Local operating-model alignment analysis

Best Franchise Opportunities We Assessed in Austin, Texas

We ranked 14 franchise concepts for Austin, Texas using local demand, labor, transportation, real estate, regulation, and source-backed evidence.

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.
Analysis by Thomas Jepsen, MSc Model: 0.9.0
14Concepts evaluated
23Sources used
14Primary sources
23Local 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

Highest category average (limited comparison)Restoration

69.7 average across 2 concepts

Largest positive factorTarget-market demand

1.4 points average among 11 affected concepts

Largest negative factorTerritory quality

0.8 points average reduction among 14 affected concepts

Most assumption-sensitive rankFASTSIGNS

Tested rank range spans 9 positions

Executive conclusion

What the ranking means for Austin, Texas

Our Austin, Texas analysis favored concepts whose operating requirements matched the city’s strongest service-demand conditions without depending too heavily on inexpensive labor, easy routing, or low-cost commercial space. City Wide, ActionCOACH, and Jan-Pro International produced the three highest modeled alignment scores in the evaluated set. Target-market demand was the strongest positive factor: it materially affected 11 concepts and added 1.4 points on average among them. Territory quality was the broadest negative pressure, reducing the 14 exposed concepts by 0.8 points on average. The result is not that the highest-ranked brand is universally better. It means that, under the documented city assumptions and the operating profiles available to us, its local advantages outweighed its modeled constraints more effectively. Territory boundaries, candidate capabilities, capital structure, franchise economics, current FDD disclosures, and local franchisee validation remain outside this ranking and can materially change the decision.

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.
RankFranchiseAlignment and tierLargest advantageLargest constraintEvidence confidence
1City WideFacility management
73.8Tier 2 · Favorable modeled alignment
+3.5 ptsTarget-market demand-0.1 ptsTerritory qualityModerate evidence confidence
2ActionCOACHBusiness coaching
72.8Tier 2 · Favorable modeled alignment
+2.3 ptsTarget-market demand-0.2 ptsTerritory qualityModerate evidence confidence
3Jan-Pro InternationalCommercial cleaning
72.3Tier 2 · Favorable modeled alignment
+2.9 ptsTarget-market demand-0.6 ptsTerritory qualityModerate evidence confidence
4HomeSmilesProperty maintenance services
71.3Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment
+1.7 ptsTarget-market demand-0.8 ptsTerritory qualityModerate evidence confidence
5FASTSIGNSSigns and graphics
71.1Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment
+2.7 ptsTarget-market demand-1.0 ptsTerritory qualityModerate evidence confidence
6Tiger AdjustersPublic insurance adjusting
70.2Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment
+0.4 ptsReferral ecosystem-0.5 ptsTerritory qualityModerate evidence confidence
7Pillar To Post Home InspectorsHome inspection
69.9Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment
+0.4 ptsReferral ecosystem-0.7 ptsTerritory qualityModerate evidence confidence
8ZOOM DRAINDrain and sewer service
69.9Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment
+0.5 ptsTarget-market demand-1.0 ptsTerritory qualityModerate evidence confidence
9Rainbow International RestorationRestoration
69.7Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment
+0.5 ptsReferral ecosystem-0.9 ptsTerritory qualityModerate evidence confidence
10PuroCleanRestoration
69.6Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment
+0.5 ptsReferral ecosystem-0.9 ptsTerritory qualityModerate evidence confidence

View all 14 score calculations

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.

Factor impact among the highest-rated franchise conceptsDiverging dot plot showing nonzero factor score contributions for the top 14 concepts. Zero-point concept-factor pairs are omitted, and factors with no nonzero contributions are excluded.+3.5+1.80.0-1.8-3.5
Target-market demand
#1 City Wide · Target-market demand · +3.5 pts1#2 ActionCOACH · Target-market demand · +2.3 pts2#3 Jan-Pro International · Target-market demand · +2.9 pts3#4 HomeSmiles · Target-market demand · +1.7 pts4#5 FASTSIGNS · Target-market demand · +2.7 pts5#6 Tiger Adjusters · Target-market demand · +0.3 pts6#7 Pillar To Post Home Inspectors · Target-market demand · +0.2 pts7#8 ZOOM DRAIN · Target-market demand · +0.5 pts8#9 Rainbow International Restoration · Target-market demand · +0.1 pts9#11 Aire Serv · Target-market demand · +0.4 pts11#12 Mr. Rooter · Target-market demand · +0.4 pts12
Real estate and site feasibility
#2 ActionCOACH · Real estate and site feasibility · -0.1 pts2#5 FASTSIGNS · Real estate and site feasibility · -0.8 pts5#14 Workout Anytime · Real estate and site feasibility · -1.8 pts14
Referral ecosystem
#1 City Wide · Referral ecosystem · +0.5 pts1#2 ActionCOACH · Referral ecosystem · +0.7 pts2#4 HomeSmiles · Referral ecosystem · +0.5 pts4#5 FASTSIGNS · Referral ecosystem · +0.1 pts5#6 Tiger Adjusters · Referral ecosystem · +0.4 pts6#7 Pillar To Post Home Inspectors · Referral ecosystem · +0.4 pts7#8 ZOOM DRAIN · Referral ecosystem · +0.4 pts8#9 Rainbow International Restoration · Referral ecosystem · +0.5 pts9#10 PuroClean · Referral ecosystem · +0.5 pts10#12 Mr. Rooter · Referral ecosystem · +0.1 pts12#13 Mister Sparky Electric · Referral ecosystem · +0.1 pts13
Territory quality
#1 City Wide · Territory quality · -0.1 pts1#2 ActionCOACH · Territory quality · -0.2 pts2#3 Jan-Pro International · Territory quality · -0.6 pts3#4 HomeSmiles · Territory quality · -0.8 pts4#5 FASTSIGNS · Territory quality · -1.0 pts5#6 Tiger Adjusters · Territory quality · -0.5 pts6#7 Pillar To Post Home Inspectors · Territory quality · -0.7 pts7#8 ZOOM DRAIN · Territory quality · -1.0 pts8#9 Rainbow International Restoration · Territory quality · -0.9 pts9#10 PuroClean · Territory quality · -0.9 pts10#11 Aire Serv · Territory quality · -0.8 pts11#12 Mr. Rooter · Territory quality · -0.9 pts12#13 Mister Sparky Electric · Territory quality · -0.8 pts13#14 Workout Anytime · Territory quality · -1.8 pts14
Primary source records by factorTarget-market demand: [5] [6] [7] [8] [10] [14] [15] [18] [4]Property replacement-cycle demand: [12] [13] [6] [7] [21] [2]Competitive environment: [8] [6] [11] [4]Labor and staffing friction: [8] [9] [10] [2]Transportation, routing, and parking: [20] [3] [4]Real estate and site feasibility: [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [23] [2] [3]Sales and customer acquisition: [11] [8] [10] [6]Referral ecosystem: [10] [8] [11] [6]Territory quality: [15] [18] [13] [20] [23] [4]Regulatory and operating friction: [19] [21] [22] [23] [11] [3] [4]
View the chart data as a table
ConceptTarget-market demandReal estate and site feasibilityReferral ecosystemTerritory quality
#1 City Wide+3.5 pts+0.5 pts-0.1 pts
#2 ActionCOACH+2.3 pts-0.1 pts+0.7 pts-0.2 pts
#3 Jan-Pro International+2.9 pts-0.6 pts
#4 HomeSmiles+1.7 pts+0.5 pts-0.8 pts
#5 FASTSIGNS+2.7 pts-0.8 pts+0.1 pts-1.0 pts
#6 Tiger Adjusters+0.3 pts+0.4 pts-0.5 pts
#7 Pillar To Post Home Inspectors+0.2 pts+0.4 pts-0.7 pts
#8 ZOOM DRAIN+0.5 pts+0.4 pts-1.0 pts
#9 Rainbow International Restoration+0.1 pts+0.5 pts-0.9 pts
#10 PuroClean+0.5 pts-0.9 pts
#11 Aire Serv+0.4 pts-0.8 pts
#12 Mr. Rooter+0.4 pts+0.1 pts-0.9 pts
#13 Mister Sparky Electric+0.1 pts-0.8 pts
#14 Workout Anytime-1.8 pts-1.8 pts

Rank stability

Which positions depend most on individual assumptions?

The line shows the best and worst rank reached when one factor was removed from every concept. A narrow range indicates a more stable position.

#1 City WideStable · tested #1–#2
#2 ActionCOACHModerately sensitive · tested #1–#3
#3 Jan-Pro InternationalHighly sensitive · tested #2–#9
#4 HomeSmilesStable · tested #4–#5
#5 FASTSIGNSHighly sensitive · tested #4–#13
#6 Tiger AdjustersHighly sensitive · tested #3–#7
#7 Pillar To Post Home InspectorsHighly sensitive · tested #4–#9
#8 ZOOM DRAINModerately sensitive · tested #6–#8
#9 Rainbow International RestorationHighly sensitive · tested #7–#11
#10 PuroCleanHighly sensitive · tested #6–#13
#11 Aire ServHighly sensitive · tested #7–#12
#12 Mr. RooterModerately sensitive · tested #10–#12
#13 Mister Sparky ElectricModerately sensitive · tested #10–#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.

Worked score example

How we calculated City Wide

This example uses the same ledger shown for every concept and must reconcile exactly to the published score.

Full score ledger

Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not confused with missing, conditional, or non-applicable evidence.

Neutral model baseline70.0
Target-market demand+3.5
Property replacement-cycle demandDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Competitive environmentNot included in the score
Labor and staffing frictionMeasured; no meaningful local adjustment
Transportation, routing, and parkingDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Real estate and site feasibilityNot applicable to this operating model
Sales and customer acquisitionNot included in the score
Referral ecosystem+0.5
Territory quality-0.1
Regulatory and operating frictionDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Full-precision calculated score73.81
Published local-market alignment73.8

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.

Interpretation

How to interpret the result

City Wide, ActionCOACH, Jan-Pro International led because their operating requirements captured more of the local support from target-market demand while remaining less exposed to 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 Jan-Pro International, FASTSIGNS, Tiger Adjusters; their ranks move more widely when individual factors are neutralized.

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.

Operating environment56Positive local support

Target-market demand

We tested how much of the city’s theoretical customer and business demand remained usable after operating friction.

We applied a measurable adjustment to 11 of 14 concepts. When we neutralized the factor and recalculated the table, 12 concepts changed position. FASTSIGNS moved from #5 to #13, the largest movement among concepts directly affected by this factor.

Concepts adjusted11 of 14
Average among affected+1.4 pts
Average across all concepts+1.1 pts
Concepts changing rank12

Concepts helped most

City WideFacility management
+3.5 pts
Jan-Pro InternationalCommercial cleaning
+2.9 pts
FASTSIGNSSigns and graphics
+2.7 pts
ActionCOACHBusiness coaching
+2.3 pts
HomeSmilesProperty maintenance services
+1.7 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
  • Sales and customer acquisitionNo material score adjustment
  • Regulatory and operating frictionNo material score adjustment

Category comparisons

Best franchise categories we assessed in Austin, Texas

Category summaries are shown only when at least two concepts qualified. Two-concept comparisons are explicitly labeled as limited.

Limited two-concept comparison

Best Restoration franchise opportunities we assessed in Austin, Texas

69.7

2 Restoration concepts qualified for comparison, with scores ranging from 69.6 to 69.7. Rainbow International Restoration ranked highest at 69.7. Referral ecosystem added 0.5 points on average among the affected concepts. Territory quality reduced the exposed concepts by 0.9 points on average.

Interpret cautiously: A 0.1-point spread is too small to support a strong brand-level conclusion from city alignment alone.

Concepts compared
2
Score range
69.6–69.7
Category average
69.7
Rainbow International Restoration69.7
PuroClean69.6

Compare all assessed concepts

Explore the complete score calculations

14 concepts shown. Expand a concept to see how each factor was treated and the single next check most capable of changing the result.

#1Tier 2 · Favorable modeled alignment73.8

City Wide

Facility management · B2B facility management and vendor coordination

Increase +3.5 pts Target-market demandReduction -0.1 pts Territory quality

Rank sensitivity: Stable

How we scored this concept

Full score ledger

Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not confused with missing, conditional, or non-applicable evidence.

Neutral model baseline70.0
Target-market demand+3.5
Property replacement-cycle demandDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Competitive environmentNot included in the score
Labor and staffing frictionMeasured; no meaningful local adjustment
Transportation, routing, and parkingDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Real estate and site feasibilityNot applicable to this operating model
Sales and customer acquisitionNot included in the score
Referral ecosystem+0.5
Territory quality-0.1
Regulatory and operating frictionDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Full-precision calculated score73.81
Published local-market alignment73.8

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
Strong
Franchise-profile completeness
Limited
Source-evidence confidence
Adequate
Geographic applicability
Limited
Overall evidence confidence
Moderate evidence confidence
Largest absolute effect
Target-market demand +3.5 pts
Tested rank range
#1–#2

Most important next check

How many qualified facility and property-management accounts must be reachable for City Wide to support its local contract pipeline?

#2Tier 2 · Favorable modeled alignment72.8

ActionCOACH

Business coaching · home-based B2B advisory

Increase +2.3 pts Target-market demandReduction -0.2 pts Territory quality

Rank sensitivity: Moderately sensitive

How we scored this concept

Full score ledger

Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not confused with missing, conditional, or non-applicable evidence.

Neutral model baseline70.0
Target-market demand+2.3
Property replacement-cycle demandDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Competitive environmentNot included in the score
Labor and staffing frictionMeasured; no meaningful local adjustment
Transportation, routing, and parkingDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Real estate and site feasibility-0.1
Sales and customer acquisitionNot included in the score
Referral ecosystem+0.7
Territory quality-0.2
Regulatory and operating frictionDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Full-precision calculated score72.75
Published local-market alignment72.8

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
Strong
Franchise-profile completeness
Limited
Source-evidence confidence
Adequate
Geographic applicability
Limited
Overall evidence confidence
Moderate evidence confidence
Largest absolute effect
Target-market demand +2.3 pts
Tested rank range
#1–#3

Most important next check

Which business-owner segments are expected to produce the most repeatable coaching demand for ActionCOACH?

#3Tier 2 · Favorable modeled alignment72.3

Jan-Pro International

Commercial cleaning · recurring commercial route service

Increase +2.9 pts Target-market demandReduction -0.6 pts Territory quality

Rank sensitivity: Highly sensitive

How we scored this concept

Full score ledger

Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not confused with missing, conditional, or non-applicable evidence.

Neutral model baseline70.0
Target-market demand+2.9
Property replacement-cycle demandDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Competitive environmentNot included in the score
Labor and staffing frictionMeasured; no meaningful local adjustment
Transportation, routing, and parkingDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Real estate and site feasibilityNot applicable to this operating model
Sales and customer acquisitionNot included in the score
Referral ecosystemNot applicable to this operating model
Territory quality-0.6
Regulatory and operating frictionDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Full-precision calculated score72.30
Published local-market alignment72.3

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
Strong
Factor Research Coverage
Strong
Franchise-profile completeness
Limited
Source-evidence confidence
Adequate
Geographic applicability
Limited
Overall evidence confidence
Moderate evidence confidence
Largest absolute effect
Target-market demand +2.9 pts
Tested rank range
#2–#9

Most important next check

What concentration of recurring commercial accounts is required for Jan-Pro International to build an efficient local book of business?

#4Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment71.3

HomeSmiles

Property maintenance services · Home-based mobile property-maintenance franchise using equipped service vans and technician crews to deliver bundled…

Increase +1.7 pts Target-market demandReduction -0.8 pts Territory quality

Rank sensitivity: Stable

How we scored this concept

Full score ledger

Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not confused with missing, conditional, or non-applicable evidence.

Neutral model baseline70.0
Target-market demand+1.7
Property replacement-cycle demandDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Competitive environmentNot included in the score
Labor and staffing frictionMeasured; no meaningful local adjustment
Transportation, routing, and parkingDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Real estate and site feasibilityNot applicable to this operating model
Sales and customer acquisitionNot included in the score
Referral ecosystem+0.5
Territory quality-0.8
Regulatory and operating frictionDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Full-precision calculated score71.35
Published local-market alignment71.3

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
Strong
Factor Research Coverage
Strong
Franchise-profile completeness
Adequate
Source-evidence confidence
Adequate
Geographic applicability
Limited
Overall evidence confidence
Moderate evidence confidence
Largest absolute effect
Target-market demand +1.7 pts
Tested rank range
#4–#5

Most important next check

How many qualified facility and property-management accounts must be reachable for HomeSmiles to support its local contract pipeline?

#5Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment71.1

FASTSIGNS

Signs and graphics · B2B production and installation center

Increase +2.7 pts Target-market demandReduction -1.0 pts Territory quality

Rank sensitivity: Highly sensitive

How we scored this concept

Full score ledger

Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not confused with missing, conditional, or non-applicable evidence.

Neutral model baseline70.0
Target-market demand+2.7
Property replacement-cycle demandDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Competitive environmentNot included in the score
Labor and staffing frictionMeasured; no meaningful local adjustment
Transportation, routing, and parkingDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Real estate and site feasibility-0.8
Sales and customer acquisitionNot included in the score
Referral ecosystem+0.1
Territory quality-1.0
Regulatory and operating frictionDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Full-precision calculated score71.09
Published local-market alignment71.1

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
Strong
Franchise-profile completeness
Limited
Source-evidence confidence
Adequate
Geographic applicability
Limited
Overall evidence confidence
Moderate evidence confidence
Largest absolute effect
Target-market demand +2.7 pts
Tested rank range
#4–#13

Most important next check

Which local customer verticals are expected to generate repeat signage and graphics work for FASTSIGNS?

#6Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment70.2

Tiger Adjusters

Public insurance adjusting · Home-based, referral-led public insurance adjusting business combining local property inspections with…

Increase +0.4 pts Referral ecosystemReduction -0.5 pts Territory quality

Rank sensitivity: Highly sensitive

How we scored this concept

Full score ledger

Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not confused with missing, conditional, or non-applicable evidence.

Neutral model baseline70.0
Target-market demand+0.3
Property replacement-cycle demandDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Competitive environmentNot included in the score
Labor and staffing frictionMeasured; no meaningful local adjustment
Transportation, routing, and parkingDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Real estate and site feasibilityNot applicable to this operating model
Sales and customer acquisitionNot included in the score
Referral ecosystem+0.4
Territory quality-0.5
Regulatory and operating frictionDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Full-precision calculated score70.23
Published local-market alignment70.2

Factor calculations use full precision. Contributions and published scores are displayed to one decimal place; ranking order uses the full-precision score.

Evidence confidence

City Modifier Evidence
Strong
Factor Research Coverage
Strong
Franchise-profile completeness
Adequate
Source-evidence confidence
Adequate
Geographic applicability
Limited
Overall evidence confidence
Moderate evidence confidence
Largest absolute effect
Territory quality -0.5 pts
Tested rank range
#3–#7

Most important next check

Which ZIP codes and appointment density assumptions define Tiger Adjusters's practical service territory?

#7Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment69.9

Pillar To Post Home Inspectors

Home inspection · mobile property inspection service

Increase +0.4 pts Referral ecosystemReduction -0.7 pts Territory quality

Rank sensitivity: Highly sensitive

How we scored this concept

Full score ledger

Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not confused with missing, conditional, or non-applicable evidence.

Neutral model baseline70.0
Target-market demand+0.2
Property replacement-cycle demandDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Competitive environmentNot included in the score
Labor and staffing frictionMeasured; no meaningful local adjustment
Transportation, routing, and parkingDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Real estate and site feasibilityNot applicable to this operating model
Sales and customer acquisitionNot included in the score
Referral ecosystem+0.4
Territory quality-0.7
Regulatory and operating frictionDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Full-precision calculated score69.92
Published local-market alignment69.9

Factor calculations use full precision. Contributions and published scores are displayed to one decimal place; ranking order uses the full-precision score.

Evidence confidence

City Modifier Evidence
Strong
Factor Research Coverage
Strong
Franchise-profile completeness
Limited
Source-evidence confidence
Adequate
Geographic applicability
Limited
Overall evidence confidence
Moderate evidence confidence
Largest absolute effect
Territory quality -0.7 pts
Tested rank range
#4–#9

Most important next check

Which transaction corridors and referral markets would define Pillar To Post Home Inspectors's practical inspection territory?

#8Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment69.9

ZOOM DRAIN

Drain and sewer service · emergency skilled-trade route service

Increase +0.5 pts Target-market demandReduction -1.0 pts Territory quality

Rank sensitivity: Moderately sensitive

How we scored this concept

Full score ledger

Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not confused with missing, conditional, or non-applicable evidence.

Neutral model baseline70.0
Target-market demand+0.5
Property replacement-cycle demandDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Competitive environmentNot included in the score
Labor and staffing frictionMeasured; no meaningful local adjustment
Transportation, routing, and parkingDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Real estate and site feasibilityNot applicable to this operating model
Sales and customer acquisitionNot included in the score
Referral ecosystem+0.4
Territory quality-1.0
Regulatory and operating frictionDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Full-precision calculated score69.90
Published local-market alignment69.9

Factor calculations use full precision. Contributions and published scores are displayed to one decimal place; ranking order uses the full-precision score.

Evidence confidence

City Modifier Evidence
Strong
Factor Research Coverage
Strong
Franchise-profile completeness
Limited
Source-evidence confidence
Adequate
Geographic applicability
Limited
Overall evidence confidence
Moderate evidence confidence
Largest absolute effect
Territory quality -1.0 pts
Tested rank range
#6–#8

Most important next check

Where must ZOOM DRAIN stage crews and vehicles to protect after-hours response times across the proposed territory?

#9Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment69.7

Rainbow International Restoration

Restoration · emergency property restoration

Increase +0.5 pts Referral ecosystemReduction -0.9 pts Territory quality

Rank sensitivity: Highly sensitive

How we scored this concept

Full score ledger

Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not confused with missing, conditional, or non-applicable evidence.

Neutral model baseline70.0
Target-market demand+0.1
Property replacement-cycle demandDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Competitive environmentNot included in the score
Labor and staffing frictionMeasured; no meaningful local adjustment
Transportation, routing, and parkingDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Real estate and site feasibilityNot applicable to this operating model
Sales and customer acquisitionNot included in the score
Referral ecosystem+0.5
Territory quality-0.9
Regulatory and operating frictionDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Full-precision calculated score69.73
Published local-market alignment69.7

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
Strong
Franchise-profile completeness
Limited
Source-evidence confidence
Adequate
Geographic applicability
Limited
Overall evidence confidence
Moderate evidence confidence
Largest absolute effect
Territory quality -0.9 pts
Tested rank range
#7–#11

Most important next check

Which territory boundaries allow Rainbow International Restoration to meet response-time expectations without excessive cross-city travel?

#10Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment69.6

PuroClean

Restoration · emergency property restoration

Increase +0.5 pts Referral ecosystemReduction -0.9 pts Territory quality

Rank sensitivity: Highly sensitive

How we scored this concept

Full score ledger

Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not confused with missing, conditional, or non-applicable evidence.

Neutral model baseline70.0
Target-market demandNot applicable to this operating model
Property replacement-cycle demandDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Competitive environmentNot included in the score
Labor and staffing frictionMeasured; no meaningful local adjustment
Transportation, routing, and parkingDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Real estate and site feasibilityNot applicable to this operating model
Sales and customer acquisitionNot included in the score
Referral ecosystem+0.5
Territory quality-0.9
Regulatory and operating frictionDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Full-precision calculated score69.62
Published local-market alignment69.6

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
Strong
Franchise-profile completeness
Limited
Source-evidence confidence
Adequate
Geographic applicability
Limited
Overall evidence confidence
Moderate evidence confidence
Largest absolute effect
Territory quality -0.9 pts
Tested rank range
#6–#13

Most important next check

Which territory boundaries allow PuroClean to meet response-time expectations without excessive cross-city travel?

#11Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment69.6

Aire Serv

HVAC installation, repair, and maintenance · Manager-led mobile HVAC installation, repair, maintenance, and emergency service business using skilled technicians…

Increase +0.4 pts Target-market demandReduction -0.8 pts Territory quality

Rank sensitivity: Highly sensitive

How we scored this concept

Full score ledger

Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not confused with missing, conditional, or non-applicable evidence.

Neutral model baseline70.0
Target-market demand+0.4
Property replacement-cycle demandDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Competitive environmentNot included in the score
Labor and staffing frictionMeasured; no meaningful local adjustment
Transportation, routing, and parkingDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Real estate and site feasibilityNot applicable to this operating model
Sales and customer acquisitionNot included in the score
Referral ecosystemNot applicable to this operating model
Territory quality-0.8
Regulatory and operating frictionDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Full-precision calculated score69.58
Published local-market alignment69.6

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
Strong
Franchise-profile completeness
Adequate
Source-evidence confidence
Adequate
Geographic applicability
Limited
Overall evidence confidence
Moderate evidence confidence
Largest absolute effect
Territory quality -0.8 pts
Tested rank range
#7–#12

Most important next check

What daily vehicle utilization and travel-time allowance are built into Aire Serv's operating plan?

#12Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment69.6

Mr. Rooter

Plumbing · scheduled and emergency skilled-trade service

Increase +0.4 pts Target-market demandReduction -0.9 pts Territory quality

Rank sensitivity: Moderately sensitive

How we scored this concept

Full score ledger

Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not confused with missing, conditional, or non-applicable evidence.

Neutral model baseline70.0
Target-market demand+0.4
Property replacement-cycle demandDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Competitive environmentNot included in the score
Labor and staffing frictionMeasured; no meaningful local adjustment
Transportation, routing, and parkingDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Real estate and site feasibilityNot applicable to this operating model
Sales and customer acquisitionNot included in the score
Referral ecosystem+0.1
Territory quality-0.9
Regulatory and operating frictionDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Full-precision calculated score69.56
Published local-market alignment69.6

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
Strong
Franchise-profile completeness
Limited
Source-evidence confidence
Adequate
Geographic applicability
Limited
Overall evidence confidence
Moderate evidence confidence
Largest absolute effect
Territory quality -0.9 pts
Tested rank range
#10–#12

Most important next check

How many field vehicles must Mr. Rooter deploy, and where would they begin and end each service day?

#13Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment69.3

Mister Sparky Electric

Electrical · skilled-trade home service

Increase +0.1 pts Referral ecosystemReduction -0.8 pts Territory quality

Rank sensitivity: Moderately sensitive

How we scored this concept

Full score ledger

Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not confused with missing, conditional, or non-applicable evidence.

Neutral model baseline70.0
Target-market demandNot applicable to this operating model
Property replacement-cycle demandDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Competitive environmentNot included in the score
Labor and staffing frictionMeasured; no meaningful local adjustment
Transportation, routing, and parkingDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Real estate and site feasibilityNot applicable to this operating model
Sales and customer acquisitionNot included in the score
Referral ecosystem+0.1
Territory quality-0.8
Regulatory and operating frictionDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Full-precision calculated score69.25
Published local-market alignment69.3

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
Strong
Factor Research Coverage
Strong
Franchise-profile completeness
Limited
Source-evidence confidence
Adequate
Geographic applicability
Limited
Overall evidence confidence
Moderate evidence confidence
Largest absolute effect
Territory quality -0.8 pts
Tested rank range
#10–#13

Most important next check

What daily vehicle utilization and travel-time allowance are built into Mister Sparky Electric's operating plan?

#14Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment66.4

Workout Anytime

Fitness · fixed-location membership fitness

No material positive local adjustment identifiedReduction -1.8 pts Real estate and site feasibility

Rank sensitivity: Stable

How we scored this concept

Full score ledger

Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not confused with missing, conditional, or non-applicable evidence.

Neutral model baseline70.0
Target-market demandNot applicable to this operating model
Property replacement-cycle demandDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Competitive environmentNot included in the score
Labor and staffing frictionMeasured; no meaningful local adjustment
Transportation, routing, and parkingDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Real estate and site feasibility-1.8
Sales and customer acquisitionNot included in the score
Referral ecosystemNot applicable to this operating model
Territory quality-1.8
Regulatory and operating frictionDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Full-precision calculated score66.45
Published local-market alignment66.4

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
Strong
Franchise-profile completeness
Limited
Source-evidence confidence
Adequate
Geographic applicability
Limited
Overall evidence confidence
Moderate evidence confidence
Largest absolute effect
Real estate and site feasibility -1.8 pts
Tested rank range
#14–#14

Most important next check

What site size, occupancy-cost ceiling, parking supply, and buildout budget must a Workout Anytime location satisfy?

Metric registry

The 23 local metrics behind this analysis

The registry exposes the raw value, period, geography, factor mapping, and source for every public metric used in the city research.

View all local metrics
MetricRaw valuePeriodGeographyHow usedSource
Resident population estimate on July 1, 20251,002,632peopleJuly 1, 2025 population estimate and April 1, 2020 estimate baseAustin, TexasEvidence for Target-market demand, Territory quality [5] [7]
Population change from the April 2020 estimate base to July 20254.6percentJuly 1, 2025 population estimate and April 1, 2020 estimate baseAustin, TexasEvidence for Target-market demand [5]
Estimated households in 2024484,550households2024 American Community Survey 1-year estimates; 2020 Decennial Census where identifiedAustin, TexasEvidence for Target-market demand, Territory quality [6]
Estimated total housing units in 2024518,574housing units2024 American Community Survey 1-year estimates; 2020 Decennial Census where identifiedAustin, TexasEvidence for Target-market demand, Property replacement-cycle demand, Territory quality [6]
Median household income and bachelor's-degree attainmentmedian household income usd: 90,430; bachelors degree or higher percent: 60.7mixed2024 American Community Survey 1-year estimates; 2020 Decennial Census where identifiedAustin, TexasEvidence for Target-market demand, Referral ecosystem, Labor and staffing friction [6]
Housing units added in Travis County from July 2024 to July 2025units added: 16,197; percent change: 2.4housing units and percentPopulation and housing-unit estimates for July 1, 2024 to July 1, 2025Travis County, TexasEvidence for Target-market demand, Property replacement-cycle demand, Territory quality [7]
Covered establishments, employment, and average weekly wages in Q4 2025establishments: 76,604; employment: 1,316,516; average weekly wage usd: 1,878mixedEmployment through June 2026; QCEW establishments, employment, and wages for Q4 2025Austin-Round Rock-San Marcos, TexasEvidence for Target-market demand, Referral ecosystem, Sales and customer acquisition, Labor and staffing friction [8]
Selected metropolitan sector employment in June 2026professional and business services jobs: 293,100; government jobs: 212,300; private education and health services jobs: 171,600; construction and mining logging jobs: 99,700jobsEmployment through June 2026; QCEW establishments, employment, and wages for Q4 2025Austin-Round Rock-San Marcos, TexasEvidence for Target-market demand, Referral ecosystem, Labor and staffing friction, Sales and customer acquisition [8]
Metropolitan and national unemployment rates in June 2026austin metro percent: 4.1; united states percent: 4.4percentEmployment through June 2026; QCEW establishments, employment, and wages for Q4 2025Austin-Round Rock-San Marcos, Texas and United StatesEvidence for Labor and staffing friction [8]
University of Texas at Austin enrollment, faculty, and research scalefall 2025 enrollment: 55,000; fall 2025 faculty: 4,693; fy2025 research expenditures usd: 1,370,000,000mixedFall 2025 enrollment and faculty; fiscal year 2025 researchUniversity of Texas at AustinEvidence for Target-market demand, Referral ecosystem, Sales and customer acquisition, Territory quality [10]
City vendor and solicitation access requires use of formal procurement systemsvendor registration available: yes; solicitation search available: yes; nigp commodity codes used: yes; small business participation program: yesprocess featuresCurrent procurement process accessed August 2026City of AustinEvidence for Target-market demand, Sales and customer acquisition, Referral ecosystem [11]
Austin spans distinct western and eastern ecological and soil regionswestern region: Balcones Canyonlands and Edwards Plateau; eastern region: Northern Blackland Prairienamed regionsCurrent ecological-geography description accessed August 2026Austin, TexasEvidence for Property replacement-cycle demand, Territory quality [13] [2]
Houston Black soil has high shrink-swell behavior and deep seasonal crackingclay content range percent: 40, 60; dry crack width range inches: 0.5, 4; shrink swell potential: highmixedCurrent official soil-series description accessed August 2026Houston Black soil series in Blackland Prairie areasEvidence for Property replacement-cycle demand, Territory quality [12] [2]
Austin office vacancy and asking rent in Q2 2026cbre vacancy percent: 23.4; cushman vacancy percent: 26.9; cbre asking rent usd psf year: 50.51; cushman asking rent usd psf year: 49.27percent and usd per square foot per yearSecond quarter 2026Austin office marketEvidence for Target-market demand, Real estate and site feasibility, Territory quality [14] [15]
Office vacancy varies sharply across Austin submarketscbd vacancy percent: 31; central vacancy percent: 11.2; northeast vacancy percent: 49.8; east vacancy percent: 45; southwest vacancy percent: 17.1; cbd class a asking rent usd psf year: 69.27percent and usd per square foot per yearSecond quarter 2026Austin office submarketsEvidence for Target-market demand, Real estate and site feasibility, Territory quality [15] [2]
Austin industrial vacancy remained elevated in Q2 2026cbre vacancy percent: 19.4; cushman vacancy percent: 22.3; cbre asking rent usd psf year: 13.78; cushman asking rent usd psf year: 11.78; cbre yoy rent change percent: -2.8percent and usd per square foot per yearSecond quarter 2026Austin industrial marketEvidence for Real estate and site feasibility, Territory quality [16] [17] [2]
Austin metropolitan retail vacancy and asking rent in Q1 2026direct vacancy percent: 3.3; average net asking rent usd psf year: 27.21; quarterly net absorption sqft: 52,984mixedFirst quarter 2026Austin metropolitan retail marketEvidence for Real estate and site feasibility, Target-market demand, Territory quality [18]
Retail vacancy and rent vary materially by Austin-area submarketlowest named city submarket vacancy percent: 1.4; lowest named city submarket: Southeast; highest named city submarket vacancy percent: 11.6; highest named city submarket: Northeast; cbd vacancy percent: 1.6; cbd net asking rent usd psf year: 35percent and usd per square foot per yearFirst quarter 2026Austin-area retail submarketsEvidence for Real estate and site feasibility, Territory quality, Target-market demand [18]
Current Austin Water impact fees for lots platted after October 1, 2023water fee per service unit usd: 4,800; wastewater fee per service unit usd: 2,900; combined fee per service unit usd: 7,700usd per service unitCurrent impact-fee schedule accessed August 2, 2026; FY 2025-2026 rates effective November 1, 2025Austin Water impact-fee boundaryEvidence for Regulatory and operating friction, Real estate and site feasibility [19] [3]
I-35 Capital Express North construction creates active frontage-road and interchange disruptionconstruction start: 2023-03; anticipated completion: 2029-early; frontage road one lane in some areas: yes; increased frontage road activity through: 2,026; project limits: SH 45 North to US 290 Eastproject statusConstruction status through May 2026I-35 Capital Express North project limitsEvidence for Transportation, routing, and parking, Territory quality, Target-market demand [20] [3]
Commercial ECAD benchmarking and reporting thresholdminimum building size sqft: 10,000; annual reporting deadline: June 1; requires austin energy service: yes; requires city limits location: yesrule thresholdsCurrent ordinance guidance accessed August 2026Commercial buildings in Austin city limits served by Austin EnergyEvidence for Regulatory and operating friction, Property replacement-cycle demand [21]
Freestanding-sign limits in Austin scenic roadway sign districtsmaximum freestanding signs per lot: 1; maximum sign area sqft: 64; maximum sign height ft: 12rule thresholdsCurrent code accessed August 2026Austin scenic roadway sign districtsEvidence for Regulatory and operating friction, Real estate and site feasibility [22] [3]
Airport CCLUA development review evaluates aviation-compatible site conditionsreview topics: height hazards, glare, wildlife attractants, exterior lightingreview topicsCurrent development-review framework described in September 2023 presentationAustin-Bergstrom CCLUA and airport overlay zonesEvidence for Regulatory and operating friction, Real estate and site feasibility, Territory quality [23] [3]

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

01

Measure the city

Collect reusable local metrics with source, period, geography, and confidence fields.

02

Profile each operating model

Map each franchise to controlled operating attributes and local sensitivities.

03

Apply scoreable effects

Score only effects that apply without an unresolved site, territory, customer, or project gate.

04

Preserve conditional effects

Keep location- or territory-dependent issues visible for diligence without automatically changing the score.

05

Test rank sensitivity

Remove one factor at a time from every concept and rerank using full-precision scores.

06

Generate public output

Create the ranking, factor-status ledger, visuals, metric registry, and automated quality report from the same data.

Why every concept begins at 70.0

70.0 is a neutral display baseline shared by every concept. Local conditions can move a score by no more than 18.0 points in either direction under the current model. It 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 0.9.0 · Compiler 0.9.10-nonzero-markers-only · Analysis updated August 5, 2026

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

  1. Model 0.9.0-calibration · August 4, 2026Added conditional scoring gates, factor-status transparency, rank-sensitivity testing, metric registry output, and factor-impact visualization data.

Corrections policy

Corrected source, geography, or operating-profile evidence triggers a full compiler rerun so every dependent score and visual is recalculated.

Source registry

Evidence represented in this report

Each source identifies its period, scope, and the local metrics it supports. Internal or supplied research is not presented as independently accessible evidence.

  1. 1
    Franchise-to-city operating-fit modelInternal or supplied research; not publicly accessible.
    Publisher
    User-supplied controlling model
    Data period
    model version 0.9.0-calibration
    Scope
    Model-wide
    Locator
    model.json retrieved from File Library
    Source tier
    Tier 1 · controlling internal taxonomy
    Accessed
    August 2, 2026
  2. 2
    The Utility Delta: A Structural Audit of Ten U.S. MarketsInternal or supplied research; not publicly accessible.

    Used for: Austin spans distinct western and eastern ecological and soil regions, Houston Black soil has high shrink-swell behavior and deep seasonal cracking, Office vacancy varies sharply across Austin submarkets, and Austin industrial vacancy remained elevated in Q2 2026

    Publisher
    Supplied research material
    Data period
    Underlying sources cited as accessed through February 24, 2026
    Scope
    Austin, Texas section within a ten-market research docket
    Locator
    Austin section, document paragraphs 92-100 and Austin Real Estate Divergence table
    Source tier
    Tier 5 · supplied bespoke research
    Accessed
    August 2, 2026
  3. 3
    Structural Constraints and Hidden Costs: A Forensic Municipal AuditInternal or supplied research; not publicly accessible.

    Used for: Current Austin Water impact fees for lots platted after October 1, 2023, I-35 Capital Express North construction creates active frontage-road and interchange disruption, Freestanding-sign limits in Austin scenic roadway sign districts, and Airport CCLUA development review evaluates aviation-compatible site conditions

    Publisher
    Supplied research material
    Data period
    Underlying sources cited as accessed through February 20, 2026
    Scope
    Austin, Texas section within a ten-jurisdiction research docket
    Locator
    Section 8, paragraphs 56-62 and Austin Utility Impact Fee table
    Source tier
    Tier 5 · supplied bespoke research
    Accessed
    August 2, 2026
  4. 4
    Franchise data - 2 - riverside through charlotteInternal or supplied research; not publicly accessible.
    Publisher
    Supplied internal dataset
    Data period
    Undated supplied neighborhood records
    Scope
    Mueller, South Lamar, Zilker, Rosedale, Allandale, and Crestview in Austin, Texas
    Locator
    Six rows where city equals Austin
    Source tier
    Tier 5 · supplied internal data
    Accessed
    August 2, 2026
  5. 5
    QuickFacts: Austin city, Texas

    Used for: Resident population estimate on July 1, 2025 and Population change from the April 2020 estimate base to July 2025

    Publisher
    U.S. Census Bureau
    Published
    May 14, 2026
    Data period
    July 1, 2025 population estimate and April 1, 2020 estimate base
    Scope
    Austin city, Texas
    Locator
    Population estimates table
    Source tier
    Tier 1 · government
    Accessed
    August 2, 2026
  6. 6
    Austin city, Texas Census Bureau Profile

    Used for: Estimated households in 2024, Estimated total housing units in 2024, and Median household income and bachelor's-degree attainment

    Publisher
    U.S. Census Bureau
    Data period
    2024 American Community Survey 1-year estimates; 2020 Decennial Census where identified
    Scope
    Austin city, Texas
    Locator
    Housing, households, income, educational attainment, and employment highlights
    Source tier
    Tier 1 · government
    Accessed
    August 2, 2026
  7. 7
    Austin Population Milestone: One Million and Counting

    Used for: Resident population estimate on July 1, 2025 and Housing units added in Travis County from July 2024 to July 2025

    Publisher
    City of Austin Planning Department
    Published
    May 14, 2026
    Data period
    Population and housing-unit estimates for July 1, 2024 to July 1, 2025
    Scope
    Austin city, Travis County, and Austin metropolitan area, separately identified
    Locator
    City population milestone and county/metropolitan housing-unit additions
    Source tier
    Tier 1 · government
    Accessed
    August 2, 2026
  8. 8
    Austin-Round Rock-San Marcos, TX, Metropolitan Area Data Tables

    Used for: Covered establishments, employment, and average weekly wages in Q4 2025, Selected metropolitan sector employment in June 2026, and Metropolitan and national unemployment rates in June 2026

    Publisher
    U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics
    Published
    July 29, 2026
    Data period
    Employment through June 2026; QCEW establishments, employment, and wages for Q4 2025
    Scope
    Austin-Round Rock-San Marcos metropolitan statistical area and component counties
    Locator
    Industry employment, unemployment, establishments, employment, and weekly-wage tables
    Source tier
    Tier 1 · government
    Accessed
    August 2, 2026
  9. 9
    May 2025 Metropolitan and Nonmetropolitan Area Occupational Employment and Wage Estimates
    Publisher
    U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics
    Published
    May 15, 2026
    Data period
    May 2025
    Scope
    Austin-Round Rock-San Marcos metropolitan statistical area
    Locator
    Area occupational-employment and wage data access page and methodology
    Source tier
    Tier 1 · government
    Accessed
    August 2, 2026
  10. 10
    Facts & Figures

    Used for: University of Texas at Austin enrollment, faculty, and research scale

    Publisher
    The University of Texas at Austin
    Data period
    Fall 2025 enrollment and faculty; fiscal year 2025 research
    Scope
    University of Texas at Austin main campus
    Locator
    UT at a Glance and Research sections
    Source tier
    Tier 2 · recognized institution
    Accessed
    August 2, 2026
  11. 11
    Procurement and Small Business Procurement Program

    Used for: City vendor and solicitation access requires use of formal procurement systems

    Publisher
    City of Austin Financial Services
    Data period
    Current procurement process accessed August 2026
    Scope
    City of Austin procurement
    Locator
    Vendor registration, solicitations, NIGP commodity codes, contracts, and small-business participation resources
    Source tier
    Tier 1 · government
    Accessed
    August 2, 2026
  12. 12
    Official Soil Series Description: Houston Black Series

    Used for: Houston Black soil has high shrink-swell behavior and deep seasonal cracking

    Publisher
    USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service
    Data period
    Current official soil-series description accessed August 2026
    Scope
    Houston Black soil series in Texas Blackland Prairie settings
    Locator
    Range in characteristics, clay content, cracking, and shrink-swell behavior
    Source tier
    Tier 1 · government
    Accessed
    August 2, 2026
  13. 13
    Natural Resources and Nature-Based Programs

    Used for: Austin spans distinct western and eastern ecological and soil regions

    Publisher
    City of Austin Parks and Recreation Department
    Data period
    Current ecological-geography description accessed August 2026
    Scope
    City of Austin ecological regions
    Locator
    Balcones Canyonlands/Edwards Plateau and Northern Blackland Prairie descriptions
    Source tier
    Tier 1 · government
    Accessed
    August 2, 2026
  14. 14
    Austin Office Figures - Q2 2026

    Used for: Austin office vacancy and asking rent in Q2 2026

    Publisher
    CBRE
    Published
    July 9, 2026
    Data period
    Second quarter 2026
    Scope
    Austin office market
    Locator
    Vacancy, absorption, construction pipeline, and asking-rent summary
    Source tier
    Tier 3 · credible industry
    Accessed
    August 2, 2026
  15. 15
    Austin Office MarketBeat Q2 2026

    Used for: Austin office vacancy and asking rent in Q2 2026 and Office vacancy varies sharply across Austin submarkets

    Publisher
    Cushman & Wakefield
    Published
    July 1, 2026
    Data period
    Second quarter 2026
    Scope
    Austin office market and named submarkets
    Locator
    Pages 1-2, market fundamentals and submarket statistics
    Source tier
    Tier 3 · credible industry
    Accessed
    August 2, 2026
  16. 16
    Austin Industrial Figures - Q2 2026

    Used for: Austin industrial vacancy remained elevated in Q2 2026

    Publisher
    CBRE
    Published
    July 9, 2026
    Data period
    Second quarter 2026
    Scope
    Austin industrial market
    Locator
    Vacancy, absorption, construction, and asking-rent summary
    Source tier
    Tier 3 · credible industry
    Accessed
    August 2, 2026
  17. 17
    Austin Industrial MarketBeat Q2 2026

    Used for: Austin industrial vacancy remained elevated in Q2 2026

    Publisher
    Cushman & Wakefield
    Published
    July 1, 2026
    Data period
    Second quarter 2026
    Scope
    Austin industrial market
    Locator
    Pages 1-3, market fundamentals and submarket statistics
    Source tier
    Tier 3 · credible industry
    Accessed
    August 2, 2026
  18. 18
    Austin Retail Market Q1 2026

    Used for: Austin metropolitan retail vacancy and asking rent in Q1 2026 and Retail vacancy and rent vary materially by Austin-area submarket

    Publisher
    Transwestern
    Published
    April 1, 2026
    Data period
    First quarter 2026
    Scope
    Austin metropolitan retail properties of 10,000 square feet or larger, with named submarkets
    Locator
    Pages 1-5, market observations and submarket table
    Source tier
    Tier 3 · credible industry
    Accessed
    August 2, 2026
  19. 19
    Rates and Fees

    Used for: Current Austin Water impact fees for lots platted after October 1, 2023

    Publisher
    Austin Water
    Data period
    Current impact-fee schedule accessed August 2, 2026; FY 2025-2026 rates effective November 1, 2025
    Scope
    Austin Water impact-fee boundary and service territory
    Locator
    Impact Fee Schedule for lots platted after October 1, 2023 and prior platting cohorts
    Source tier
    Tier 1 · government
    Accessed
    August 2, 2026
  20. 20
    I-35 Capital Express North Project

    Used for: I-35 Capital Express North construction creates active frontage-road and interchange disruption

    Publisher
    Texas Department of Transportation
    Data period
    Construction status through May 2026
    Scope
    I-35 from SH 45 North to US 290 East in the Austin area
    Locator
    Project overview, major impacts/activity, and schedule
    Source tier
    Tier 1 · government
    Accessed
    August 2, 2026
  21. 21
    ECAD for Commercial Buildings

    Used for: Commercial ECAD benchmarking and reporting threshold

    Publisher
    Austin Energy
    Data period
    Current ordinance guidance accessed August 2026
    Scope
    Commercial buildings within Austin city limits served by Austin Energy
    Locator
    Commercial building size, service-territory, and annual reporting requirements
    Source tier
    Tier 1 · government
    Accessed
    August 2, 2026
  22. 22
    Austin Land Development Code Chapter 25-10: Sign Regulations

    Used for: Freestanding-sign limits in Austin scenic roadway sign districts

    Publisher
    City of Austin via Municode
    Data period
    Current code accessed August 2026
    Scope
    Scenic roadway sign districts in Austin
    Locator
    Scenic roadway sign district freestanding-sign area, count, and height requirements
    Source tier
    Tier 1 · government
    Accessed
    August 2, 2026
  23. 23
    Controlled Compatible Land Use Area and Airport Overlay Zones

    Used for: Airport CCLUA development review evaluates aviation-compatible site conditions

    Publisher
    City of Austin Aviation Department
    Published
    September 1, 2023
    Data period
    Current development-review framework described in September 2023 presentation
    Scope
    Austin-Bergstrom International Airport controlled compatible land-use and overlay areas
    Locator
    CCLUA development review for height, glare, wildlife attractants, and exterior lighting
    Source tier
    Tier 1 · government
    Accessed
    August 2, 2026

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.

Request a private franchise review
View methodologyView source registry

Twenty Twenty-Five

Take Free Franchise Match Quiz