69.7 average across 2 concepts
Local operating-model alignment analysis
Best Franchise Opportunities We Assessed in Louisville, Kentucky
We compared 14 franchise concepts for Louisville, Kentucky. Household service demand was a leading positive mechanism. Frontline labor pressure was a leading operating constraint.
What “best” means in this ranking“Best” means the strongest modeled local operating alignment among the franchise concepts assessed on this page. It does not estimate earnings or determine which franchise is best for a particular candidate.
14Concepts evaluated
27Local sources used
29Local metrics
Evaluation set
Why these concepts were evaluated
This is not a ranking of every franchise that may be offered in the city.
14Concepts assessed
Concepts were included when enough operating-model information existed to assign a provisional local-sensitivity profile. Unresolved inputs reduce confidence or remain conditional rather than automatically excluding a concept.
A brand’s participation in our referral network does not add points or change its position.
City-level conclusions
What stood out in our assessment
0.6 points average among 13 affected concepts
0.7 points average reduction among 9 affected concepts
Tested rank range spans 10 positions
Executive conclusion
What the ranking means for Louisville, Kentucky
ZOOM DRAIN, Pillar To Post Home Inspectors, and Mr. Rooter produced the highest modeled local-alignment scores in the evaluated set. Household service demand was the strongest positive scored mechanism among 8 exposed concepts, adding 0.6 points on average. One important asymmetry was that the same local condition supported event-driven demand upside while also creating event-demand volatility. Jan-Pro International was especially relationship-sensitive: removing frontline labor pressure moved it from #14 to #11 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 | ZOOM DRAINDrain and sewer serviceInvestment: $266,250–$570,500 | 71.3Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +0.6 ptsTarget-market demand | No material negative local adjustment | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 2 | Pillar To Post Home InspectorsHome inspectionInvestment: $102,690–$134,290 | 71.1Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +0.9 ptsTarget-market demand | No material negative local adjustment | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 3 | Mr. RooterPlumbingInvestment: $152,900–$298,675 | 71.0Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +0.7 ptsTarget-market demand | No material negative local adjustment | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 4 | City WideFacility managementInvestment: $229,729–$410,730 | 71.0Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +0.8 ptsTarget-market demand | -0.4 ptsLabor and staffing friction | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 5 | HomeSmilesProperty maintenance servicesInvestment: $148,110–$201,800 | 71.0Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +1.0 ptsTarget-market demand | -0.5 ptsLabor and staffing friction | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 6 | Mister Sparky ElectricElectrical | 70.9Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +0.6 ptsTarget-market demand | No material negative local adjustment | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 7 | Aire ServHVAC installation, repair, and maintenanceInvestment: $113,308–$271,708 | 70.9Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +0.7 ptsTarget-market demand | -0.2 ptsLabor and staffing friction | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 8 | FASTSIGNSSigns and graphicsInvestment: $231,226–$386,285 | 70.6Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +0.3 ptsTarget-market demand | No material negative local adjustment | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 9 | ActionCOACHBusiness coachingInvestment: $71,668–$303,513 | 70.5Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +0.5 ptsReferral ecosystem | -0.1 ptsLabor and staffing friction | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 10 | Tiger AdjustersPublic insurance adjustingInvestment: $43,050–$159,500 | 70.1Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +0.2 ptsTarget-market demand | -0.1 ptsLabor and staffing friction | Moderate evidence confidence |
Conditions that changed the analysis
What mattered most in Louisville, Kentucky
Recent population growth and housing permitting support incremental household-service demand
This relationship affected 8 concepts and added 0.6 points on average among those exposed. Local evidence: Population change from the April 2020 estimate base to July 2025 for the Louisville metro-government balance: 1.6 percent. [4] [5]
Large recurring Louisville events create concentrated demand spikes and event-linked variance
The same local condition created complementary effects: event-driven demand upside supported exposed concepts while event-demand volatility constrained others. [23] [24]
Large logistics employment base raises competition for overlapping frontline and material-handling labor
This relationship affected 9 concepts and reduced 0.7 points on average among those exposed. Local evidence: Laborers and freight, stock, and material movers in the Louisville metropolitan area: employment: 29,400; location quotient: 2.26; mean hourly wage usd: 21.37 jobs location quotient and usd per hour. [9]
Evidence behind the city mechanisms
Recent population growth and housing permitting support incremental household-service demand1 modeled effect
Household service demandTarget-market demand
Large logistics employment base raises competition for overlapping frontline and material-handling labor1 modeled effect
Frontline labor pressureLabor and staffing friction
Large academic-health-system footprint supports institutional service demand1 modeled effect
Healthcare institutional service demandTarget-market demand
Academic and health-system provider networks create a professional referral base for referral-dependent services1 modeled effect
Professional and institutional relationship densityReferral ecosystem
Large recurring Louisville events create concentrated demand spikes and event-linked variance2 local facts · 2 modeled effects · 2 sources
- Combined attendance cited by Louisville Metro for Bourbon and Beyond, Louder Than Life, and Kentucky Kingdom in 2025: 450,000 attendees over [24]
- Attendance at the 152nd Kentucky Derby on May 2, 2026: 150,000 attendees over [23]
Event-driven demand upsideTarget-market demand
Event-demand volatilityTarget-market demand
Preservation and design-overlay review can require site-specific signage or facade adaptation1 modeled effect
Signage and prototype adaptation burdenRegulatory and operating friction
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 alignment71.3
ZOOM DRAIN
Initial investment: $266,250–$570,500
Increase +0.6 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 |
| +0.6 pts |
| Property replacement-cycle demand |
| +0.4 pts |
| Referral ecosystem |
| +0.3 pts |
| Net local movement | +1.30 pts | |
Net uses full-precision effects; displayed factor and driver rows are rounded.
Franchise evidence
Source material assessed
Item 3 — Litigation
1 image
Item 6 — Other Fees
1 image
Item 7 — Estimated Initial Investment
2 images
Item 12 — Territory
1 image
Item 20 — Outlets and Franchise Information
1 image
Full calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not mistaken for a score-changing effect.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +0.6 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | +0.4 |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Measured; no meaningful local adjustment |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | +0.3 |
| Territory quality | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 71.30 |
| Published local-market alignment | 71.3 |
Factor calculations use full precision. Contributions and published scores are displayed to one decimal place; ranking order uses the full-precision score.
Evidence confidence
- City Modifier Evidence
- Adequate
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Adequate
- Geographic applicability
- Adequate
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Target-market demand +0.6 pts
- Tested rank range
- #1–#4
#2Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment71.1
Pillar To Post Home Inspectors
Initial investment: $102,690–$134,290
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 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand |
| +0.2 pts |
| Net local movement | +1.09 pts | |
Net uses full-precision effects; displayed factor and driver rows are rounded.
Franchise evidence
Source material assessed
Item 3 — Litigation
1 image
Item 6 — Other Fees
1 image
Item 7 — Estimated Initial Investment
2 images
Item 12 — Territory
1 image
Item 19 — Financial Performance Representation
1 image
Public company data assessed
2 sourcesFull calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not mistaken for a score-changing effect.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +0.9 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | +0.2 |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Measured; no meaningful local adjustment |
| 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 | 71.09 |
| Published local-market alignment | 71.1 |
Factor calculations use full precision. Contributions and published scores are displayed to one decimal place; ranking order uses the full-precision score.
Evidence confidence
- City Modifier Evidence
- Adequate
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Adequate
- Geographic applicability
- Adequate
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Target-market demand +0.9 pts
- Tested rank range
- #1–#7
#3Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment71.0
Mr. Rooter
Initial investment: $152,900–$298,675
Increase +0.7 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 |
| +0.7 pts |
| Property replacement-cycle demand |
| +0.4 pts |
| Net local movement | +1.04 pts | |
Net uses full-precision effects; displayed factor and driver rows are rounded.
Franchise evidence
Source material assessed
Item 3 — Litigation
1 image
Item 6 — Other Fees
1 image
Item 7 — Estimated Initial Investment
2 images
Item 12 — Territory
1 image
Item 20 — Outlets and Franchise Information
1 image
Full calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not mistaken for a score-changing effect.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +0.7 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | +0.4 |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Measured; no meaningful local adjustment |
| 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 | 71.04 |
| Published local-market alignment | 71.0 |
Factor calculations use full precision. Contributions and published scores are displayed to one decimal place; ranking order uses the full-precision score.
Evidence confidence
- City Modifier Evidence
- Adequate
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Adequate
- Geographic applicability
- Adequate
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Target-market demand +0.7 pts
- Tested rank range
- #2–#6
#4Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment71.0
City Wide
Initial investment: $229,729–$410,730
Increase +0.8 pts Target-market demandReduction -0.4 pts Labor and staffing friction
Rank sensitivity: Highly sensitive
Why it ranks here
Score-changing local factors only. Evidence links open the underlying city finding.
| Local factor | Modeled drivers | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Target-market demand |
| +0.8 pts |
| Referral ecosystem |
| +0.6 pts |
| Labor and staffing friction |
| -0.4 pts |
| Net local movement | +0.99 pts | |
Net uses full-precision effects; displayed factor and driver rows are rounded.
Franchise evidence
Source material assessed
Item 3 — Litigation
1 image
Item 6 — Other Fees
1 image
Item 7 — Estimated Initial Investment
2 images
Item 12 — Territory
1 image
Item 20 — Outlets and Franchise Information
1 image
Full calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not mistaken for a score-changing effect.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +0.8 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | -0.4 |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Measured; no meaningful local adjustment |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | +0.6 |
| Territory quality | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 70.99 |
| Published local-market alignment | 71.0 |
Factor calculations use full precision. Contributions and published scores are displayed to one decimal place; ranking order uses the full-precision score.
Evidence confidence
- City Modifier Evidence
- Adequate
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Adequate
- Geographic applicability
- Adequate
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Target-market demand +0.8 pts
- Tested rank range
- #1–#7
#5Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment71.0
HomeSmiles
Initial investment: $148,110–$201,800
Increase +1.0 pts Target-market demandReduction -0.5 pts Labor and staffing friction
Rank sensitivity: Highly sensitive
Why it ranks here
Score-changing local factors only. Evidence links open the underlying city finding.
| Local factor | Modeled drivers | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +1.0 pts | |
| Labor and staffing friction |
| -0.5 pts |
| Referral ecosystem |
| +0.5 pts |
| Net local movement | +0.97 pts | |
Net uses full-precision effects; displayed factor and driver rows are rounded.
Franchise evidence
Source material assessed
Item 3 — Litigation
1 image
Item 6 — Other Fees
1 image
Item 7 — Estimated Initial Investment
2 images
Item 12 — Territory
1 image
Item 20 — Outlets and Franchise Information
1 image
Full calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not mistaken for a score-changing effect.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +1.0 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | -0.5 |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Measured; no meaningful local adjustment |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | +0.5 |
| 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 | 70.97 |
| Published local-market alignment | 71.0 |
Factor calculations use full precision. Contributions and published scores are displayed to one decimal place; ranking order uses the full-precision score.
Evidence confidence
- City Modifier Evidence
- Adequate
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Adequate
- Source-evidence confidence
- Adequate
- Geographic applicability
- Adequate
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Target-market demand +1.0 pts
- Tested rank range
- #1–#9
#6Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment70.9
Mister Sparky Electric
Increase +0.6 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 |
| +0.6 pts |
| Property replacement-cycle demand |
| +0.3 pts |
| Net local movement | +0.94 pts | |
Net uses full-precision effects; displayed factor and driver rows are rounded.
Full calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not mistaken for a score-changing effect.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +0.6 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | +0.3 |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Measured; no meaningful local adjustment |
| 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 | 70.94 |
| 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
- Adequate
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Adequate
- Geographic applicability
- Adequate
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Target-market demand +0.6 pts
- Tested rank range
- #4–#7
#7Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment70.9
Aire Serv
Initial investment: $113,308–$271,708
Increase +0.7 pts Target-market demandReduction -0.2 pts Labor and staffing friction
Rank sensitivity: Highly sensitive
Why it ranks here
Score-changing local factors only. Evidence links open the underlying city finding.
| Local factor | Modeled drivers | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Target-market demand |
| +0.7 pts |
| Property replacement-cycle demand |
| +0.4 pts |
| Labor and staffing friction |
| -0.2 pts |
| Net local movement | +0.87 pts | |
Net uses full-precision effects; displayed factor and driver rows are rounded.
Franchise evidence
Source material assessed
Item 3 — Litigation
1 image
Item 6 — Other Fees
1 image
Item 7 — Estimated Initial Investment
1 image
Item 12 — Territory
1 image
Item 20 — Outlets and Franchise Information
1 image
Item 19 — Financial Performance Representation
1 image
Public company data assessed
1 sourceFull calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not mistaken for a score-changing effect.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +0.7 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | +0.4 |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | -0.2 |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Measured; no meaningful local adjustment |
| 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 | 70.87 |
| 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
- Adequate
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Adequate
- Source-evidence confidence
- Adequate
- Geographic applicability
- Adequate
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Target-market demand +0.7 pts
- Tested rank range
- #5–#9
#8Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment70.6
FASTSIGNS
Initial investment: $231,226–$386,285
Increase +0.3 pts Target-market demandNo material negative local adjustment identified
Rank sensitivity: Highly sensitive
Why it ranks here
Score-changing local factors only. Evidence links open the underlying city finding.
| Local factor | Modeled drivers | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Target-market demand |
| +0.3 pts |
| Referral ecosystem |
| +0.3 pts |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Signage and prototype adaptation burden EvidenceConditional — applicability must be confirmed | Not scored |
| 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 mistaken for a score-changing effect.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +0.3 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Measured; no meaningful local adjustment |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | +0.3 |
| Territory quality | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 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
- Adequate
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Adequate
- Geographic applicability
- Adequate
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Target-market demand +0.3 pts
- Tested rank range
- #5–#13
#9Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment70.5
ActionCOACH
Initial investment: $71,668–$303,513
Increase +0.5 pts Referral ecosystemReduction -0.1 pts Labor and staffing friction
Rank sensitivity: Highly sensitive
Why it ranks here
Score-changing local factors only. Evidence links open the underlying city finding.
| Local factor | Modeled drivers | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Referral ecosystem |
| +0.5 pts |
| Target-market demand |
| +0.1 pts |
| Labor and staffing friction |
| -0.1 pts |
| Net local movement | +0.54 pts | |
Net uses full-precision effects; displayed factor and driver rows are rounded.
Franchise evidence
Source material assessed
Item 3 — Litigation
1 image
Item 6 — Other Fees
1 image
Item 7 — Estimated Initial Investment
2 images
Item 12 — Territory
1 image
Item 20 — Outlets and Franchise Information
1 image
Full calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not mistaken for a score-changing effect.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +0.1 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | -0.1 |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Measured; no meaningful local adjustment |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | +0.5 |
| 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 | 70.54 |
| Published local-market alignment | 70.5 |
Factor calculations use full precision. Contributions and published scores are displayed to one decimal place; ranking order uses the full-precision score.
Evidence confidence
- City Modifier Evidence
- Adequate
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Adequate
- Geographic applicability
- Adequate
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Referral ecosystem +0.5 pts
- Tested rank range
- #2–#12
#10Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment70.1
Tiger Adjusters
Initial investment: $43,050–$159,500
Increase +0.2 pts Target-market demandReduction -0.1 pts Labor and staffing friction
Rank sensitivity: Highly sensitive
Why it ranks here
Score-changing local factors only. Evidence links open the underlying city finding.
| Local factor | Modeled drivers | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Target-market demand |
| +0.2 pts |
| Labor and staffing friction |
| -0.1 pts |
| Net local movement | +0.10 pts | |
Net uses full-precision effects; displayed factor and driver rows are rounded.
Franchise evidence
Source material assessed
Item 3 — Litigation
1 image
Item 6 — Other Fees
1 image
Item 7 — Estimated Initial Investment
2 images
Item 12 — Territory
1 image
Item 19 — Financial Performance Representation
1 image
Public company data assessed
1 sourceFull calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not mistaken for a score-changing effect.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +0.2 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | -0.1 |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Measured; no meaningful local adjustment |
| 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 | 70.10 |
| Published local-market alignment | 70.1 |
Factor calculations use full precision. Contributions and published scores are displayed to one decimal place; ranking order uses the full-precision score.
Evidence confidence
- City Modifier Evidence
- Adequate
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Adequate
- Source-evidence confidence
- Adequate
- Geographic applicability
- Adequate
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Target-market demand +0.2 pts
- Tested rank range
- #9–#14
#11Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment69.8
PuroClean
Initial investment: $54,575–$262,145
Increase +0.4 pts Referral ecosystemReduction -1.0 pts Labor and staffing friction
Rank sensitivity: Moderately sensitive
Why it ranks here
Score-changing local factors only. Evidence links open the underlying city finding.
| Local factor | Modeled drivers | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Labor and staffing friction |
| -0.9 pts |
| Referral ecosystem |
| +0.4 pts |
| Property replacement-cycle demand |
| +0.3 pts |
| Net local movement | -0.25 pts | |
Net uses full-precision effects; displayed factor and driver rows are rounded.
Franchise evidence
Source material assessed
Item 3 — Litigation
1 image
Item 6 — Other Fees
1 image
Item 7 — Estimated Initial Investment
2 images
Item 12 — Territory
1 image
Item 20 — Outlets and Franchise Information
1 image
Full calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not mistaken for a score-changing effect.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | +0.3 |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | -0.9 |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Measured; no meaningful local adjustment |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | +0.4 |
| Territory quality | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 69.75 |
| Published local-market alignment | 69.8 |
Factor calculations use full precision. Contributions and published scores are displayed to one decimal place; ranking order uses the full-precision score.
Evidence confidence
- City Modifier Evidence
- Adequate
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Adequate
- Geographic applicability
- Adequate
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Labor and staffing friction -1.0 pts
- Tested rank range
- #9–#12
#12Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment69.7
Rainbow International Restoration
Initial investment: $185,336–$351,900
Increase +0.4 pts Referral ecosystemReduction -1.1 pts Labor and staffing friction
Rank sensitivity: Highly sensitive
Why it ranks here
Score-changing local factors only. Evidence links open the underlying city finding.
| Local factor | Modeled drivers | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Labor and staffing friction |
| -1.1 pts |
| Referral ecosystem |
| +0.4 pts |
| Property replacement-cycle demand |
| +0.3 pts |
| Target-market demand |
| +0.1 pts |
| Net local movement | -0.31 pts | |
Net uses full-precision effects; displayed factor and driver rows are rounded.
Franchise evidence
Source material assessed
Item 3 — Litigation
1 image
Item 6 — Other Fees
1 image
Item 7 — Estimated Initial Investment
2 images
Item 12 — Territory
1 image
Item 20 — Outlets and Franchise Information
1 image
Full calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not mistaken for a score-changing effect.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +0.1 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | +0.3 |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | -1.1 |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Measured; no meaningful local adjustment |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | +0.4 |
| Territory quality | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 69.69 |
| Published local-market alignment | 69.7 |
Factor calculations use full precision. Contributions and published scores are displayed to one decimal place; ranking order uses the full-precision score.
Evidence confidence
- City Modifier Evidence
- Adequate
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Adequate
- Geographic applicability
- Adequate
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Labor and staffing friction -1.1 pts
- Tested rank range
- #8–#13
#13Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment69.5
Workout Anytime
Initial investment: $1,060,850–$1,840,550
Increase +0.6 pts Target-market demandReduction -1.1 pts Labor and staffing friction
Rank sensitivity: Moderately sensitive
Why it ranks here
Score-changing local factors only. Evidence links open the underlying city finding.
| Local factor | Modeled drivers | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Labor and staffing friction |
| -1.1 pts |
| Target-market demand | +0.6 pts | |
| Net local movement | -0.46 pts | |
Net uses full-precision effects; displayed factor and driver rows are rounded.
Franchise evidence
Source material assessed
Item 3 — Litigation
1 image
Item 6 — Other Fees
1 image
Item 7 — Estimated Initial Investment
2 images
Item 12 — Territory
1 image
Item 20 — Outlets and Franchise Information
1 image
Full calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not mistaken for a score-changing effect.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +0.6 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | -1.1 |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Measured; no meaningful local adjustment |
| 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 | 69.54 |
| Published local-market alignment | 69.5 |
Factor calculations use full precision. Contributions and published scores are displayed to one decimal place; ranking order uses the full-precision score.
Evidence confidence
- City Modifier Evidence
- Adequate
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Adequate
- Geographic applicability
- Adequate
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Labor and staffing friction -1.1 pts
- Tested rank range
- #10–#13
#14Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment68.6
Jan-Pro International
Initial investment: $130,000–$421,500
Increase +0.5 pts Target-market demandReduction -2.0 pts Labor and staffing friction
Rank sensitivity: Moderately sensitive
Why it ranks here
Score-changing local factors only. Evidence links open the underlying city finding.
| Local factor | Modeled drivers | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Labor and staffing friction |
| -2.0 pts |
| Target-market demand | +0.5 pts | |
| Referral ecosystem |
| +0.1 pts |
| Net local movement | -1.38 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
1 image
Item 12 — Territory
1 image
Item 20 — Outlets and Franchise Information
1 image
Full calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not mistaken for a score-changing effect.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +0.5 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | -2.0 |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Measured; no meaningful local adjustment |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | +0.1 |
| Territory quality | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 68.62 |
| Published local-market alignment | 68.6 |
Factor calculations use full precision. Contributions and published scores are displayed to one decimal place; ranking order uses the full-precision score.
Evidence confidence
- City Modifier Evidence
- Adequate
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Adequate
- Geographic applicability
- Adequate
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Labor and staffing friction -2.0 pts
- Tested rank range
- #11–#14
No franchise concepts match the selected filters.
Worked score example
How we calculated ZOOM DRAIN
This example uses the same ledger shown for every concept and must reconcile exactly to the published score.
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not mistaken for a score-changing effect.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +0.6 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | +0.4 |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Measured; no meaningful local adjustment |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | +0.3 |
| Territory quality | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 71.30 |
| Published local-market alignment | 71.3 |
Factor calculations use full precision. Contributions and published scores are displayed to one decimal place; ranking order uses the full-precision score.
Starting pointThe operating-model baseline shown in the first ledger row.
InteractionsAny interaction or gate is included in the relevant contribution or calibration row.
Confidence treatmentEvidence confidence is disclosed separately unless the model definition explicitly applies a calibration adjustment.
RoundingFull-precision contributions are summed before the final displayed score is rounded to one decimal place; whole-number results are shown without a trailing decimal.
Factor impact
Which local conditions changed scores or rankings?
We neutralized one factor at a time, recalculated every score, and then measured both absolute score movement and changes in rank order.
Observed model effectPositive local support
Target-market demand
We tested how much of the city’s theoretical customer and business demand remained usable after operating friction.
Why concepts react differently
We applied a measurable adjustment to 13 of 14 concepts. When we neutralized the factor and recalculated the table, 7 concepts changed position. ActionCOACH moved from #9 to #2, the largest movement among concepts directly affected by this factor.
Concepts adjusted13 of 14
Average among affected+0.6 pts
Average across all concepts+0.5 pts
Concepts changing rank7
What we observed
- Population Change From The April 2020 Estimate Base To July 2025 For The Louisville Metro Government Balance1.6 percent
- Jefferson County Population Estimate On July 1, 2025795,222 people
- Jefferson County Building Permits In 20253,001 permits
Concepts helped most
HomeSmilesProperty maintenance services
+1.0 pts
Pillar To Post Home InspectorsHome inspection
+0.9 pts
City WideFacility management
+0.8 pts
Aire ServHVAC installation, repair, and maintenance
+0.7 pts
Mr. RooterPlumbing
+0.7 pts
Observed model effectMixed or model dependent
Property replacement-cycle demand
We compared the age and condition of relevant property systems with the services each concept is actually equipped to provide.
Why concepts react differently
We applied a measurable adjustment to 7 of 14 concepts. When we neutralized the factor and recalculated the table, 10 concepts changed position. ZOOM DRAIN moved from #1 to #4, the largest movement among concepts directly affected by this factor.
Concepts adjusted7 of 14
Average among affected+0.3 pts
Average across all concepts+0.2 pts
Concepts changing rank10
What we observed
- Jefferson County Housing Units On July 1, 2025366,702 housing units
- Share Of Nearly 120,000 Occupied Louisville Metro Rental Units Built Before 1980 Cited In The 2022 Lead Hazard Ordinance Findings65 percent
- Louisville Metro Home Repair Programs Address Critical Residential Repairs Including HVAC, Plumbing, Electrical, Roofing, Exterior Code, And Lead Related Workhvac, plumbing, electrical, roofing, exterior code repairs, lead hazard repairs repair categories
Concepts helped most
ZOOM DRAINDrain and sewer service
+0.4 pts
Mr. RooterPlumbing
+0.4 pts
Aire ServHVAC installation, repair, and maintenance
+0.4 pts
Mister Sparky ElectricElectrical
+0.3 pts
PuroCleanRestoration
+0.3 pts
Observed model effectMixed or model dependent
Labor and staffing friction
We compared each concept’s frontline and specialist staffing requirements with the local labor environment.
Why concepts react differently
We applied a measurable adjustment to 9 of 14 concepts. When we neutralized the factor and recalculated the table, 14 concepts changed position. HomeSmiles moved from #5 to #1, the largest movement among concepts directly affected by this factor.
Concepts adjusted9 of 14
Average among affected-0.7 pts
Average across all concepts-0.5 pts
Concepts changing rank14
What we observed
- Transportation And Material Moving Employment Share In The Louisville Metropolitan Area Versus The United Stateslouisville percent: 13.2; united states percent: 8.8; louisville jobs: 90,400; location quotient group approx: 1.5 percent and jobs
- Laborers And Freight, Stock, And Material Movers In The Louisville Metropolitan Areaemployment: 29,400; location quotient: 2.26; mean hourly wage usd: 21.37 jobs location quotient and usd per hour
- Selected Logistics Adjacent Occupations In The Louisville Metropolitan Areastockers order fillers: employment: 16,410, location quotient: 1.31, mean hourly wage usd: 19.73; heavy tractor trailer drivers: employment: 10,820, location quotient: 1.19, mean hourly wage usd: 30.26; light truck drivers: employment: 6,340, location quotient: 1.46, mean hourly wage usd: 25.84 jobs location quotient and usd per hour
Concepts challenged most
Jan-Pro InternationalCommercial cleaning
-2.0 pts
Rainbow International RestorationRestoration
-1.1 pts
Workout AnytimeFitness
-1.1 pts
PuroCleanRestoration
-1.0 pts
HomeSmilesProperty maintenance services
-0.5 pts
Observed model effectMixed or model dependent
Referral ecosystem
We tested whether the local professional and institutional referral ecosystem materially separated the assessed concepts.
Why concepts react differently
We applied a measurable adjustment to 8 of 14 concepts. When we neutralized the factor and recalculated the table, 12 concepts changed position. City Wide moved from #4 to #7, the largest movement among concepts directly affected by this factor.
Concepts adjusted8 of 14
Average among affected+0.4 pts
Average across all concepts+0.2 pts
Concepts changing rank12
What we observed
- Healthcare Practitioners And Technical Occupations As A Share Of Louisville Metropolitan Employment Versus The United Stateslouisville percent: 7.1; united states percent: 6.3; louisville mean hourly wage usd: 49.94 percent and usd per hour
- Jefferson County Employer Establishments And Employment In 2023employer establishments: 20,164; employment: 470,153; nonemployer establishments: 70,600 businesses and jobs
- University Of Louisville Student Body And Faculty/staff Scale In Fall 2025student body: 25,005; faculty and staff excluding instruction research assistants: 7,075; students with jefferson county permanent residence at first admission: 10,253 people
Concepts helped most
City WideFacility management
+0.6 pts
ActionCOACHBusiness coaching
+0.5 pts
HomeSmilesProperty maintenance services
+0.5 pts
PuroCleanRestoration
+0.4 pts
Rainbow International RestorationRestoration
+0.4 pts
Measured but not differentiating in this concept set
- Competitive environmentNo 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
- 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 ZOOM DRAINModerately sensitive · tested #1–#4
#2 Pillar To Post Home InspectorsHighly sensitive · tested #1–#7
#3 Mr. RooterHighly sensitive · tested #2–#6
#4 City WideHighly sensitive · tested #1–#7
#5 HomeSmilesHighly sensitive · tested #1–#9
#6 Mister Sparky ElectricModerately sensitive · tested #4–#7
#7 Aire ServHighly sensitive · tested #5–#9
#8 FASTSIGNSHighly sensitive · tested #5–#13
#9 ActionCOACHHighly sensitive · tested #2–#12
#10 Tiger AdjustersHighly sensitive · tested #9–#14
#11 PuroCleanModerately sensitive · tested #9–#12
#12 Rainbow International RestorationHighly sensitive · tested #8–#13
#13 Workout AnytimeModerately sensitive · tested #10–#13
#14 Jan-Pro InternationalModerately sensitive · tested #11–#14
Neutralizing a factor removes it from every concept. A concept can move down even when its own score improves because competitors may benefit more.
Score-changing factors
Factors that changed the calculated scores
The graph includes the top 14 concepts by local-alignment score. Only nonzero score contributions are plotted. A factor is removed when every displayed concept received 0.0 points from it. Hover or focus a concept name to highlight all of its remaining data points.
Primary source records by factorTarget-market demand: [4] [5] [6] [21] [22] [23] [24] [1]Property replacement-cycle demand: [8] [7] [5] [18] [1]Competitive environment: [25] [5] [3]Labor and staffing friction: [9] [10] [21] [2] [3]Transportation, routing, and parking: [27] [4] [20] [3] [1]Real estate and site feasibility: [11] [12] [13] [17] [19] [20] [1] [2]Sales and customer acquisition: [25] [5] [26] [21] [3]Referral ecosystem: [21] [22] [5] [26] [3]Territory quality: [13] [17] [11] [12] [5] [18] [3]Regulatory and operating friction: [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [19] [20] [2] [3]
View the chart data as a table
| Concept | Target-market demand | Property replacement-cycle demand | Labor and staffing friction | Referral ecosystem |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| #1 ZOOM DRAIN | +0.6 pts | +0.4 pts | — | +0.3 pts |
| #2 Pillar To Post Home Inspectors | +0.9 pts | +0.2 pts | — | — |
| #3 Mr. Rooter | +0.7 pts | +0.4 pts | — | — |
| #4 City Wide | +0.8 pts | — | -0.4 pts | +0.6 pts |
| #5 HomeSmiles | +1.0 pts | — | -0.5 pts | +0.5 pts |
| #6 Mister Sparky Electric | +0.6 pts | +0.3 pts | — | — |
| #7 Aire Serv | +0.7 pts | +0.4 pts | -0.2 pts | — |
| #8 FASTSIGNS | +0.3 pts | — | — | +0.3 pts |
| #9 ActionCOACH | +0.1 pts | — | -0.1 pts | +0.5 pts |
| #10 Tiger Adjusters | +0.2 pts | — | -0.1 pts | — |
| #11 PuroClean | — | +0.3 pts | -1.0 pts | +0.4 pts |
| #12 Rainbow International Restoration | +0.1 pts | +0.3 pts | -1.1 pts | +0.4 pts |
| #13 Workout Anytime | +0.6 pts | — | -1.1 pts | — |
| #14 Jan-Pro International | +0.5 pts | — | -2.0 pts | +0.1 pts |
Interpretation
How to interpret the result
ZOOM DRAIN, Pillar To Post Home Inspectors, Mr. Rooter led because their operating requirements captured more of the local support from target-market demand while remaining less exposed to labor and staffing friction. The same city condition can help one operating model and constrain another, so score differences should be read through each concept's factor pattern rather than as a universal franchise-quality verdict. The ordering is most assumption-sensitive for Pillar To Post Home Inspectors, Mr. Rooter, City Wide; their ranks move more widely when individual factors are neutralized.
Local evidence assessed for modeling
Category comparisons
Best franchise categories we assessed in Louisville, Kentucky
Category summaries are shown only when at least two concepts qualified. Two-concept comparisons are explicitly labeled as limited.
Limited two-concept comparison
69.7Limited comparison: Restoration franchise opportunities assessed in Louisville, Kentucky
2 Restoration concepts qualified for comparison, with scores ranging from 69.7 to 69.8. PuroClean ranked highest at 69.8. Referral ecosystem added 0.4 points on average among the affected concepts. Labor and staffing friction reduced the exposed concepts by 1 point 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
- 69.7–69.8
- Category average
- 69.7
PuroClean69.8
Rainbow International Restoration69.7
Metric registry
The 29 local metrics behind this analysis
The registry shows each public metric’s raw value, period, geography, source, and its actual role in the compiled analysis.
View all local metrics
| Metric | Raw value | Period | Geography | Role in analysis | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Resident population estimate for Louisville/Jefferson County metro government (balance) on July 1, 2025 | 641,962people | July 1, 2025 population estimate; 2020-2024 ACS-derived QuickFacts; 2022 economic census fields | Louisville/Jefferson County metro government (balance), Kentucky | Context only | [4] |
| Population change from the April 2020 estimate base to July 2025 for the Louisville metro-government balance | 1.6percent | July 1, 2025 population estimate; 2020-2024 ACS-derived QuickFacts; 2022 economic census fields | Louisville/Jefferson County metro government (balance), Kentucky | Used in scoring | [4] |
| Jefferson County population estimate on July 1, 2025 | 795,222people | July 1, 2025 population and housing estimates; 2025 building permits; 2023 business statistics | Jefferson County, Kentucky | Used in scoring | [5] |
| Jefferson County building permits in 2025 | 3,001permits | July 1, 2025 population and housing estimates; 2025 building permits; 2023 business statistics | Jefferson County, Kentucky | Used in scoring | [5] |
| Jefferson County housing units on July 1, 2025 | 366,702housing units | July 1, 2025 population and housing estimates; 2025 building permits; 2023 business statistics | Jefferson County, Kentucky | Used in scoring | [5] |
| Increase in housing units available and affordable to residents earning 30 percent of area median income or less from 2016 to 2021 | 18,400housing units approximate | 2024 update; primary change measures described for 2016-2021 | Louisville-Jefferson County | Context only | [6] |
| Share of nearly 120,000 occupied Louisville Metro rental units built before 1980 cited in the 2022 lead-hazard ordinance findings | 65percent | Louisville Metro rental-housing stock cited in 2022 ordinance findings | Louisville Metro occupied rental units | Used in scoring | [8] |
| Louisville Metro home-repair programs address critical residential repairs including HVAC, plumbing, electrical, roofing, exterior-code, and lead-related work | hvac, plumbing, electrical, roofing, exterior code repairs, lead hazard repairsrepair categories | Current program information and June 2025 Home Repair Needs Assessment | Louisville Metro eligible households | Used in scoring | [7] |
| Transportation and material moving employment share in the Louisville metropolitan area versus the United States | louisville percent: 13.2; united states percent: 8.8; louisville jobs: 90,400; location quotient group approx: 1.5percent and jobs | May 2025 | Louisville/Jefferson County, KY-IN MSA | Used in scoring | [9] |
| Laborers and freight, stock, and material movers in the Louisville metropolitan area | employment: 29,400; location quotient: 2.26; mean hourly wage usd: 21.37jobs location quotient and usd per hour | May 2025 | Louisville/Jefferson County, KY-IN MSA | Used in scoring | [9] |
| Selected logistics-adjacent occupations in the Louisville metropolitan area | stockers order fillers: employment: 16,410, location quotient: 1.31, mean hourly wage usd: 19.73; heavy tractor trailer drivers: employment: 10,820, location quotient: 1.19, mean hourly wage usd: 30.26; light truck drivers: employment: 6,340, location quotient: 1.46, mean hourly wage usd: 25.84jobs location quotient and usd per hour | May 2025 | Louisville/Jefferson County, KY-IN MSA | Used in scoring | [9] |
| UPS Worldport employment and facility scale | greater louisville employment over: 20,000; worldport sqft: 5,200,000; packages per hour over: 400,000; daily flights: 300mixed operational metrics | Current page accessed August 2026 | UPS Worldport and greater Louisville metropolitan region | Used in scoring | [10] |
| Louisville industrial vacancy and product-type conditions in Q1 2026 | overall vacancy percent: 6; warehouse distribution vacancy percent: 6.9; flex rnd asking rent nnn usd psf: 10.22; overall asking rent nnn usd psf: 6.63; flex rnd condition: comparatively tightpercent and usd per square foot | Q1 2026 | Louisville industrial market | Conditional relationship | [11] |
| Louisville office vacancy and asking rates in Q2 2026 | marketwide vacancy percent: 22.1; cbd class a vacancy percent: 28.9; suburban class a vacancy percent: 19.5; cbd class a asking usd psf: 19.57; suburban class a asking usd psf: 22.44percent and usd per square foot | Q2 2026 | Louisville office market and submarkets | Conditional relationship | [12] |
| Permanent signs and signs in local preservation or design overlay districts can require additional Louisville Metro permits or review | permanent sign permit: generally required; local preservation long duration sign: certificate of appropriateness required under stated conditions; design overlay long duration sign: overlay permit required under stated conditionspermit requirements | Current regulations accessed August 2026 | Louisville Metro zoning jurisdiction and designated districts | Conditional relationship | [13] [16] |
| Clifton Preservation District exterior alterations may require Certificate of Appropriateness review depending on project scope | district area acres: 423; review body: Louisville Metro preservation staff or Clifton Architectural Review Committee depending on casedistrict and review structure | Current district guidance accessed August 2026 | Clifton Preservation District, Louisville | Conditional relationship | [14] [15] [3] |
| Louisville Metro identifies 12 independently incorporated cities with their own zoning authority where local regulations may differ | 12independent zoning cities | Current regulations accessed August 2026 | Jefferson County, Kentucky | Conditional relationship | [13] [17] |
| Karst geology in Jefferson County is concentrated in eastern and central portions rather than established as a uniform countywide condition | eastern and central parts have karst geologygeologic scope | County geologic framework; current page accessed August 2026 | Eastern and central Jefferson County, Kentucky | Context only | [18] [1] |
| Jefferson County Louisville MSD FY26 rate increase currently in effect as of August 7, 2026 | 3.9percent | FY2026 rates and capital plan; increase effective September 1, 2025 | Jefferson County Louisville MSD customers | Context only | [19] |
| Approved Jefferson County Louisville MSD FY27 rate increase scheduled to begin September 1, 2026 | 3.9percent | FY2027 board approval July 27, 2026; Jefferson County increase begins September 1, 2026 | Jefferson County Louisville MSD customers | Context only | [20] |
| Current Louisville MSD major infrastructure projects and completion horizons | paddys run replacement total usd: 230,000,000; paddys run expected completion: 2027-spring; morris forman modernization total usd: 285,000,000; morris forman expected completion: 2028usd and completion horizon | FY2026 rates and capital plan; increase effective September 1, 2025 | Louisville MSD service area | Context only | [19] [20] |
| Healthcare practitioners and technical occupations as a share of Louisville metropolitan employment versus the United States | louisville percent: 7.1; united states percent: 6.3; louisville mean hourly wage usd: 49.94percent and usd per hour | May 2025 | Louisville/Jefferson County, KY-IN MSA | Used in scoring | [9] |
| UofL Health regional institutional footprint | team members over: 14,000; hospitals: 9; medical centers: 4; practice locations over: 250; providers over: 1,200organization scale | Current organization profile accessed August 2026 | Louisville and surrounding counties including southern Indiana | Used in scoring | [21] |
| University of Louisville student body and faculty/staff scale in Fall 2025 | student body: 25,005; faculty and staff excluding instruction research assistants: 7,075; students with jefferson county permanent residence at first admission: 10,253people | Fall 2025 enrollment and personnel; FY2025-26 budget | University of Louisville | Used in scoring | [22] |
| Attendance at the 152nd Kentucky Derby on May 2, 2026 | 150,000attendees over | Kentucky Derby Day 2026 | Churchill Downs Racetrack, Louisville | Supports modeled relationship | [23] |
| Combined attendance cited by Louisville Metro for Bourbon and Beyond, Louder Than Life, and Kentucky Kingdom in 2025 | 450,000attendees over | Calendar year 2025 | Louisville Metro named major events and attraction | Supports modeled relationship | [24] |
| Jefferson County employer establishments and employment in 2023 | employer establishments: 20,164; employment: 470,153; nonemployer establishments: 70,600businesses and jobs | July 1, 2025 population and housing estimates; 2025 building permits; 2023 business statistics | Jefferson County, Kentucky | Used in scoring | [5] [25] |
| Louisville Metro procurement uses vendor registration and Bonfire for public opportunities and publishes contract resources | vendor registration, bonfire opportunities, forecasted projects, contract resourcesprocurement process elements | Current procurement process accessed August 2026 | Louisville Metro Government | Context only | [26] |
| Bardstown Road/Baxter Avenue Phase 1 work cited by Louisville Metro is completed rather than an active current corridor disruption | completed 2023project status | Current project/status page accessed August 2026 | Bardstown Road/Baxter Avenue, Louisville | Context only | [27] [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
Measure the city
Collect reusable local metrics with source, period, geography, and confidence fields.
Profile each operating model
Map each franchise to controlled operating attributes and local sensitivities.
Apply scoreable effects
Score only effects whose applicability is established at the report’s current geographic and operating scope.
Preserve conditional effects
Keep location- or territory-dependent issues visible for diligence without automatically changing the score.
Test rank sensitivity
Remove one factor at a time from every concept and rerank using full-precision scores.
Generate public output
Create the ranking, factor-status ledger, visuals, metric registry, and automated quality report from the same data.
How the common baseline becomes a city-specific score
Every concept starts from the same 70.0 reference point, so differences come only from modeled local interactions. In this city, ZOOM DRAIN reached 71.30 after target-market demand +0.6 pts, property replacement-cycle demand +0.4 pts, and referral ecosystem +0.3 pts. The current model caps total local movement at ±18.0 points. The score is not a percentage, probability, or estimate of investment quality.
Precision and materiality
Calculations use full-precision values. Published scores and factor contributions display one decimal place, while ranks use full precision. Effects smaller than 0.1 points are identified as below the publication threshold rather than presented as a meaningful zero.
Score tiers
Tier 1 · Strongest modeled alignment80.0–100.0
Tier 2 · Favorable modeled alignment72.0–<80.0
Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment64.0–<72.0
Tier 4 · Higher-friction modeled alignment0.0–<64.0
How factor rows are classified
Positive local adjustmentNegative local adjustmentMeasured; no meaningful local adjustmentEffect below the publication thresholdNot applicable to this operating modelDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating conditionNot included in the score
What “best” means here
“Best” means the strongest modeled local operating alignment among the franchise concepts assessed on this page.
Model governance
How this report is calculated and corrected
Calculation controls
- Model designer
- Thomas Jepsen
No concept’s final score is manually raised or lowered after calculation. Reports are checked for source scope, classification, arithmetic, unsupported claims, duplication, and readability before publication.
Model history
- Model 0.9.0-calibration · August 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
Local evidence supporting this report
The city page keeps the local sources used for its visible findings and metrics. Franchise-source provenance stays with the underlying franchise research rather than being duplicated across every city page.
- 1Structural Inefficiencies and Asymmetric Franchise Opportunities in Tier-1 U.S. MarketsInternal or supplied research; not publicly accessible.
Used for: Karst geology in Jefferson County is concentrated in eastern and central portions rather than established as a uniform countywide condition
- 2Forensic Audit of Municipal Structural Constraints: Cross-Jurisdictional Barrier AnalysisInternal or supplied research; not publicly accessible.
- 3Franchise data - remake - Combine2 (1)Internal or supplied research; not publicly accessible.
Used for: Clifton Preservation District exterior alterations may require Certificate of Appropriateness review depending on project scope and Bardstown Road/Baxter Avenue Phase 1 work cited by Louisville Metro is completed rather than an active current corridor disruption
- 4QuickFacts: Louisville/Jefferson County metro government (balance), Kentucky
Used for: Resident population estimate for Louisville/Jefferson County metro government (balance) on July 1, 2025 and Population change from the April 2020 estimate base to July 2025 for the Louisville metro-government balance
- 5QuickFacts: Jefferson County, Kentucky
Used for: Jefferson County population estimate on July 1, 2025, Jefferson County building permits in 2025, Jefferson County housing units on July 1, 2025, and Jefferson County employer establishments and employment in 2023
- 6Housing Needs Assessment
Used for: Increase in housing units available and affordable to residents earning 30 percent of area median income or less from 2016 to 2021
- 7Home Repair Programs
Used for: Louisville Metro home-repair programs address critical residential repairs including HVAC, plumbing, electrical, roofing, exterior-code, and lead-related work
- 8Louisville Metro Council File O-134-22 / Ordinance 183, Series 2022
Used for: Share of nearly 120,000 occupied Louisville Metro rental units built before 1980 cited in the 2022 lead-hazard ordinance findings
- 9Occupational Employment and Wages in Louisville/Jefferson County, KY-IN - May 2025
Used for: Transportation and material moving employment share in the Louisville metropolitan area versus the United States, Laborers and freight, stock, and material movers in the Louisville metropolitan area, Selected logistics-adjacent occupations in the Louisville metropolitan area, and Healthcare practitioners and technical occupations as a share of Louisville metropolitan employment versus the United States
- 10UPS Worldport
Used for: UPS Worldport employment and facility scale
- 11Louisville Industrial Report | 26 Q1
Used for: Louisville industrial vacancy and product-type conditions in Q1 2026
- 12Louisville Office Figures Q2 2026
Used for: Louisville office vacancy and asking rates in Q2 2026
- 13Sign Regulations
Used for: Permanent signs and signs in local preservation or design overlay districts can require additional Louisville Metro permits or review and Louisville Metro identifies 12 independently incorporated cities with their own zoning authority where local regulations may differ
- 14Clifton Preservation District
Used for: Clifton Preservation District exterior alterations may require Certificate of Appropriateness review depending on project scope
- 15Certificate of Appropriateness Review Process
Used for: Clifton Preservation District exterior alterations may require Certificate of Appropriateness review depending on project scope
- 16Design Overlay Districts
Used for: Permanent signs and signs in local preservation or design overlay districts can require additional Louisville Metro permits or review
- 17Land Development Code
Used for: Louisville Metro identifies 12 independently incorporated cities with their own zoning authority where local regulations may differ
- 18Jefferson County, Kentucky - Geologic and Environmental Issues
Used for: Karst geology in Jefferson County is concentrated in eastern and central portions rather than established as a uniform countywide condition
- 19MSD Board Reduces FY26 Rate Increase After Community Input
Used for: Jefferson County Louisville MSD FY26 rate increase currently in effect as of August 7, 2026 and Current Louisville MSD major infrastructure projects and completion horizons
- 20Understanding Louisville MSD Rate Increases
Used for: Approved Jefferson County Louisville MSD FY27 rate increase scheduled to begin September 1, 2026 and Current Louisville MSD major infrastructure projects and completion horizons
- 21About UofL Health
Used for: UofL Health regional institutional footprint
- 22Quick Facts
Used for: University of Louisville student body and faculty/staff scale in Fall 2025
- 23Golden Tempo Wins the 152nd Running of the Kentucky Derby Presented by Woodford Reserve
Used for: Attendance at the 152nd Kentucky Derby on May 2, 2026
- 24Mayor Greenberg's 2025 Accomplishments
Used for: Combined attendance cited by Louisville Metro for Bourbon and Beyond, Louder Than Life, and Kentucky Kingdom in 2025
- 25County Business Patterns: 2023
Used for: Jefferson County employer establishments and employment in 2023
- 26Procurement
Used for: Louisville Metro procurement uses vendor registration and Bonfire for public opportunities and publishes contract resources
- 27Transportation Plans and Studies
Used for: Bardstown Road/Baxter Avenue Phase 1 work cited by Louisville Metro is completed rather than an active current corridor disruption
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.