm employment through June 2026; preliminary where marked | Albuquerque, NM Metropolitan Statistical Area | Context only | [12] |
| Selected Albuquerque MSA major occupational mean hourly wages compared with U.S. averages in May 2024 | all occupations: albuquerque: 30.17, us: 32.66; food preparation and serving: albuquerque: 16.48, us: 17.32; building and grounds cleaning maintenance: albuquerque: 16.95, us: 19.01; sales and related: albuquerque: 21.61, us: 26; office and administrative support: albuquerque: 22.19, us: 24.12; construction and extraction: albuquerque: 25.79, us: 30.73; installation maintenance and repair: albuquerque: 26.69, us: 29.63; architecture and engineering: albuquerque: 61.35, us: 49.99USD per hour mean | May 2024 | Albuquerque, NM Metropolitan Statistical Area | Context only | [11] [5] |
| Albuquerque office market vacancy and asking rent in Q2 2026 | overall vacancy percent: 12.9; downtown vacancy percent: 23.6; average direct asking rent usd per sqft fsg: 20.93; location note: Mesa del Sol led absorption while Downtown had the highest vacancymarket metrics | Q2 2026 | Albuquerque office market and submarkets | Used in scoring | [17] [4] |
| Albuquerque industrial market vacancy and asking rent in Q2 2026 | vacancy percent: 3.6; average direct asking rent usd per sqft: 11.1market metrics | Q2 2026 | Albuquerque industrial market | Context only | [18] |
| Greater Albuquerque industrial vacancy reached a two-year low in Q1 2026 | 3.38percent vacancy | Q1 2026 | Greater Albuquerque industrial market | Context only | [19] |
| Q3 2025 Albuquerque industrial availability was heavily tilted toward suites of 5,000 square feet or less | market vacancy percent: 4.26; size bucket: 5,000 square feet or less; availability description: surplus of sub-5,000-square-foot space; functional space note: conventionally configured spaces tended to re-lease quickly; new space rent usd per sqft range: 14, 16market and size specific metrics | Q3 2025 | Albuquerque industrial market | Context only | [20] [4] |
| I-25 Improved construction is active between Comanche Road and Montgomery Boulevard | construction started: 2024-08; projected completion: spring 2027; current 2026 impacts: lane shifts between Candelaria Road and south of Montgomery Boulevard, nighttime lane and ramp closures, reduced 55 mph work-zone speed, phased Montgomery ramp closures; daytime lanes after shift: three lanes in each direction between Comanche and Montgomeryproject status and impacts | Construction status current through August 2026; major construction August 2024 through projected spring 2027 | I-25 Comanche Road to Montgomery Boulevard, Albuquerque | Conditional relationship | [21] [22] |
| The Big I is currently in an NMDOT operations-improvement study rather than the active construction project described in supplied research | official status: Study and Design; study focus: eastbound and westbound I-40 ramps connecting to northbound I-25; existing condition: significant congestion particularly during the morning peak on the studied rampsstudy status and condition | Current study status accessed August 2026; study launched September 2025 | I-40/I-25 Big I interchange, Albuquerque | Context only | [23] [5] |
| Current Albuquerque sign rules impose permit and engineering gates for many exterior signs | most signs require permit: yes; freestanding over 6ft: engineered design sealed by a New Mexico licensed structural engineer; freestanding over 12ft: Public Service Company of New Mexico approval required; license requirement: specified sign-contractor license required to obtain permitregulatory thresholds | Current sign-permit guidance under the 2026 IDO | Albuquerque, New Mexico | Conditional relationship | [25] [24] [6] |
| Business licensing requires zoning review and carries location-size-related inspection fees | annual business license fee usd: 36.75; fee effective: 2026-07-01; zoning review required for all business locations: yes; fire life safety inspection fee usd by size: up to 1500 sqft: 35, 1501 to 6000 sqft: 100, 6001 to 12000 sqft: 250, 12001 plus sqft: 400fees and requirements | Fee effective July 1, 2026 and current licensing/zoning-review rules | Albuquerque, New Mexico | Context only | [26] |
| City impact fees apply to new development and are assessed and collected during building permitting | applies to: new development; capital improvements: roads, drainage facilities, fire stations, police stations, parks, open space, trails; collection stage: building permit process; metropolitan redevelopment area city fee waiver: yes; water sewer fee waiver excluded: yesprogram rules | Current impact-fee program guidance accessed August 2026 | City of Albuquerque; Metropolitan Redevelopment Areas have a City impact-fee waiver | Context only | [27] [28] [5] |
| Safer Community Places Ordinance imposes current workplace signage and notice requirements on Albuquerque businesses | all businesses private area signage: yes; all businesses employee notice requirements: yes; written safety plan employee threshold: 5; designated safer community places additional requirements: yesregulatory requirements | Requirements in effect July 2026 | Incorporated City of Albuquerque businesses | Context only | [29] |
| ABCWUA drinking water ranges from moderately hard to hard depending on source and blend | hardness range description: moderately hard to hard; distribution pH range: 7.1, 8.4; average pH: 7.6; supply note: treated surface water and groundwater are blended throughout the systemutility water quality condition | Current distribution-system guidance accessed August 2026 | Albuquerque Bernalillo County Water Utility Authority distribution system | Context only | [10] [4] |
| Estimated guest visits to the 2025 Albuquerque International Balloon Fiesta | 851,994estimated guest visits | October 4-12, 2025 event; 2026 dates announced for October 3-11, 2026 | Albuquerque International Balloon Fiesta / Balloon Fiesta Park | Supports modeled relationship | [30] |
| Scheduled 2026 Albuquerque International Balloon Fiesta event window | start date: 2026-10-03; end date: 2026-10-11; duration days: 9event dates | October 4-12, 2025 event; 2026 dates announced for October 3-11, 2026 | Albuquerque International Balloon Fiesta / Balloon Fiesta Park | Supports modeled relationship | [30] |
| Bernalillo County employer establishments in 2023 | 16,349employer establishments | 2023 employer-establishment and employment metrics | Bernalillo County, New Mexico | Context only | [32] [31] |
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 72.62 after target-market demand +2.7 pts and territory quality -0.1 pts. The current model caps total local movement at ±18.0 points. The score is not a percentage, probability, or estimate of investment quality.
Precision and materiality
Calculations use full-precision values. Published scores and factor contributions display one decimal place, while ranks use full precision. Effects smaller than 0.1 points are identified as below the publication threshold rather than presented as a meaningful zero.
Score tiers
Tier 1 · Strongest modeled alignment80.0–100.0
Tier 2 · Favorable modeled alignment72.0–<80.0
Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment64.0–<72.0
Tier 4 · Higher-friction modeled alignment0.0–<64.0
How factor rows are classified
Positive local adjustmentNegative local adjustmentMeasured; no meaningful local adjustmentEffect below the publication thresholdNot applicable to this operating modelDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating conditionNot included in the score
What “best” means here
“Best” means the strongest modeled local operating alignment among the franchise concepts assessed on this page.
Model governance
How this report is calculated and corrected
Calculation controls
- Model designer
- Thomas Jepsen
No concept’s final score is manually raised or lowered after calculation. Before this template is activated, the report is reviewed for source scope, classification, arithmetic, unsupported claims, duplication, and readability.
Model history
- Model 0.9.0-calibration · August 19, 2026Added compiler-derived decision intelligence and observation usage mapping., Changed factor sensitivity and channel counterfactuals to full model reruns., Added data-dependent city content signals while preserving legacy public report fields., and Added model-owned semantic compatibility gates and backward-compatible channel-level evidence attribution.
Corrections policy
Corrected source, geography, or operating-profile evidence triggers a full compiler rerun so every dependent score and visual is recalculated.
Source registry
Evidence represented in this report
Each source identifies its period, scope, and the claims or metrics it supports. Internal or supplied research is clearly distinguished from publicly accessible evidence.
- 1Franchise-to-city operating-fit model definitionInternal or supplied research; not publicly accessible.
- 2Valid city JSON exampleInternal or supplied research; not publicly accessible.
- 3Compiler-ready city research JSON instructionsInternal or supplied research; not publicly accessible.
- 4Structural Inefficiencies and Utility Delta Audit: A Private Equity Real Estate AnalysisInternal or supplied research; not publicly accessible.
Used for: Mean travel time to work for workers age 16 and older, Rental housing described by the 2024 housing assessment as older and in need of maintenance, Sandia National Laboratories Albuquerque site population, Military and civilian employees included in Kirtland AFB FY24 local economic statement, and Albuquerque office market vacancy and asking rent in Q2 2026
- 5Forensic Municipal Constraint and Structural Friction ReportInternal or supplied research; not publicly accessible.
Used for: Presbyterian Healthcare Services Albuquerque facility footprint, Selected Albuquerque MSA major occupational mean hourly wages compared with U.S. averages in May 2024, The Big I is currently in an NMDOT operations-improvement study rather than the active construction project described in supplied research, and City impact fees apply to new development and are assessed and collected during building permitting
- 6Franchise data - remake - B start(1).csvInternal or supplied research; not publicly accessible.
Used for: Future residential land capacity is concentrated on Albuquerque’s West Side, Sandia National Laboratories Albuquerque site population, and Current Albuquerque sign rules impose permit and engineering gates for many exterior signs
- 7QuickFacts: Albuquerque city, New Mexico
Used for: Resident population estimate on July 1, 2025, Population change from the April 2020 estimate base to July 2025, and Mean travel time to work for workers age 16 and older
- 8Affordable Housing
Used for: Renter households paying more than 30 percent of income on housing, Rental housing described by the 2024 housing assessment as older and in need of maintenance, and Future residential land capacity is concentrated on Albuquerque’s West Side
- 9Research — Housing Now
Used for: City research reports housing supply remained flat despite rising prices and smaller renter households
- 10Your Drinking Water — FAQs
Used for: ABCWUA drinking water ranges from moderately hard to hard depending on source and blend
- 11Occupational Employment and Wages in Albuquerque — May 2024
Used for: Selected Albuquerque MSA major occupational mean hourly wages compared with U.S. averages in May 2024
- 12Albuquerque, NM Economy at a Glance
Used for: Education and health services nonfarm employment in June 2026 and Unemployment rate in May 2026
- 13Facts & Figures — About Sandia
Used for: Sandia National Laboratories Albuquerque site population
- 14Kirtland releases latest economic statement, increases impact to $7.5B
Used for: Military and civilian employees included in Kirtland AFB FY24 local economic statement and Kirtland AFB contracts awarded to small businesses in FY24
- 15UNM sets new records in enrollment growth, fall 2025 numbers show
Used for: University of New Mexico Albuquerque campus total enrollment in fall 2025
- 16Albuquerque Area
Used for: Presbyterian Healthcare Services Albuquerque facility footprint
- 17Albuquerque Office Figures Q2 2026
Used for: Albuquerque office market vacancy and asking rent in Q2 2026
- 18Albuquerque Industrial Figures Q2 2026
Used for: Albuquerque industrial market vacancy and asking rent in Q2 2026
- 19Land/Industrial — 2026 Q1 Market Review
Used for: Greater Albuquerque industrial vacancy reached a two-year low in Q1 2026
- 20Land/Industrial — 2025 Q3 Market Review
Used for: Q3 2025 Albuquerque industrial availability was heavily tilted toward suites of 5,000 square feet or less
- 21I-25 Improved | Comanche to Montgomery
Used for: I-25 Improved construction is active between Comanche Road and Montgomery Boulevard
- 22I-25 Improved Traffic Shift
Used for: I-25 Improved construction is active between Comanche Road and Montgomery Boulevard
- 23Big-I Operations Improvements Study
Used for: The Big I is currently in an NMDOT operations-improvement study rather than the active construction project described in supplied research
- 24Integrated Development Ordinance
Used for: Current Albuquerque sign rules impose permit and engineering gates for many exterior signs
- 25Sign Regulations
Used for: Current Albuquerque sign rules impose permit and engineering gates for many exterior signs
- 26Business License FAQs
Used for: Business licensing requires zoning review and carries location-size-related inspection fees
- 27Impact Fees Section
Used for: City impact fees apply to new development and are assessed and collected during building permitting
- 28Other Development Incentives and Resources
Used for: City impact fees apply to new development and are assessed and collected during building permitting
- 29Safer Spaces Ordinance
Used for: Safer Community Places Ordinance imposes current workplace signage and notice requirements on Albuquerque businesses
- 30Albuquerque International Balloon Fiesta 2025 Final Event Numbers
Used for: Estimated guest visits to the 2025 Albuquerque International Balloon Fiesta and Scheduled 2026 Albuquerque International Balloon Fiesta event window
- 31County Business Patterns: 2023
Used for: Bernalillo County employer establishments in 2023
- 32QuickFacts: Bernalillo County, New Mexico
Used for: Bernalillo County employer establishments in 2023
- 33Vendor Handbook
Used for: City purchasing described in current vendor guidance
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.