70.9 average across 2 concepts
Local operating-model alignment analysis
Best Franchise Opportunities We Assessed in Denton, Texas
We compared 14 franchise concepts for Denton, Texas. University and government account demand was a leading positive mechanism.
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
24Sources used
16Primary 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
0.6 points average among 6 affected concepts
Tested rank range spans 12 positions
Executive conclusion
What the ranking means for Denton, Texas
City Wide, Rainbow International Restoration, and Jan-Pro International 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 0.6 points on average. City Wide was especially relationship-sensitive: removing university and government account demand moved it from #1 to #13 in the full model rerun. These scores describe local operating alignment, not expected returns or overall franchise quality; the offered territory and franchise economics still require separate diligence.
How this differs from a directory: the model does not award points for brand popularity, advertising placement, or referral compensation. It tests how documented local conditions interact with each concept’s operating requirements.
Best franchise opportunities assessed
Top 10 local-alignment scores from 14 concepts assessed
“Best” refers to modeled local operating alignment among the concepts assessed—not expected earnings, franchise-system quality, or candidate fit.
Rankings use full-precision scores.Displayed values use one decimal place. Identical displayed scores can therefore have different ranks, and close results should be treated as effectively similar.
| Rank | Franchise | Alignment and tier | Largest advantage | Largest constraint | Evidence confidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | City WideFacility managementInvestment: $229,729–$410,730 | 71.2Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +1.2 ptsTarget-market demand | No material negative local adjustment | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 2 | Rainbow International RestorationRestorationInvestment: $185,336–$351,900 | 70.9Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +0.8 ptsProperty replacement-cycle demand | No material negative local adjustment | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 3 | Jan-Pro InternationalCommercial cleaningInvestment: $130,000–$421,500 | 70.9Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +0.9 ptsTarget-market demand | No material negative local adjustment | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 4 | PuroCleanRestorationInvestment: $54,575–$262,145 | 70.8Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +0.8 ptsProperty replacement-cycle demand | No material negative local adjustment | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 5 | FASTSIGNSSigns and graphicsInvestment: $231,226–$386,285 | 70.6Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +0.6 ptsTarget-market demand | No material negative local adjustment | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 6 | HomeSmilesProperty maintenance servicesInvestment: $148,110–$201,800 | 70.4Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +0.4 ptsTarget-market demand | No material negative local adjustment | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 7 | ActionCOACHBusiness coachingInvestment: $71,668–$303,513 | 70.4Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +0.4 ptsTarget-market demand | No material negative local adjustment | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 8 | Pillar To Post Home InspectorsHome inspectionInvestment: $102,690–$134,290 | 70.4Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +0.4 ptsProperty replacement-cycle demand | No material negative local adjustment | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 9 | ZOOM DRAINDrain and sewer serviceInvestment: $266,250–$570,500 | 70.3Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +0.3 ptsProperty replacement-cycle demand | No material negative local adjustment | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 10 | Mr. RooterPlumbingInvestment: $152,900–$298,675 | 70.3Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +0.3 ptsProperty replacement-cycle demand | No material negative local adjustment | Moderate evidence confidence |
Conditions that changed the analysis
What mattered most in Denton, Texas
Large university institutions and municipal purchasing create a material institutional-account base
This relationship affected 6 concepts and added 0.6 points on average among those exposed. Local evidence: City of Denton total procurement and contracting spending in fiscal year 2025: 398,629,855 usd. [20] [3] [17]
Denton's July 1, 2025 population estimate was 21.1 percent above its April 1, 2020 Census count
Rapid resident growth does not make all Denton sites equally accessible or equally easy to develop. Current I-35 work is corridor-specific, utility impact fees vary by plat date and service area, and signage or historic review can be property-specific. Population growth should therefore be treated as market-scale context rather than as proof of uniform walk-in demand, route productivity, site feasibility or development cost. [4] [10] [11] [13] [14]
property-restoration
This operating-model cluster separated from the broader set because its exposure to local support and constraints differed. The strongest positive factor was property replacement-cycle demand, while the main constraint was competitive environment. [16] [20] [3] [1] [18] [17] [6] [8] [7]
Evidence behind the city mechanisms
Clay-rich Denton-area soil series create recurring shrink-swell property exposure1 modeled effect
Moisture and foundation service demandProperty replacement-cycle demand
Large university institutions and municipal purchasing create a material institutional-account base1 modeled effect
University and government account demandTarget-market demand
Multi-year I-35 reconstruction can disrupt routes using the Denton corridor1 modeled effect
Temporary route disruptionTransportation, routing, and parking
Compare all assessed concepts
Local impact by franchise concept
14 concepts shown. Expand a concept to see the score-changing factors and their modeled drivers; the full audit ledger stays collapsed.
#1Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment71.2
City Wide
Initial investment: $229,729–$410,730
Increase +1.2 pts Target-market demandNo material negative local adjustment identified
Rank sensitivity: Highly sensitive
Why it ranks here
Score-changing local factors only. Evidence links open the underlying city finding.
| Local factor | Modeled drivers | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Target-market demand |
| +1.2 pts |
| Net local movement | +1.17 pts | |
Net uses full-precision effects; displayed factor and driver rows are rounded.
Franchise evidence
Source material assessed
Item 3 — Litigation
1 image
Item 6 — Other Fees
1 image
Item 7 — Estimated Initial Investment
2 images
Item 12 — Territory
1 image
Item 20 — Outlets and Franchise Information
1 image
Full calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not confused with missing, conditional, or non-applicable evidence.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +1.2 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| 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 | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Referral ecosystem | Not included in the score |
| Territory quality | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 71.17 |
| Published local-market alignment | 71.2 |
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
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Limited
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Target-market demand +1.2 pts
- Tested rank range
- #1–#13
#2Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment70.9
Rainbow International Restoration
Initial investment: $185,336–$351,900
Increase +0.8 pts Property replacement-cycle demandNo material negative local adjustment identified
Rank sensitivity: Highly sensitive
Why it ranks here
Score-changing local factors only. Evidence links open the underlying city finding.
| Local factor | Modeled drivers | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Property replacement-cycle demand |
| +0.8 pts |
| Target-market demand |
| +0.1 pts |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Temporary route disruption EvidenceConditional — applicability must be confirmed | Not scored |
| Net local movement | +0.93 pts | |
Net uses full-precision effects; displayed factor and driver rows are rounded.
Franchise evidence
Source material assessed
Item 3 — Litigation
1 image
Item 6 — Other Fees
1 image
Item 7 — Estimated Initial Investment
2 images
Item 12 — Territory
1 image
Item 20 — Outlets and Franchise Information
1 image
Full calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not confused with missing, conditional, or non-applicable evidence.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +0.1 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | +0.8 |
| 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 | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 70.93 |
| Published local-market alignment | 70.9 |
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
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Limited
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Property replacement-cycle demand +0.8 pts
- Tested rank range
- #2–#6
#3Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment70.9
Jan-Pro International
Initial investment: $130,000–$421,500
Increase +0.9 pts Target-market demandNo material negative local adjustment identified
Rank sensitivity: Highly sensitive
Why it ranks here
Score-changing local factors only. Evidence links open the underlying city finding.
| Local factor | Modeled drivers | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Target-market demand |
| +0.9 pts |
| Net local movement | +0.86 pts | |
Net uses full-precision effects; displayed factor and driver rows are rounded.
Franchise evidence
Source material assessed
Item 3 — Litigation
1 image
Item 6 — Other Fees
1 image
Item 7 — Estimated Initial Investment
1 image
Item 12 — Territory
1 image
Item 20 — Outlets and Franchise Information
1 image
Full calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not confused with missing, conditional, or non-applicable evidence.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +0.9 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| 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 | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Referral ecosystem | Not included in the score |
| Territory quality | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 70.86 |
| Published local-market alignment | 70.9 |
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
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Limited
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Target-market demand +0.9 pts
- Tested rank range
- #2–#14
#4Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment70.8
PuroClean
Initial investment: $54,575–$262,145
Increase +0.8 pts Property replacement-cycle demandNo material negative local adjustment identified
Rank sensitivity: Highly sensitive
Why it ranks here
Score-changing local factors only. Evidence links open the underlying city finding.
| Local factor | Modeled drivers | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Property replacement-cycle demand |
| +0.8 pts |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Temporary route disruption EvidenceConditional — applicability must be confirmed | Not scored |
| Net local movement | +0.80 pts | |
Net uses full-precision effects; displayed factor and driver rows are rounded.
Franchise evidence
Source material assessed
Item 3 — Litigation
1 image
Item 6 — Other Fees
1 image
Item 7 — Estimated Initial Investment
2 images
Item 12 — Territory
1 image
Item 20 — Outlets and Franchise Information
1 image
Full calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not confused with missing, conditional, or non-applicable evidence.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | +0.8 |
| 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 | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 70.80 |
| Published local-market alignment | 70.8 |
Factor calculations use full precision. Contributions and published scores are displayed to one decimal place; ranking order uses the full-precision score.
Evidence confidence
- City Modifier Evidence
- Strong
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Limited
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Property replacement-cycle demand +0.8 pts
- Tested rank range
- #1–#13
#5Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment70.6
FASTSIGNS
Initial investment: $231,226–$386,285
Increase +0.6 pts Target-market demandNo material negative local adjustment identified
Rank sensitivity: Highly sensitive
Why it ranks here
Score-changing local factors only. Evidence links open the underlying city finding.
| Local factor | Modeled drivers | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Target-market demand |
| +0.6 pts |
| Net local movement | +0.56 pts | |
Net uses full-precision effects; displayed factor and driver rows are rounded.
Franchise evidence
Source material assessed
Item 3 — Litigation
1 image
Item 6 — Other Fees
1 image
Item 7 — Estimated Initial Investment
2 images
Item 12 — Territory
1 image
Item 20 — Outlets and Franchise Information
1 image
Item 19 — Financial Performance Representation
2 images
Public company data assessed
3 sourcesFull calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not confused with missing, conditional, or non-applicable evidence.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +0.6 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| 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 | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Referral ecosystem | Not included in the score |
| Territory quality | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 70.56 |
| 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
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Limited
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Target-market demand +0.6 pts
- Tested rank range
- #3–#10
#6Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment70.4
HomeSmiles
Initial investment: $148,110–$201,800
Increase +0.4 pts Target-market demandNo material negative local adjustment identified
Rank sensitivity: Moderately sensitive
Why it ranks here
Score-changing local factors only. Evidence links open the underlying city finding.
| Local factor | Modeled drivers | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Target-market demand |
| +0.4 pts |
| Net local movement | +0.38 pts | |
Net uses full-precision effects; displayed factor and driver rows are rounded.
Franchise evidence
Source material assessed
Item 3 — Litigation
1 image
Item 6 — Other Fees
1 image
Item 7 — Estimated Initial Investment
2 images
Item 12 — Territory
1 image
Item 20 — Outlets and Franchise Information
1 image
Full calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not confused with missing, conditional, or non-applicable evidence.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +0.4 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| 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 | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 70.38 |
| 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
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Limited
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Target-market demand +0.4 pts
- Tested rank range
- #4–#7
#7Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment70.4
ActionCOACH
Initial investment: $71,668–$303,513
Increase +0.4 pts Target-market demandNo material negative local adjustment identified
Rank sensitivity: Highly sensitive
Why it ranks here
Score-changing local factors only. Evidence links open the underlying city finding.
| Local factor | Modeled drivers | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Target-market demand |
| +0.4 pts |
| Net local movement | +0.36 pts | |
Net uses full-precision effects; displayed factor and driver rows are rounded.
Franchise evidence
Source material assessed
Item 3 — Litigation
1 image
Item 6 — Other Fees
1 image
Item 7 — Estimated Initial Investment
2 images
Item 12 — Territory
1 image
Item 20 — Outlets and Franchise Information
1 image
Full calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not confused with missing, conditional, or non-applicable evidence.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +0.4 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| 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 | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Referral ecosystem | Not included in the score |
| Territory quality | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 70.36 |
| 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
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Limited
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Target-market demand +0.4 pts
- Tested rank range
- #5–#9
#8Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment70.4
Pillar To Post Home Inspectors
Initial investment: $102,690–$134,290
Increase +0.4 pts Property replacement-cycle demandNo material negative local adjustment identified
Rank sensitivity: Highly sensitive
Why it ranks here
Score-changing local factors only. Evidence links open the underlying city finding.
| Local factor | Modeled drivers | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Property replacement-cycle demand |
| +0.4 pts |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Temporary route disruption EvidenceConditional — applicability must be confirmed | Not scored |
| Net local movement | +0.36 pts | |
Net uses full-precision effects; displayed factor and driver rows are rounded.
Franchise evidence
Source material assessed
Item 3 — Litigation
1 image
Item 6 — Other Fees
1 image
Item 7 — Estimated Initial Investment
2 images
Item 12 — Territory
1 image
Item 19 — Financial Performance Representation
1 image
Public company data assessed
2 sourcesFull calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not confused with missing, conditional, or non-applicable evidence.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | +0.4 |
| 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 | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 70.36 |
| 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
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Limited
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Property replacement-cycle demand +0.4 pts
- Tested rank range
- #3–#12
#9Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment70.3
ZOOM DRAIN
Initial investment: $266,250–$570,500
Increase +0.3 pts Property replacement-cycle demandNo material negative local adjustment identified
Rank sensitivity: Highly sensitive
Why it ranks here
Score-changing local factors only. Evidence links open the underlying city finding.
| Local factor | Modeled drivers | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Property replacement-cycle demand |
| +0.3 pts |
| Net local movement | +0.28 pts | |
Net uses full-precision effects; displayed factor and driver rows are rounded.
Franchise evidence
Source material assessed
Item 3 — Litigation
1 image
Item 6 — Other Fees
1 image
Item 7 — Estimated Initial Investment
2 images
Item 12 — Territory
1 image
Item 20 — Outlets and Franchise Information
1 image
Full calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not confused with missing, conditional, or non-applicable evidence.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | +0.3 |
| 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 | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 70.28 |
| Published local-market alignment | 70.3 |
Factor calculations use full precision. Contributions and published scores are displayed to one decimal place; ranking order uses the full-precision score.
Evidence confidence
- City Modifier Evidence
- Strong
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Limited
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Property replacement-cycle demand +0.3 pts
- Tested rank range
- #4–#9
#10Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment70.3
Mr. Rooter
Initial investment: $152,900–$298,675
Increase +0.3 pts Property replacement-cycle demandNo material negative local adjustment identified
Rank sensitivity: Highly sensitive
Why it ranks here
Score-changing local factors only. Evidence links open the underlying city finding.
| Local factor | Modeled drivers | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Property replacement-cycle demand |
| +0.3 pts |
| Net local movement | +0.28 pts | |
Net uses full-precision effects; displayed factor and driver rows are rounded.
Franchise evidence
Source material assessed
Item 3 — Litigation
1 image
Item 6 — Other Fees
1 image
Item 7 — Estimated Initial Investment
2 images
Item 12 — Territory
1 image
Item 20 — Outlets and Franchise Information
1 image
Full calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not confused with missing, conditional, or non-applicable evidence.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | +0.3 |
| 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 | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 70.28 |
| Published local-market alignment | 70.3 |
Factor calculations use full precision. Contributions and published scores are displayed to one decimal place; ranking order uses the full-precision score.
Evidence confidence
- City Modifier Evidence
- Strong
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Limited
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Property replacement-cycle demand +0.3 pts
- Tested rank range
- #5–#10
#11Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment70.0
Aire Serv
Initial investment: $113,308–$271,708
No material positive local adjustment identifiedNo material negative local adjustment identified
Rank sensitivity: Highly sensitive
Why it ranks here
Score-changing local factors only. Evidence links open the underlying city finding.
No material scored local adjustment was identified for this concept.
Franchise evidence
Source material assessed
Item 3 — Litigation
1 image
Item 6 — Other Fees
1 image
Item 7 — Estimated Initial Investment
1 image
Item 12 — Territory
1 image
Item 20 — Outlets and Franchise Information
1 image
Item 19 — Financial Performance Representation
1 image
Public company data assessed
1 sourceFull calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not confused with missing, conditional, or non-applicable evidence.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | 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 | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 70.00 |
| Published local-market alignment | 70.0 |
Factor calculations use full precision. Contributions and published scores are displayed to one decimal place; ranking order uses the full-precision score.
Evidence confidence
- City Modifier Evidence
- Strong
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Adequate
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Limited
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- 0.0 pts
- Tested rank range
- #6–#11
#12Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment70.0
Tiger Adjusters
Initial investment: $43,050–$159,500
No material positive local adjustment identifiedNo material negative local adjustment identified
Rank sensitivity: Highly sensitive
Why it ranks here
Score-changing local factors only. Evidence links open the underlying city finding.
No material scored local adjustment was identified for this concept.
Franchise evidence
Source material assessed
Item 3 — Litigation
1 image
Item 6 — Other Fees
1 image
Item 7 — Estimated Initial Investment
2 images
Item 12 — Territory
1 image
Item 19 — Financial Performance Representation
1 image
Public company data assessed
1 sourceFull calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not confused with missing, conditional, or non-applicable evidence.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | 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 | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 70.00 |
| Published local-market alignment | 70.0 |
Factor calculations use full precision. Contributions and published scores are displayed to one decimal place; ranking order uses the full-precision score.
Evidence confidence
- City Modifier Evidence
- Strong
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Adequate
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Limited
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- 0.0 pts
- Tested rank range
- #8–#12
#13Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment70.0
Mister Sparky Electric
No material positive local adjustment identifiedNo material negative local adjustment identified
Rank sensitivity: Moderately sensitive
Why it ranks here
Score-changing local factors only. Evidence links open the underlying city finding.
No material scored local adjustment was identified for this concept.
Full calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not confused with missing, conditional, or non-applicable evidence.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | 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 | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 70.00 |
| Published local-market alignment | 70.0 |
Factor calculations use full precision. Contributions and published scores are displayed to one decimal place; ranking order uses the full-precision score.
Evidence confidence
- City Modifier Evidence
- Strong
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Limited
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- 0.0 pts
- Tested rank range
- #11–#13
#14Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment70.0
Workout Anytime
Initial investment: $1,060,850–$1,840,550
No material positive local adjustment identifiedNo material negative local adjustment identified
Rank sensitivity: Moderately sensitive
Why it ranks here
Score-changing local factors only. Evidence links open the underlying city finding.
No material scored local adjustment was identified for this concept.
Franchise evidence
Source material assessed
Item 3 — Litigation
1 image
Item 6 — Other Fees
1 image
Item 7 — Estimated Initial Investment
2 images
Item 12 — Territory
1 image
Item 20 — Outlets and Franchise Information
1 image
Full calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not confused with missing, conditional, or non-applicable evidence.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | 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 | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 70.00 |
| Published local-market alignment | 70.0 |
Factor calculations use full precision. Contributions and published scores are displayed to one decimal place; ranking order uses the full-precision score.
Evidence confidence
- City Modifier Evidence
- Strong
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Limited
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- 0.0 pts
- Tested rank range
- #12–#14
No franchise concepts match the selected filters.
Worked score example
How we calculated City Wide
This example uses the same ledger shown for every concept and must reconcile exactly to the published score.
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not confused with missing, conditional, or non-applicable evidence.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +1.2 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| 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 | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Referral ecosystem | Not included in the score |
| Territory quality | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 71.17 |
| Published local-market alignment | 71.2 |
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 6 of 14 concepts. When we neutralized the factor and recalculated the table, 8 concepts changed position. City Wide moved from #1 to #9, the largest movement among concepts directly affected by this factor.
Concepts adjusted6 of 14
Average among affected+0.6 pts
Average across all concepts+0.2 pts
Concepts changing rank8
What we observed
- City Of Denton Total Procurement And Contracting Spending In Fiscal Year 2025398,629,855 usd
- University Of North Texas Denton Campus Student Count Described By Untminimum: 44,000 students more than
- Combined Enrollment At The University Of North Texas And Texas Woman's University Described By The City Of Dentonminimum: 50,000 students more than
Concepts helped most
City WideFacility management
+1.2 pts
Jan-Pro InternationalCommercial cleaning
+0.9 pts
FASTSIGNSSigns and graphics
+0.6 pts
HomeSmilesProperty maintenance services
+0.4 pts
ActionCOACHBusiness coaching
+0.4 pts
Observed model effectMixed or model dependent
Property replacement-cycle demand
We compared the age and condition of relevant property systems with the services each concept is actually equipped to provide.
Why concepts react differently
We applied a measurable adjustment to 5 of 14 concepts. When we neutralized the factor and recalculated the table, 8 concepts changed position. PuroClean moved from #4 to #10, the largest movement among concepts directly affected by this factor.
Concepts adjusted5 of 14
Average among affected+0.5 pts
Average across all concepts+0.2 pts
Concepts changing rank8
What we observed
- Sanger Soil At Its Denton County Type Location Is Clay Rich And Develops Wide Deep Cracks When Dryclay percent range: 40, 60; dry crack width inches range: 1, 3; dry crack depth inches minimum: 20 soil characteristics
- Medlin Soil Series In The Denton County Area Has High Shrink Swell Potential And Very Slow Permeabilityshrink swell potential: high; permeability: very slow; dry crack width inches range: 1, 3 soil characteristics
- Denton Soil Series Has Clay Rich Upper Horizons And Develops Surface Cracks When Dryupper horizon total clay percent range: 35, 57; dry surface crack width inches range: 0, 2 soil characteristics
Concepts helped most
PuroCleanRestoration
+0.8 pts
Rainbow International RestorationRestoration
+0.8 pts
Pillar To Post Home InspectorsHome inspection
+0.4 pts
ZOOM DRAINDrain and sewer service
+0.3 pts
Mr. RooterPlumbing
+0.3 pts
Measured but not differentiating in this concept set
- Competitive environmentNo material score adjustment
- Labor and staffing frictionNo material score adjustment
- Transportation, routing, and parkingNo material score adjustment
- Real estate and site feasibilityNo material score adjustment
- Sales and customer acquisitionNo material score adjustment
- Referral ecosystemNo material score adjustment
- Territory qualityNo material score adjustment
- Regulatory and operating frictionNo material score adjustment
Rank stability
Which positions depend most on individual assumptions?
The line shows the best and worst rank reached when one factor was removed from every concept. A narrow range indicates a more stable position.
#1 City WideHighly sensitive · tested #1–#13
#2 Rainbow International RestorationHighly sensitive · tested #2–#6
#3 Jan-Pro InternationalHighly sensitive · tested #2–#14
#4 PuroCleanHighly sensitive · tested #1–#13
#5 FASTSIGNSHighly sensitive · tested #3–#10
#6 HomeSmilesModerately sensitive · tested #4–#7
#7 ActionCOACHHighly sensitive · tested #5–#9
#8 Pillar To Post Home InspectorsHighly sensitive · tested #3–#12
#9 ZOOM DRAINHighly sensitive · tested #4–#9
#10 Mr. RooterHighly sensitive · tested #5–#10
#11 Aire ServHighly sensitive · tested #6–#11
#12 Tiger AdjustersHighly sensitive · tested #8–#12
#13 Mister Sparky ElectricModerately sensitive · tested #11–#13
#14 Workout AnytimeModerately sensitive · tested #12–#14
Neutralizing a factor removes it from every concept. A concept can move down even when its own score improves because competitors may benefit more.
Original factor comparison
How each factor affected the highest-rated franchise concepts
The graph includes the top 14 concepts by local-alignment score. Only nonzero score contributions are plotted. A factor is removed when every displayed concept received 0.0 points from it. Hover or focus a concept name to highlight all of its remaining data points.
Primary source records by factorTarget-market demand: [4] [5] [16] [17] [18] [20] [1] [3]Property replacement-cycle demand: [6] [7] [8] [5] [9] [1]Competitive environment: [4] [16] [1] [3]Labor and staffing friction: [21] [16] [17] [18] [1] [2] [3]Transportation, routing, and parking: [14] [15] [4] [3]Real estate and site feasibility: [22] [23] [24] [9] [10] [1]Sales and customer acquisition: [19] [20] [16] [4] [3]Referral ecosystem: [16] [17] [18] [19] [4] [3]Territory quality: [10] [9] [11] [13] [14] [3]Regulatory and operating friction: [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [2] [3]
View the chart data as a table
| Concept | Target-market demand | Property replacement-cycle demand |
|---|---|---|
| #1 City Wide | +1.2 pts | — |
| #2 Rainbow International Restoration | +0.1 pts | +0.8 pts |
| #3 Jan-Pro International | +0.9 pts | — |
| #4 PuroClean | — | +0.8 pts |
| #5 FASTSIGNS | +0.6 pts | — |
| #6 HomeSmiles | +0.4 pts | — |
| #7 ActionCOACH | +0.4 pts | — |
| #8 Pillar To Post Home Inspectors | — | +0.4 pts |
| #9 ZOOM DRAIN | — | +0.3 pts |
| #10 Mr. Rooter | — | +0.3 pts |
| #11 Aire Serv | — | — |
| #12 Tiger Adjusters | — | — |
| #13 Mister Sparky Electric | — | — |
| #14 Workout Anytime | — | — |
Interpretation
How to interpret the result
City Wide, Rainbow International Restoration, Jan-Pro International led because their operating requirements captured more of the local support from target-market demand while remaining less exposed to competitive environment. 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 City Wide, Rainbow International Restoration, Jan-Pro International; their ranks move more widely when individual factors are neutralized.
Local evidence assessed for modeling
Category comparisons
Best franchise categories we assessed in Denton, Texas
Category summaries are shown only when at least two concepts qualified. Two-concept comparisons are explicitly labeled as limited.
Limited two-concept comparison
70.9Best Restoration franchise opportunities we assessed in Denton, Texas
2 Restoration concepts qualified for comparison, with scores ranging from 70.8 to 70.9. Rainbow International Restoration ranked highest at 70.9. Property replacement-cycle demand added 0.8 points on average among the affected concepts.
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
- 70.8–70.9
- Category average
- 70.9
Rainbow International Restoration70.9
PuroClean70.8
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 | 169,431people | July 1, 2025 population estimate; 2020 Census counts; 2020-2024 ACS five-year characteristics; 2022 economic measures | Denton, Texas | Supports research conclusion | [4] |
| Population change from the April 1, 2020 Census count to the July 1, 2025 population estimate | 21.1percent | July 1, 2025 population estimate; 2020 Census counts; 2020-2024 ACS five-year characteristics; 2022 economic measures | Denton, Texas | Supports research conclusion | [4] |
| Total housing units in the 2024 ACS one-year estimate | 63,538housing units | 2024 American Community Survey one-year estimates and 2020 Decennial Census | Denton, Texas | Context only | [5] |
| Total households in the 2024 ACS one-year estimate | 59,003households | 2024 American Community Survey one-year estimates and 2020 Decennial Census | Denton, Texas | Context only | [5] |
| Owner-occupied housing unit rate | 50percent | July 1, 2025 population estimate; 2020 Census counts; 2020-2024 ACS five-year characteristics; 2022 economic measures | Denton, Texas | Context only | [4] |
| Mean travel time to work for workers age 16 and older | 23.7minutes | July 1, 2025 population estimate; 2020 Census counts; 2020-2024 ACS five-year characteristics; 2022 economic measures | Denton, Texas | Context only | [4] |
| Total retail sales in 2022 | 3,587,404,000usd | July 1, 2025 population estimate; 2020 Census counts; 2020-2024 ACS five-year characteristics; 2022 economic measures | Denton, Texas | Context only | [4] |
| Health care and social assistance receipts/revenue in 2022 | 1,632,051,000usd | July 1, 2025 population estimate; 2020 Census counts; 2020-2024 ACS five-year characteristics; 2022 economic measures | Denton, Texas | Context only | [4] |
| Transportation and warehousing receipts/revenue in 2022 | 1,293,445,000usd | July 1, 2025 population estimate; 2020 Census counts; 2020-2024 ACS five-year characteristics; 2022 economic measures | Denton, Texas | Context only | [4] |
| Combined enrollment at the University of North Texas and Texas Woman's University described by the City of Denton | minimum: 50,000students more than | Current city institutional and education overview accessed August 2026 | Denton, Texas | Used in scoring | [16] [3] |
| University of North Texas Denton-campus student count described by UNT | minimum: 44,000students more than | Current Denton-campus university profile accessed August 2026 | University of North Texas, Denton campus | Used in scoring | [17] [3] |
| Texas Woman's University total enrollment in fall 2025 | 15,424students | Fall 2025 enrollment | Texas Woman's University | Context only | [18] [3] |
| City of Denton total procurement and contracting spending in fiscal year 2025 | 398,629,855usd | Fiscal Year 2025 contracts and procurement summary | City of Denton | Used in scoring | [20] |
| City of Denton threshold above which purchases or projects use a formal sealed solicitation process | 100,000usd project cost threshold | Current procurement process and vendor guidance accessed August 2026 | City of Denton | Conditional relationship | [19] |
| Potential general operational purchase ceiling for the City of Denton Vendor Catalog | 50,000usd | Current procurement process and vendor guidance accessed August 2026 | City of Denton | Conditional relationship | [19] |
| Denton soil series has clay-rich upper horizons and develops surface cracks when dry | upper horizon total clay percent range: 35, 57; dry surface crack width inches range: 0, 2soil characteristics | Official series description revised December 2016 | Denton series; established in Denton County and distributed in central Texas | Used in scoring | [6] [1] |
| Sanger soil at its Denton County type location is clay-rich and develops wide deep cracks when dry | clay percent range: 40, 60; dry crack width inches range: 1, 3; dry crack depth inches minimum: 20soil characteristics | Current official series description accessed August 2026 | Denton County, about eight miles south of Denton | Used in scoring | [7] |
| Medlin soil series in the Denton County area has high shrink-swell potential and very slow permeability | shrink swell potential: high; permeability: very slow; dry crack width inches range: 1, 3soil characteristics | Current official series description accessed August 2026 | Medlin series in north-central Texas, including Denton County | Used in scoring | [8] |
| Water impact fees per service unit for property platted on or after June 1, 2026 | zone 1a: 1,365; zone 1b: 8,058.75; zone 2: 9,104.25usd per service unit | Fee schedule including property-platted date regimes and water/wastewater impact fees effective for plats on or after June 1, 2026 | City of Denton water impact-fee zones | Conditional relationship | [10] [9] |
| Wastewater impact fees per service unit for property platted on or after June 1, 2026 | pecan creek: 8,711.25; hickory creek: 9,593.25; clear creek: 13,437usd per service unit | Fee schedule including property-platted date regimes and water/wastewater impact fees effective for plats on or after June 1, 2026 | City of Denton wastewater impact-fee service areas | Conditional relationship | [10] [9] |
| The June 1, 2026 plat-date regime changed water and wastewater impact-fee amounts and introduced wastewater service-area-specific rates | pre june 2026 example: water zone 2 per sfe: 7,638, wastewater per sfe: 4,716; post june 2026 example: water zone 2 per service unit: 9,104.25, clear creek wastewater per service unit: 13,437usd per service unit or sfe | Fee schedule including property-platted date regimes and water/wastewater impact fees effective for plats on or after June 1, 2026 | City of Denton; applicability depends on final plat recordation date and utility service area | Context only | [10] [2] |
| New signs and specified sign changes require City sign permits, and some areas have special sign-district overlays | permit required: yes; special sign district overlays exist: yes; certificate of occupancy or building permit prerequisite: yesrule | Current sign-permit guidance accessed August 2026 | Denton, Texas with overlay-specific variation | Conditional relationship | [11] [3] |
| Denton's sign code imposes repair/replacement constraints on nonconforming signs and separate requirements for abandoned signs and supporting structures | nonconforming repair cost threshold percent of new sign: 60; abandoned supporting structure rule section: 33.12.2; nonconforming sign rule section: 33.10.5rule | Current codified sign rules accessed August 2026 | Denton, Texas; applicable to signs and supporting structures meeting the code definitions | Conditional relationship | [12] [2] |
| Certificate of Appropriateness is required for exterior work on specified Denton historic properties | local historic districts: Oak-Hickory, West Oak Area, Bell Avenue; also covers: local historic landmarks including Denton Square District, Recorded Texas Historic Landmarks, National Register Landmarks; covered work: exterior repairs and alterations, additions, demolitions, new constructionrule | 2026 Certificate of Appropriateness application and review process | Designated historic properties in Denton, Texas | Conditional relationship | [13] [3] |
| TxDOT lists the I-35 project from I-35W to north of the Cooke County line on a 2024-2032 timeline | start year: 2,024; end year: 2,032calendar years | Current project list accessed August 2026; I-35 from I-35W to north of Cooke County line listed for 2024-2032 | I-35 from I-35W through/north of Denton toward Cooke County | Conditional relationship | [14] [3] |
| The environmental record for the I-35 widening/reconstruction segment starts at US 380 in Denton and extends approximately 15.1 miles north | distance miles: 15.1; southern limit: US 380 (University Drive West); northern limit: approximately 0.7 mile north of FM 3002project scope | Project environmental review for the I-35 widening/reconstruction segment from US 380 to north of FM 3002 | I-35 through Denton and Sanger, Denton County, extending to Valley View in Cooke County | Conditional relationship | [15] |
| Selected major occupational-group mean hourly wages in the Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington MSA compared with U.S. averages | all occupations: dfw: 32.89, us: 32.66; food preparation serving: dfw: 15.69, us: 17.32; building grounds cleaning maintenance: dfw: 17.48, us: 19.01; construction extraction: dfw: 26.49, us: 30.73; installation maintenance repair: dfw: 28.97, us: 29.63; office administrative support: dfw: 24.12, us: 24.12; transportation material moving: dfw: 23.66, us: 23.44usd per hour mean | May 2024 occupational employment and wage estimates | Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington, TX; includes Denton County | Context only | [21] |
| JLL Dallas-Fort Worth industrial market indicators in Q2 2026 | vacancy percent: 9.3; availability percent: 11.5; average asking rent usd per sqft: 8.99; under construction sqft: 31,200,000mixed industrial market metrics | Q2 2026, data as of June 30, 2026 | Dallas-Fort Worth industrial market | Context only | [22] |
| Cushman & Wakefield Dallas-Fort Worth industrial market indicators in Q2 2026 | vacancy percent: 8.1; average asking rent net usd per sqft: 9.19mixed industrial market metrics | Q2 2026 | Dallas-Fort Worth industrial market | Context only | [23] |
| CBRE Dallas-Fort Worth industrial market indicators in Q2 2026 | vacancy percent: 8.3; availability percent: 9.9; under construction sqft: 24,000,000mixed industrial market metrics | Q2 2026 | Dallas-Fort Worth industrial market | Context only | [24] |
How to use the ranking
What the model can and cannot establish
- Scores measure local operating alignment, not expected financial performance or franchise-system quality.
- Citywide evidence may not describe the exact site or territory ultimately offered.
- Conditional effects are shown for diligence but do not change the published score until their applicability is established.
Methodology
How the local-alignment ranking is calculated
Measure the city
Collect reusable local metrics with source, period, geography, and confidence fields.
Profile each operating model
Map each franchise to controlled operating attributes and local sensitivities.
Apply scoreable effects
Score only effects that apply without an unresolved site, territory, customer, or project gate.
Preserve conditional effects
Keep location- or territory-dependent issues visible for diligence without automatically changing the score.
Test rank sensitivity
Remove one factor at a time from every concept and rerank using full-precision scores.
Generate public output
Create the ranking, factor-status ledger, visuals, metric registry, and automated quality report from the same data.
How the common baseline becomes a city-specific score
Every concept starts from the same 70.0 reference point, so differences come only from modeled local interactions. In this city, City Wide reached 71.17 after target-market demand +1.2 pts. The current model caps total local movement at ±18.0 points. The score is not a percentage, probability, or estimate of investment quality.
Precision and materiality
Calculations use full-precision values. Published scores and factor contributions display one decimal place, while ranks use full precision. Effects smaller than 0.1 points are identified as below the publication threshold rather than presented as a meaningful zero.
Score tiers
Tier 1 · Strongest modeled alignment80.0–100.0
Tier 2 · Favorable modeled alignment72.0–<80.0
Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment64.0–<72.0
Tier 4 · Higher-friction modeled alignment0.0–<64.0
How factor rows are classified
Positive local adjustmentNegative local adjustmentMeasured; no meaningful local adjustmentEffect below the publication thresholdNot applicable to this operating modelDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating conditionNot included in the score
What “best” means here
“Best” means the strongest modeled local operating alignment among the franchise concepts assessed on this page.
Model governance
How this report is calculated and corrected
Calculation controls
- Model designer
- Thomas Jepsen
No concept’s final score is manually raised or lowered after calculation. Before this template is activated, the report is reviewed for source scope, classification, arithmetic, unsupported claims, duplication, and readability.
Model history
- Model 0.9.0-calibration · August 19, 2026Added compiler-derived decision intelligence and observation usage mapping., Changed factor sensitivity and channel counterfactuals to full model reruns., Added data-dependent city content signals while preserving legacy public report fields., and Added model-owned semantic compatibility gates and backward-compatible channel-level evidence attribution.
Corrections policy
Corrected source, geography, or operating-profile evidence triggers a full compiler rerun so every dependent score and visual is recalculated.
Source registry
Evidence represented in this report
Each source identifies its period, scope, and the local metrics it supports. Internal or supplied research is not presented as independently accessible evidence.
- 1Utility Delta Market Audit: Structural Inefficiencies and Asymmetric CRE OpportunitiesInternal or supplied research; not publicly accessible.
Used for: Denton soil series has clay-rich upper horizons and develops surface cracks when dry
- 2Structural Capital Friction and Municipal Extraction Mechanisms: A Forensic Audit of Ten U.S. JurisdictionsInternal or supplied research; not publicly accessible.
Used for: The June 1, 2026 plat-date regime changed water and wastewater impact-fee amounts and introduced wastewater service-area-specific rates and Denton's sign code imposes repair/replacement constraints on nonconforming signs and separate requirements for abandoned signs and supporting structures
- 3Franchise data - remake - des.csvInternal or supplied research; not publicly accessible.
Used for: Combined enrollment at the University of North Texas and Texas Woman's University described by the City of Denton, University of North Texas Denton-campus student count described by UNT, Texas Woman's University total enrollment in fall 2025, New signs and specified sign changes require City sign permits, and some areas have special sign-district overlays, and Certificate of Appropriateness is required for exterior work on specified Denton historic properties
- 4QuickFacts: Denton city, Texas
Used for: Resident population estimate on July 1, 2025, Population change from the April 1, 2020 Census count to the July 1, 2025 population estimate, Owner-occupied housing unit rate, Mean travel time to work for workers age 16 and older, and Total retail sales in 2022
- 5Denton city, Texas - Census Bureau Profile
Used for: Total housing units in the 2024 ACS one-year estimate and Total households in the 2024 ACS one-year estimate
- 6Official Series Description - DENTON Series
Used for: Denton soil series has clay-rich upper horizons and develops surface cracks when dry
- 7Official Series Description - SANGER Series
Used for: Sanger soil at its Denton County type location is clay-rich and develops wide deep cracks when dry
- 8Official Series Description - MEDLIN Series
Used for: Medlin soil series in the Denton County area has high shrink-swell potential and very slow permeability
- 9Development Fees
Used for: Water impact fees per service unit for property platted on or after June 1, 2026 and Wastewater impact fees per service unit for property platted on or after June 1, 2026
- 10Permit and Fee Schedule
Used for: Water impact fees per service unit for property platted on or after June 1, 2026, Wastewater impact fees per service unit for property platted on or after June 1, 2026, and The June 1, 2026 plat-date regime changed water and wastewater impact-fee amounts and introduced wastewater service-area-specific rates
- 11Signs
Used for: New signs and specified sign changes require City sign permits, and some areas have special sign-district overlays
- 12Code of Ordinances, Chapter 33 - Signs and Advertising Devices
Used for: Denton's sign code imposes repair/replacement constraints on nonconforming signs and separate requirements for abandoned signs and supporting structures
- 13Certificate of Appropriateness
Used for: Certificate of Appropriateness is required for exterior work on specified Denton historic properties
- 14Texas Clear Lanes Projects
Used for: TxDOT lists the I-35 project from I-35W to north of the Cooke County line on a 2024-2032 timeline
- 15Notice of Availability of Final Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact for IH 35 From US 380 to FM 3002
Used for: The environmental record for the I-35 widening/reconstruction segment starts at US 380 in Denton and extends approximately 15.1 miles north
- 16About Denton
Used for: Combined enrollment at the University of North Texas and Texas Woman's University described by the City of Denton
- 17Academics - Denton Campus
Used for: University of North Texas Denton-campus student count described by UNT
- 18TWU posts growth in enrollment, credit hours, scholars
Used for: Texas Woman's University total enrollment in fall 2025
- 19Procurement
Used for: City of Denton threshold above which purchases or projects use a formal sealed solicitation process and Potential general operational purchase ceiling for the City of Denton Vendor Catalog
- 20Contracts & Procurement Transparency
Used for: City of Denton total procurement and contracting spending in fiscal year 2025
- 21Occupational Employment and Wages in Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington — May 2024
Used for: Selected major occupational-group mean hourly wages in the Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington MSA compared with U.S. averages
- 22Dallas-Fort Worth industrial market dynamics, Q2 2026
Used for: JLL Dallas-Fort Worth industrial market indicators in Q2 2026
- 23Dallas/Fort Worth Industrial MarketBeat Q2 2026
Used for: Cushman & Wakefield Dallas-Fort Worth industrial market indicators in Q2 2026
- 24Dallas/Fort Worth Industrial Figures Q2 2026
Used for: CBRE Dallas-Fort Worth industrial market indicators in Q2 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.
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.