70.8 average across 2 concepts
Local operating-model alignment analysis
Best Franchise Opportunities We Assessed in Rochester, New York
We compared 14 franchise concepts for Rochester, New York. Replacement and repair demand was a leading positive mechanism. Territory and submarket uncertainty was a leading operating constraint.
What “best” means in this ranking“Best” means the strongest modeled local operating alignment among the franchise concepts assessed on this page. It does not estimate earnings or determine which franchise is best for a particular candidate.
14Concepts evaluated
26Sources used
20Primary sources
35Local metrics
Evaluation set
Why these concepts were evaluated
This is not a ranking of every franchise that may be offered in the city.
14Concepts assessed
Concepts were included when enough operating-model information existed to assign a provisional local-sensitivity profile. Unresolved inputs reduce confidence or remain conditional rather than automatically excluding a concept.
A brand’s participation in our referral network does not add points or change its position.
City-level conclusions
What stood out in our assessment
1.2 points average among 7 affected concepts
0.4 points average reduction among 14 affected concepts
Tested rank range spans 8 positions
Executive conclusion
What the ranking means for Rochester, New York
City Wide, Rainbow International Restoration, and PuroClean produced the highest modeled local-alignment scores in the evaluated set. Replacement and repair demand was the strongest positive scored mechanism among 7 exposed concepts, adding 0.7 points on average. One important asymmetry was that the same local condition supported replacement and repair demand while also creating legacy-system service complexity. City Wide was especially relationship-sensitive: removing healthcare institutional service demand moved it from #1 to #3 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 | 71.8Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +1.3 ptsTarget-market demand | -0.1 ptsTransportation, routing, and parking | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 2 | Rainbow International RestorationRestorationInvestment: $185,336–$351,900 | 70.8Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +1.4 ptsProperty replacement-cycle demand | -0.5 ptsTerritory quality | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 3 | PuroCleanRestorationInvestment: $54,575–$262,145 | 70.7Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +1.4 ptsProperty replacement-cycle demand | -0.5 ptsTerritory quality | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 4 | ActionCOACHBusiness coachingInvestment: $71,668–$303,513 | 70.5Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +0.5 ptsReferral ecosystem | -0.1 ptsTerritory quality | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 5 | Jan-Pro InternationalCommercial cleaningInvestment: $130,000–$421,500 | 70.4Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +1.0 ptsTarget-market demand | -0.4 ptsTransportation, routing, and parking | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 6 | HomeSmilesProperty maintenance servicesInvestment: $148,110–$201,800 | 70.2Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +0.5 ptsTarget-market demand | -0.4 ptsTerritory quality | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 7 | Aire ServHVAC installation, repair, and maintenanceInvestment: $113,308–$271,708 | 70.0Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +1.8 ptsProperty replacement-cycle demand | -0.8 ptsLabor and staffing friction | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 8 | Pillar To Post Home InspectorsHome inspectionInvestment: $102,690–$134,290 | 69.9Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +0.8 ptsProperty replacement-cycle demand | -0.4 ptsTerritory quality | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 9 | FASTSIGNSSigns and graphicsInvestment: $231,226–$386,285 | 69.7Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +0.5 ptsTarget-market demand | -0.5 ptsTerritory quality | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 10 | Tiger AdjustersPublic insurance adjustingInvestment: $43,050–$159,500 | 69.5Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | No material positive local adjustment | -0.3 ptsTerritory quality | Moderate evidence confidence |
Conditions that changed the analysis
What mattered most in Rochester, New York
Predominantly old housing stock with documented deferred-maintenance exposure
The same local condition created complementary effects: replacement and repair demand supported exposed concepts while legacy-system service complexity constrained others. [6] [2]
Zoning, preservation review, winter parking restrictions, and institutional geography vary materially by Rochester submarket
This relationship affected 14 concepts and reduced 0.4 points on average among those exposed. Local evidence: Designated Parking Emergency Streets: 65 streets. [9] [3] [16]
Monroe County has 17,484 employer establishments and materially higher household income than Rochester city, while the city has a lower household-income level and higher poverty rate.
County or metropolitan business scale can support B2B opportunity but should not be substituted for Rochester-city resident discretionary spending or for a specific trade area. Institutional demand, resident purchasing power, and site-level access need separate treatment. [5] [4]
Evidence behind the city mechanisms
Predominantly old housing stock with documented deferred-maintenance exposure3 local facts · 2 modeled effects · 2 sources
- Housing units older than 1978 in the City housing-quality review: 90 percent [6] [2]
- City housing-quality review links older stock to substantial deferred maintenance, especially in lower-demand areas: substantial deferred maintenance identified qualitative condition [6]
- Housing units dating from before 1940 in the City housing-quality review: nearly half qualitative share [6] [2]
Replacement and repair demandProperty replacement-cycle demand
Legacy-system service complexityLabor and staffing friction
Recurring cold, snow, lake effect, and frequent winter thaws increase weather-exposure maintenance demand1 modeled effect
Freeze-thaw repair demandProperty replacement-cycle demand
Large healthcare and academic-medical institutional base supports institution-facing service demand1 modeled effect
Healthcare institutional service demandTarget-market demand
Large institutional and professional base creates referral-network opportunity while formal public procurement can lengthen institutional sales cycles3 local facts · 2 modeled effects · 3 sources
- Healthcare practitioners and technical occupations in the Rochester metropolitan area in May 2025: employment: 36,730; location quotient: 1.18; mean hourly wage usd: 47.85 employment location quotient and wage [12]
- Employer establishments in Monroe County in 2023: 17,484 establishments [5]
- City procurement uses competitive bidding for applicable purchases and public work and RFP processes for professional services; professional agreements over $10,000 require City Council approval: competitive bidding: yes; professional services rfp: yes; council approval threshold usd: 10,000; electronic bid service: BidNet Direct process elements [22]
Professional and institutional relationship densityReferral ecosystem
Institutional procurement-cycle frictionSales and customer acquisition
Zoning, preservation review, winter parking restrictions, and institutional geography vary materially by Rochester submarket1 modeled effect
Territory and submarket uncertaintyTerritory quality
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 alignment71.8
City Wide
Initial investment: $229,729–$410,730
Increase +1.3 pts Target-market demandReduction -0.1 pts Transportation, routing, and parking
Rank sensitivity: Moderately sensitive
Why it ranks here
Score-changing local factors only. Evidence links open the underlying city finding.
| Local factor | Modeled drivers | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Target-market demand |
| +1.3 pts |
| Referral ecosystem |
| +0.6 pts |
| Transportation, routing, and parking |
| -0.1 pts |
| Territory quality |
| -0.1 pts |
| Net local movement | +1.78 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 | +1.3 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Not included in the score |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | -0.1 |
| 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 | +0.6 |
| Territory quality | -0.1 |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 71.78 |
| Published local-market alignment | 71.8 |
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
- Strong
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Strong
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Target-market demand +1.3 pts
- Tested rank range
- #1–#3
#2Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment70.8
Rainbow International Restoration
Initial investment: $185,336–$351,900
Increase +1.4 pts Property replacement-cycle demandReduction -0.5 pts Territory quality
Rank sensitivity: Highly sensitive
Why it ranks here
Score-changing local factors only. Evidence links open the underlying city finding.
| Local factor | Modeled drivers | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Property replacement-cycle demand | +1.4 pts | |
| Territory quality |
| -0.5 pts |
| Transportation, routing, and parking |
| -0.4 pts |
| Referral ecosystem |
| +0.4 pts |
| Labor and staffing friction |
| -0.3 pts |
| Target-market demand |
| +0.2 pts |
| Net local movement | +0.83 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 | +0.2 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | +1.4 |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | -0.3 |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | -0.4 |
| 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 | -0.5 |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 70.83 |
| 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
- Adequate
- Factor Research Coverage
- Strong
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Strong
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Property replacement-cycle demand +1.4 pts
- Tested rank range
- #2–#7
#3Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment70.7
PuroClean
Initial investment: $54,575–$262,145
Increase +1.4 pts Property replacement-cycle demandReduction -0.5 pts Territory quality
Rank sensitivity: Highly sensitive
Why it ranks here
Score-changing local factors only. Evidence links open the underlying city finding.
| Local factor | Modeled drivers | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Property replacement-cycle demand | +1.4 pts | |
| Territory quality |
| -0.5 pts |
| Referral ecosystem |
| +0.4 pts |
| Transportation, routing, and parking |
| -0.3 pts |
| Labor and staffing friction |
| -0.3 pts |
| Net local movement | +0.74 pts | |
Net uses full-precision effects; displayed factor and driver rows are rounded.
Franchise evidence
Source material assessed
Item 3 — Litigation
1 image
Item 6 — Other Fees
1 image
Item 7 — Estimated Initial Investment
2 images
Item 12 — Territory
1 image
Item 20 — Outlets and Franchise Information
1 image
Full calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not mistaken for a score-changing effect.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | +1.4 |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | -0.3 |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | -0.3 |
| 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 | -0.5 |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 70.74 |
| Published local-market alignment | 70.7 |
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
- Strong
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Strong
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Property replacement-cycle demand +1.4 pts
- Tested rank range
- #1–#8
#4Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment70.5
ActionCOACH
Initial investment: $71,668–$303,513
Increase +0.5 pts Referral ecosystemReduction -0.1 pts Territory quality
Rank sensitivity: Highly sensitive
Why it ranks here
Score-changing local factors only. Evidence links open the underlying city finding.
| Local factor | Modeled drivers | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Referral ecosystem |
| +0.5 pts |
| Target-market demand |
| +0.2 pts |
| Territory quality |
| -0.1 pts |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Institutional procurement-cycle friction EvidenceConditional — applicability must be confirmed | Not scored |
| Net local movement | +0.55 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 | +0.2 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Not included in the score |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Not applicable to this operating model |
| 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 | +0.5 |
| Territory quality | -0.1 |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 70.55 |
| 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
- Strong
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Strong
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Referral ecosystem +0.5 pts
- Tested rank range
- #2–#6
#5Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment70.4
Jan-Pro International
Initial investment: $130,000–$421,500
Increase +1.0 pts Target-market demandReduction -0.4 pts Transportation, routing, and parking
Rank sensitivity: Highly sensitive
Why it ranks here
Score-changing local factors only. Evidence links open the underlying city finding.
| Local factor | Modeled drivers | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Target-market demand |
| +1.0 pts |
| Transportation, routing, and parking |
| -0.4 pts |
| Territory quality |
| -0.3 pts |
| Referral ecosystem |
| +0.1 pts |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Institutional procurement-cycle friction EvidenceConditional — applicability must be confirmed | Not scored |
| Net local movement | +0.42 pts | |
Net uses full-precision effects; displayed factor and driver rows are rounded.
Franchise evidence
Source material assessed
Item 3 — Litigation
1 image
Item 6 — Other Fees
1 image
Item 7 — Estimated Initial Investment
1 image
Item 12 — Territory
1 image
Item 20 — Outlets and Franchise Information
1 image
Full calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not mistaken for a score-changing effect.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +1.0 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Not included in the score |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | -0.4 |
| 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 | +0.1 |
| Territory quality | -0.3 |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 70.42 |
| Published local-market alignment | 70.4 |
Factor calculations use full precision. Contributions and published scores are displayed to one decimal place; ranking order uses the full-precision score.
Evidence confidence
- City Modifier Evidence
- Adequate
- Factor Research Coverage
- Strong
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Strong
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Target-market demand +1.0 pts
- Tested rank range
- #3–#9
#6Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment70.2
HomeSmiles
Initial investment: $148,110–$201,800
Increase +0.5 pts Target-market demandReduction -0.4 pts Territory quality
Rank sensitivity: Highly sensitive
Why it ranks here
Score-changing local factors only. Evidence links open the underlying city finding.
| Local factor | Modeled drivers | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Target-market demand |
| +0.5 pts |
| Referral ecosystem |
| +0.5 pts |
| Territory quality |
| -0.4 pts |
| Transportation, routing, and parking |
| -0.4 pts |
| Net local movement | +0.16 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 | +0.5 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Not included in the score |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | -0.4 |
| 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 | -0.4 |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 70.16 |
| Published local-market alignment | 70.2 |
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
- Adequate
- Factor Research Coverage
- Strong
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Adequate
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Strong
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Target-market demand +0.5 pts
- Tested rank range
- #4–#8
#7Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment70.0
Aire Serv
Initial investment: $113,308–$271,708
Increase +1.8 pts Property replacement-cycle demandReduction -0.8 pts Labor and staffing friction
Rank sensitivity: Highly sensitive
Why it ranks here
Score-changing local factors only. Evidence links open the underlying city finding.
| Local factor | Modeled drivers | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Property replacement-cycle demand | +1.8 pts | |
| Labor and staffing friction |
| -0.8 pts |
| Transportation, routing, and parking |
| -0.5 pts |
| Territory quality |
| -0.4 pts |
| Net local movement | +0.03 pts | |
Net uses full-precision effects; displayed factor and driver rows are rounded.
Franchise evidence
Source material assessed
Item 3 — Litigation
1 image
Item 6 — Other Fees
1 image
Item 7 — Estimated Initial Investment
1 image
Item 12 — Territory
1 image
Item 20 — Outlets and Franchise Information
1 image
Item 19 — Financial Performance Representation
1 image
Public company data assessed
1 sourceFull calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not mistaken for a score-changing effect.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | +1.8 |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | -0.8 |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | -0.5 |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | Not included in the score |
| Territory quality | -0.4 |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 70.03 |
| Published local-market alignment | 70.0 |
Factor calculations use full precision. Contributions and published scores are displayed to one decimal place; ranking order uses the full-precision score.
Evidence confidence
- City Modifier Evidence
- Adequate
- Factor Research Coverage
- Strong
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Adequate
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Strong
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Property replacement-cycle demand +1.8 pts
- Tested rank range
- #4–#12
#8Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment69.9
Pillar To Post Home Inspectors
Initial investment: $102,690–$134,290
Increase +0.8 pts Property replacement-cycle demandReduction -0.4 pts Territory quality
Rank sensitivity: Highly sensitive
Why it ranks here
Score-changing local factors only. Evidence links open the underlying city finding.
| Local factor | Modeled drivers | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Property replacement-cycle demand | +0.8 pts | |
| Territory quality |
| -0.4 pts |
| Transportation, routing, and parking |
| -0.4 pts |
| Labor and staffing friction |
| -0.1 pts |
| Net local movement | -0.08 pts | |
Net uses full-precision effects; displayed factor and driver rows are rounded.
Franchise evidence
Source material assessed
Item 3 — Litigation
1 image
Item 6 — Other Fees
1 image
Item 7 — Estimated Initial Investment
2 images
Item 12 — Territory
1 image
Item 19 — Financial Performance Representation
1 image
Public company data assessed
2 sourcesFull calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not mistaken for a score-changing effect.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | +0.8 |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | -0.1 |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | -0.4 |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | Not included in the score |
| Territory quality | -0.4 |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 69.92 |
| Published local-market alignment | 69.9 |
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
- Strong
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Strong
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Property replacement-cycle demand +0.8 pts
- Tested rank range
- #6–#10
#9Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment69.7
FASTSIGNS
Initial investment: $231,226–$386,285
Increase +0.5 pts Target-market demandReduction -0.5 pts Territory quality
Rank sensitivity: Highly sensitive
Why it ranks here
Score-changing local factors only. Evidence links open the underlying city finding.
| Local factor | Modeled drivers | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Territory quality |
| -0.5 pts |
| Transportation, routing, and parking |
| -0.5 pts |
| Target-market demand |
| +0.5 pts |
| Referral ecosystem |
| +0.3 pts |
| Net local movement | -0.27 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 | +0.5 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Not included in the score |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | -0.5 |
| 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 | +0.3 |
| Territory quality | -0.5 |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 69.73 |
| 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
- Strong
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Strong
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Territory quality -0.5 pts
- Tested rank range
- #5–#12
#10Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment69.5
Tiger Adjusters
Initial investment: $43,050–$159,500
No material positive local adjustment identifiedReduction -0.3 pts Territory quality
Rank sensitivity: Highly sensitive
Why it ranks here
Score-changing local factors only. Evidence links open the underlying city finding.
| Local factor | Modeled drivers | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Territory quality |
| -0.3 pts |
| Transportation, routing, and parking |
| -0.2 pts |
| Net local movement | -0.48 pts | |
Net uses full-precision effects; displayed factor and driver rows are rounded.
Franchise evidence
Source material assessed
Item 3 — Litigation
1 image
Item 6 — Other Fees
1 image
Item 7 — Estimated Initial Investment
2 images
Item 12 — Territory
1 image
Item 19 — Financial Performance Representation
1 image
Public company data assessed
1 sourceFull calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not mistaken for a score-changing effect.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Not included in the score |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | -0.2 |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | Not included in the score |
| Territory quality | -0.3 |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 69.52 |
| 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
- Strong
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Adequate
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Strong
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Territory quality -0.3 pts
- Tested rank range
- #6–#13
#11Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment69.4
ZOOM DRAIN
Initial investment: $266,250–$570,500
Increase +0.8 pts Property replacement-cycle demandReduction -0.7 pts Labor and staffing friction
Rank sensitivity: Highly sensitive
Why it ranks here
Score-changing local factors only. Evidence links open the underlying city finding.
| Local factor | Modeled drivers | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Property replacement-cycle demand |
| +0.8 pts |
| Labor and staffing friction |
| -0.7 pts |
| Transportation, routing, and parking |
| -0.6 pts |
| Territory quality |
| -0.5 pts |
| Referral ecosystem |
| +0.3 pts |
| Net local movement | -0.61 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 | +0.8 |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | -0.7 |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | -0.6 |
| 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 | -0.5 |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 69.39 |
| Published local-market alignment | 69.4 |
Factor calculations use full precision. Contributions and published scores are displayed to one decimal place; ranking order uses the full-precision score.
Evidence confidence
- City Modifier Evidence
- Adequate
- Factor Research Coverage
- Strong
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Strong
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Property replacement-cycle demand +0.8 pts
- Tested rank range
- #8–#12
#12Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment69.2
Mister Sparky Electric
Increase +1.0 pts Property replacement-cycle demandReduction -0.8 pts Labor and staffing friction
Rank sensitivity: Highly sensitive
Why it ranks here
Score-changing local factors only. Evidence links open the underlying city finding.
| Local factor | Modeled drivers | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Property replacement-cycle demand | +1.0 pts | |
| Labor and staffing friction |
| -0.8 pts |
| Transportation, routing, and parking |
| -0.5 pts |
| Territory quality |
| -0.4 pts |
| Net local movement | -0.75 pts | |
Net uses full-precision effects; displayed factor and driver rows are rounded.
Full calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not mistaken for a score-changing effect.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | +1.0 |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | -0.8 |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | -0.5 |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | Not included in the score |
| Territory quality | -0.4 |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 69.25 |
| Published local-market alignment | 69.2 |
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
- Adequate
- Factor Research Coverage
- Strong
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Strong
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Property replacement-cycle demand +1.0 pts
- Tested rank range
- #9–#13
#13Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment69.0
Mr. Rooter
Initial investment: $152,900–$298,675
Increase +0.8 pts Property replacement-cycle demandReduction -0.7 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 |
|---|---|---|
| Property replacement-cycle demand |
| +0.8 pts |
| Labor and staffing friction |
| -0.7 pts |
| Transportation, routing, and parking |
| -0.6 pts |
| Territory quality |
| -0.5 pts |
| Net local movement | -0.98 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 | +0.8 |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | -0.7 |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | -0.6 |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | Not included in the score |
| Territory quality | -0.5 |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 69.02 |
| Published local-market alignment | 69.0 |
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
- Strong
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Strong
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Property replacement-cycle demand +0.8 pts
- Tested rank range
- #11–#14
#14Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment68.8
Workout Anytime
Initial investment: $1,060,850–$1,840,550
No material positive local adjustment identifiedReduction -0.9 pts Territory quality
Rank sensitivity: Highly sensitive
Why it ranks here
Score-changing local factors only. Evidence links open the underlying city finding.
| Local factor | Modeled drivers | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Territory quality |
| -0.9 pts |
| Transportation, routing, and parking |
| -0.3 pts |
| Net local movement | -1.23 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 | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Not included in the score |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | -0.3 |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | Not included in the score |
| Territory quality | -0.9 |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 68.77 |
| Published local-market alignment | 68.8 |
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
- Strong
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Strong
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Territory quality -0.9 pts
- Tested rank range
- #10–#14
No franchise concepts match the selected filters.
Worked score example
How we calculated City Wide
This example uses the same ledger shown for every concept and must reconcile exactly to the published score.
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not mistaken for a score-changing effect.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +1.3 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Not included in the score |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | -0.1 |
| 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 | +0.6 |
| Territory quality | -0.1 |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 71.78 |
| Published local-market alignment | 71.8 |
Factor calculations use full precision. Contributions and published scores are displayed to one decimal place; ranking order uses the full-precision score.
Starting pointThe operating-model baseline shown in the first ledger row.
InteractionsAny interaction or gate is included in the relevant contribution or calibration row.
Confidence treatmentEvidence confidence is disclosed separately unless the model definition explicitly applies a calibration adjustment.
RoundingFull-precision contributions are summed before the final displayed score is rounded to one decimal place; whole-number results are shown without a trailing decimal.
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, 10 concepts changed position. Jan-Pro International moved from #5 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+0.3 pts
Concepts changing rank10
What we observed
- Health Care And Social Assistance Receipts/revenue In 20227,201,382 thousand usd
- Healthcare Practitioners And Technical Occupations In The Rochester Metropolitan Area In May 2025employment: 36,730; location quotient: 1.18; mean hourly wage usd: 47.85 employment location quotient and wage
- University Of Rochester Student Enrollment In The 2025 2026 Common Data Set11,211 students
Concepts helped most
City WideFacility management
+1.3 pts
Jan-Pro InternationalCommercial cleaning
+1.0 pts
FASTSIGNSSigns and graphics
+0.5 pts
HomeSmilesProperty maintenance services
+0.5 pts
Rainbow International RestorationRestoration
+0.2 pts
Observed model effectPositive local support
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, 12 concepts changed position. Rainbow International Restoration moved from #2 to #7, the largest movement among concepts directly affected by this factor.
Concepts adjusted7 of 14
Average among affected+1.2 pts
Average across all concepts+0.6 pts
Concepts changing rank12
What we observed
- City Housing Quality Review Links Older Stock To Substantial Deferred Maintenance, Especially In Lower Demand Areassubstantial deferred maintenance identified qualitative condition
- Rochester Winters Are Cold, Snowy, And Changeable With Frequent Thaws And Substantial Lake Effect Snowfallwinter character: cold cloudy snowy; frequent thaws: yes; lake effect share of annual snowfall: about half; typical total snowfall in rochester in: about 90 climate characteristics
Concepts helped most
Aire ServHVAC installation, repair, and maintenance
+1.8 pts
PuroCleanRestoration
+1.4 pts
Rainbow International RestorationRestoration
+1.4 pts
Mister Sparky ElectricElectrical
+1.0 pts
ZOOM DRAINDrain and sewer service
+0.8 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 7 of 14 concepts. When we neutralized the factor and recalculated the table, 10 concepts changed position. Aire Serv moved from #7 to #4, the largest movement among concepts directly affected by this factor.
Concepts adjusted7 of 14
Average among affected-0.5 pts
Average across all concepts-0.3 pts
Concepts changing rank10
Concepts challenged most
Mister Sparky ElectricElectrical
-0.8 pts
Aire ServHVAC installation, repair, and maintenance
-0.8 pts
Mr. RooterPlumbing
-0.7 pts
ZOOM DRAINDrain and sewer service
-0.7 pts
PuroCleanRestoration
-0.3 pts
Observed model effectMixed or model dependent
Transportation, routing, and parking
We recalculated route-dependent models after accounting for travel corridors, parking, and the number of productive stops they require.
Why concepts react differently
We applied a measurable adjustment to 13 of 14 concepts. When we neutralized the factor and recalculated the table, 6 concepts changed position. Jan-Pro International moved from #5 to #4, the largest movement among concepts directly affected by this factor.
Concepts adjusted13 of 14
Average among affected-0.4 pts
Average across all concepts-0.4 pts
Concepts changing rank6
What we observed
- Snow Plans Can Require Alternate Side Parking Or Prohibit Parking On Designated Routes And Announced Residential Streetsplowing day alternate side required: yes; snow emergency no parking on emergency routes: yes; parking emergency announced residential streets prohibited: yes; general max hours without other rule: 12 rule elements
- Designated Parking Emergency Streets65 streets
- Residential Plows Are Generally Mobilized At Three Inches Of New Snow; A Routine Residential Plow Run Is About Eight Miles And Five Hoursmobilization snow inches: 3; average residential plow run miles: 8; routine run hours: 5 mixed winter operations metrics
Concepts challenged most
Mr. RooterPlumbing
-0.6 pts
ZOOM DRAINDrain and sewer service
-0.6 pts
Aire ServHVAC installation, repair, and maintenance
-0.5 pts
FASTSIGNSSigns and graphics
-0.5 pts
Mister Sparky ElectricElectrical
-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, 9 concepts changed position. ActionCOACH moved from #4 to #6, 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 rank9
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
Observed model effectMixed or model dependent
Territory quality
We measured whether the territory structure could support the required customer density, service radius, and operating model.
Why concepts react differently
We applied a measurable adjustment to 14 of 14 concepts. When we neutralized the factor and recalculated the table, 8 concepts changed position. ActionCOACH moved from #4 to #6, the largest movement among concepts directly affected by this factor.
Concepts adjusted14 of 14
Average among affected-0.4 pts
Average across all concepts-0.4 pts
Concepts changing rank8
What we observed
- Designated Parking Emergency Streets65 streets
- University Of Rochester Current Employment Scale30,000 employees minimum
- The Final Proposed Updated Zoning Code And Map Were Released In April 2026 And Remained In The Review Process Rather Than Adopted As The Current Codeproposal under review regulatory project stage
Concepts challenged most
Workout AnytimeFitness
-0.9 pts
FASTSIGNSSigns and graphics
-0.5 pts
ZOOM DRAINDrain and sewer service
-0.5 pts
Mr. RooterPlumbing
-0.5 pts
PuroCleanRestoration
-0.5 pts
Measured but not differentiating in this concept set
- Competitive environmentNo material score adjustment
- Real estate and site feasibilityNo material score adjustment
- Sales and customer acquisitionNo material score adjustment
- Regulatory and operating frictionNo material score adjustment
Rank stability
Which positions depend most on individual assumptions?
The line shows the best and worst rank reached when one factor was removed from every concept. A narrow range indicates a more stable position.
#1 City WideModerately sensitive · tested #1–#3
#2 Rainbow International RestorationHighly sensitive · tested #2–#7
#3 PuroCleanHighly sensitive · tested #1–#8
#4 ActionCOACHHighly sensitive · tested #2–#6
#5 Jan-Pro InternationalHighly sensitive · tested #3–#9
#6 HomeSmilesHighly sensitive · tested #4–#8
#7 Aire ServHighly sensitive · tested #4–#12
#8 Pillar To Post Home InspectorsHighly sensitive · tested #6–#10
#9 FASTSIGNSHighly sensitive · tested #5–#12
#10 Tiger AdjustersHighly sensitive · tested #6–#13
#11 ZOOM DRAINHighly sensitive · tested #8–#12
#12 Mister Sparky ElectricHighly sensitive · tested #9–#13
#13 Mr. RooterModerately sensitive · tested #11–#14
#14 Workout AnytimeHighly sensitive · tested #10–#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] [6] [15] [16] [12] [14] [2] [26]Property replacement-cycle demand: [6] [7] [4] [2]Competitive environment: [5] [26] [4] [3]Labor and staffing friction: [12] [13] [14] [6] [16] [1] [2]Transportation, routing, and parking: [8] [9] [10] [7] [11] [4] [3] [1]Real estate and site feasibility: [25] [21] [8] [2] [3]Sales and customer acquisition: [22] [23] [24] [16] [12] [5] [26]Referral ecosystem: [16] [15] [12] [5] [22] [24] [2]Territory quality: [17] [18] [19] [21] [8] [9] [16] [3]Regulatory and operating friction: [17] [18] [19] [20] [21] [13] [22] [1] [3]
View the chart data as a table
| Concept | Target-market demand | Property replacement-cycle demand | Labor and staffing friction | Transportation, routing, and parking | Referral ecosystem | Territory quality |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| #1 City Wide | +1.3 pts | — | — | -0.1 pts | +0.6 pts | -0.1 pts |
| #2 Rainbow International Restoration | +0.2 pts | +1.4 pts | -0.3 pts | -0.4 pts | +0.4 pts | -0.5 pts |
| #3 PuroClean | — | +1.4 pts | -0.3 pts | -0.3 pts | +0.4 pts | -0.5 pts |
| #4 ActionCOACH | +0.2 pts | — | — | — | +0.5 pts | -0.1 pts |
| #5 Jan-Pro International | +1.0 pts | — | — | -0.4 pts | +0.1 pts | -0.3 pts |
| #6 HomeSmiles | +0.5 pts | — | — | -0.4 pts | +0.5 pts | -0.4 pts |
| #7 Aire Serv | — | +1.8 pts | -0.8 pts | -0.5 pts | — | -0.4 pts |
| #8 Pillar To Post Home Inspectors | — | +0.8 pts | -0.1 pts | -0.4 pts | — | -0.4 pts |
| #9 FASTSIGNS | +0.5 pts | — | — | -0.5 pts | +0.3 pts | -0.5 pts |
| #10 Tiger Adjusters | — | — | — | -0.2 pts | — | -0.3 pts |
| #11 ZOOM DRAIN | — | +0.8 pts | -0.7 pts | -0.6 pts | +0.3 pts | -0.5 pts |
| #12 Mister Sparky Electric | — | +1.0 pts | -0.8 pts | -0.5 pts | — | -0.5 pts |
| #13 Mr. Rooter | — | +0.8 pts | -0.7 pts | -0.6 pts | — | -0.5 pts |
| #14 Workout Anytime | — | — | — | -0.3 pts | — | -0.9 pts |
Interpretation
How to interpret the result
City Wide, Rainbow International Restoration, PuroClean led because their operating requirements captured more of the local support from property replacement-cycle demand while remaining less exposed to territory quality. The same city condition can help one operating model and constrain another, so score differences should be read through each concept's factor pattern rather than as a universal franchise-quality verdict. The ordering is most assumption-sensitive for Rainbow International Restoration, PuroClean, ActionCOACH; their ranks move more widely when individual factors are neutralized.
Local evidence assessed for modeling
Category comparisons
Best franchise categories we assessed in Rochester, New York
Category summaries are shown only when at least two concepts qualified. Two-concept comparisons are explicitly labeled as limited.
Limited two-concept comparison
70.8Best Restoration franchise opportunities we assessed in Rochester, New York
2 Restoration concepts qualified for comparison, with scores ranging from 70.7 to 70.8. Rainbow International Restoration ranked highest at 70.8. Property replacement-cycle demand added 1.4 points on average among the affected concepts. Territory quality reduced the exposed concepts by 0.5 points on average.
Interpret cautiously: A 0.1-point spread is too small to support a strong brand-level conclusion from city alignment alone.
- Concepts compared
- 2
- Score range
- 70.7–70.8
- Category average
- 70.8
Rainbow International Restoration70.8
PuroClean70.7
Metric registry
The 35 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 | 206,108people | July 1, 2025 population estimate; 2020-2024 ACS-derived characteristics; 2022 Economic Census measures | Rochester, New York | Context only | [4] |
| Population change from the April 2020 estimate base to July 2025 | -2.4percent | July 1, 2025 population estimate; 2020-2024 ACS-derived characteristics; 2022 Economic Census measures | Rochester, New York | Context only | [4] |
| Households, 2020-2024 | 93,261households | July 1, 2025 population estimate; 2020-2024 ACS-derived characteristics; 2022 Economic Census measures | Rochester, New York | Context only | [4] |
| Owner-occupied housing unit rate, 2020-2024 | 38.1percent | July 1, 2025 population estimate; 2020-2024 ACS-derived characteristics; 2022 Economic Census measures | Rochester, New York | Context only | [4] |
| Median household income in 2024 dollars, 2020-2024 | 47,213usd | July 1, 2025 population estimate; 2020-2024 ACS-derived characteristics; 2022 Economic Census measures | Rochester, New York | Supports research conclusion | [4] |
| Persons in poverty | 27.8percent | July 1, 2025 population estimate; 2020-2024 ACS-derived characteristics; 2022 Economic Census measures | Rochester, New York | Supports research conclusion | [4] |
| Health care and social assistance receipts/revenue in 2022 | 7,201,382thousand usd | July 1, 2025 population estimate; 2020-2024 ACS-derived characteristics; 2022 Economic Census measures | Rochester, New York | Used in scoring | [4] |
| Mean travel time to work, workers age 16 years and older, 2020-2024 | 19.3minutes | July 1, 2025 population estimate; 2020-2024 ACS-derived characteristics; 2022 Economic Census measures | Rochester, New York | Context only | [4] |
| Employer establishments in Monroe County in 2023 | 17,484establishments | 2020-2024 income and poverty; 2023 business measures; 2022 economic measures | Monroe County, New York | Supports modeled relationship | [5] |
| Employment in Monroe County in 2023 | 350,205jobs | 2020-2024 income and poverty; 2023 business measures; 2022 economic measures | Monroe County, New York | Context only | [5] |
| Monroe County household income and poverty context compared with Rochester city | median household income usd: 76,382; poverty percent: 14.1mixed income and percent | 2020-2024 income and poverty; 2023 business measures; 2022 economic measures | Monroe County, New York | Supports research conclusion | [5] |
| Housing units older than 1978 in the City housing-quality review | 90percent | Housing studies reviewed through 2022, including the 2018 Housing Market Study and 2021 rental-market research | Rochester, New York | Supports modeled relationship | [6] [2] |
| Housing units dating from before 1940 in the City housing-quality review | nearly halfqualitative share | Housing studies reviewed through 2022, including the 2018 Housing Market Study and 2021 rental-market research | Rochester, New York | Supports modeled relationship | [6] [2] |
| City housing-quality review links older stock to substantial deferred maintenance, especially in lower-demand areas | substantial deferred maintenance identifiedqualitative condition | Housing studies reviewed through 2022, including the 2018 Housing Market Study and 2021 rental-market research | Rochester, New York | Used in scoring | [6] |
| Rochester winters are cold, snowy, and changeable with frequent thaws and substantial lake-effect snowfall | winter character: cold cloudy snowy; frequent thaws: yes; lake effect share of annual snowfall: about half; typical total snowfall in rochester in: about 90climate characteristics | Long-term Rochester climate narrative | Rochester and Genesee Valley, New York | Used in scoring | [7] [2] |
| Snow plans can require alternate-side parking or prohibit parking on designated routes and announced residential streets | plowing day alternate side required: yes; snow emergency no parking on emergency routes: yes; parking emergency announced residential streets prohibited: yes; general max hours without other rule: 12rule elements | Current rules accessed August 2026 | Rochester, New York | Used in scoring | [8] |
| Designated Parking Emergency Streets | 65streets | Current designation accessed August 2026 | Rochester, New York | Used in scoring | [9] |
| Residential plows are generally mobilized at three inches of new snow; a routine residential plow run is about eight miles and five hours | mobilization snow inches: 3; average residential plow run miles: 8; routine run hours: 5mixed winter operations metrics | Current winter operations guidance accessed August 2026 | Rochester, New York | Used in scoring | [10] |
| Inner Loop North is in preliminary engineering design rather than active corridor reconstruction | preliminary engineering designproject stage | Project status accessed August 2026; Mobility and Development Strategy completed December 2025 | Inner Loop North, Rochester, New York | Context only | [11] [1] |
| Average hourly wage for all occupations in the Rochester metropolitan area in May 2025 | rochester msa: 32.41; united states: 33.54usd per hour | May 2025; release reissued June 24, 2026 for sample-size and response-rate errata | Rochester, New York MSA | Context only | [12] |
| Selected lower-paid major occupational-group mean wages in the Rochester metropolitan area in May 2025 | healthcare support usd per hour: 19.6; personal care and service usd per hour: 19.62; food preparation and serving usd per hour: 19.7; building and grounds cleaning usd per hour: 20.27usd per hour | May 2025; release reissued June 24, 2026 for sample-size and response-rate errata | Rochester, New York MSA | Context only | [12] |
| Healthcare practitioners and technical occupations in the Rochester metropolitan area in May 2025 | employment: 36,730; location quotient: 1.18; mean hourly wage usd: 47.85employment location quotient and wage | May 2025; release reissued June 24, 2026 for sample-size and response-rate errata | Rochester, New York MSA | Used in scoring | [12] |
| General hourly minimum wage for the remainder of New York State effective January 1, 2026 | 16usd per hour | Rate effective January 1, 2026 | Remainder of New York State, including Rochester | Context only | [13] |
| Rochester metro private-sector jobs and twelve-month change ending June 2026 | private sector jobs: 446,600; twelve month change jobs: -1,500; twelve month change percent: -0.3; private education and health change jobs: 600jobs and percent | 12 months ending June 2026 | Rochester metro area, New York | Context only | [14] |
| University of Rochester student enrollment in the 2025-2026 Common Data Set | 11,211students | 2025-2026 Common Data Set | University of Rochester | Used in scoring | [15] |
| University of Rochester current employment scale | 30,000employees minimum | Current employment scale accessed August 2026 | University of Rochester | Used in scoring | [16] [3] |
| Overall Rochester industrial-market vacancy in Q2 2026 | 7.2percent | Second quarter 2026 | Rochester industrial market | Context only | [25] [2] |
| Window signs may not exceed 25 percent of a window under the current city code | 25percent of window | Current codified zoning provisions accessed August 2026 | City of Rochester, New York | Conditional relationship | [17] [1] |
| Internally lit sign permissions vary by Rochester zoning district and arterial location | prohibited districts: residential, C-1, PMV, H-V; conditionally permitted districts: C-2, C-3, M-1; arterial gate: yeszoning rule elements | Current codified zoning provisions accessed August 2026 | City of Rochester, New York | Used in scoring | [17] [3] |
| Non-maintenance exterior changes to Preservation District properties and local landmarks require Preservation Board approval before a permit can be issued | certificate of appropriateness required: yes; review body: Rochester Preservation Board; permit precondition: yesrule elements | Current preservation guidance accessed August 2026 | Rochester Preservation District properties and local landmarks | Used in scoring | [18] [19] [3] |
| The final proposed updated Zoning Code and Map were released in April 2026 and remained in the review process rather than adopted as the current code | proposal under reviewregulatory project stage | April 2026 proposal status | Rochester, New York | Used in scoring | [20] [21] |
| City procurement uses competitive bidding for applicable purchases and public work and RFP processes for professional services; professional agreements over $10,000 require City Council approval | competitive bidding: yes; professional services rfp: yes; council approval threshold usd: 10,000; electronic bid service: BidNet Directprocess elements | Current procurement rules and active requests accessed August 2026 | City of Rochester | Supports modeled relationship | [22] |
| A 2025-2026 City professional-engineering RFP scheduled 127 calendar days from release to City Council approval | rfp release: 2025-12-15; proposal due: 2026-01-30; selection recommendation: 2026-02-20; city council approval: 2026-04-21; release to approval calendar days: 127process dates and days | RFP release December 15, 2025 through scheduled City Council approval April 21, 2026 | City of Rochester | Supports modeled relationship | [23] |
| Monroe County public-bidding thresholds and quotation process | purchase contract public bid threshold usd: 20,000; public work public bid threshold usd: 35,000; three quotes minimum above usd: 500usd thresholds | Current procurement rules accessed August 2026 | Monroe County, New York | Supports modeled relationship | [24] |
| County Business Patterns provides establishment and employment counts by detailed NAICS and subnational geography | industry detail: 2-through-6-digit NAICS; geographies: county, metropolitan area, ZIP code; measures: establishments, employment, first quarter payroll, annual payrolldataset dimensions | Calendar year 2023 | United States subnational geographies including Monroe County and Rochester-area ZIP Codes | Context only | [26] |
How to use the ranking
What the model can and cannot establish
- Scores measure local operating alignment, not expected financial performance or franchise-system quality.
- Citywide evidence may not describe the exact site or territory ultimately offered.
- Conditional effects are shown for diligence but do not change the published score until their applicability is established.
Methodology
How the local-alignment ranking is calculated
Measure the city
Collect reusable local metrics with source, period, geography, and confidence fields.
Profile each operating model
Map each franchise to controlled operating attributes and local sensitivities.
Apply scoreable effects
Score only effects whose applicability is established at the report’s current geographic and operating scope.
Preserve conditional effects
Keep location- or territory-dependent issues visible for diligence without automatically changing the score.
Test rank sensitivity
Remove one factor at a time from every concept and rerank using full-precision scores.
Generate public output
Create the ranking, factor-status ledger, visuals, metric registry, and automated quality report from the same data.
How the common baseline becomes a city-specific score
Every concept starts from the same 70.0 reference point, so differences come only from modeled local interactions. In this city, City Wide reached 71.78 after target-market demand +1.3 pts, referral ecosystem +0.6 pts, transportation, routing, and parking -0.1 pts, and territory quality -0.1 pts. The current model caps total local movement at ±18.0 points. The score is not a percentage, probability, or estimate of investment quality.
Precision and materiality
Calculations use full-precision values. Published scores and factor contributions display one decimal place, while ranks use full precision. Effects smaller than 0.1 points are identified as below the publication threshold rather than presented as a meaningful zero.
Score tiers
Tier 1 · Strongest modeled alignment80.0–100.0
Tier 2 · Favorable modeled alignment72.0–<80.0
Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment64.0–<72.0
Tier 4 · Higher-friction modeled alignment0.0–<64.0
How factor rows are classified
Positive local adjustmentNegative local adjustmentMeasured; no meaningful local adjustmentEffect below the publication thresholdNot applicable to this operating modelDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating conditionNot included in the score
What “best” means here
“Best” means the strongest modeled local operating alignment among the franchise concepts assessed on this page.
Model governance
How this report is calculated and corrected
Calculation controls
- Model designer
- Thomas Jepsen
No concept’s final score is manually raised or lowered after calculation. Before this template is activated, the report is reviewed for source scope, classification, arithmetic, unsupported claims, duplication, and readability.
Model history
- Model 0.9.0-calibration · August 19, 2026Added compiler-derived decision intelligence and observation usage mapping., Changed factor sensitivity and channel counterfactuals to full model reruns., Added data-dependent city content signals while preserving legacy public report fields., and Added model-owned semantic compatibility gates and backward-compatible channel-level evidence attribution.
Corrections policy
Corrected source, geography, or operating-profile evidence triggers a full compiler rerun so every dependent score and visual is recalculated.
Source registry
Evidence represented in this report
Each source identifies its period, scope, and the claims or metrics it supports. Internal or supplied research is clearly distinguished from publicly accessible evidence.
- 1Forensic Municipal Constraint and Structural Friction ReportInternal or supplied research; not publicly accessible.
Used for: Inner Loop North is in preliminary engineering design rather than active corridor reconstruction and Window signs may not exceed 25 percent of a window under the current city code
- 2Structural Inefficiencies and Utility Delta Audit: A Private Equity Real Estate AnalysisInternal or supplied research; not publicly accessible.
Used for: Housing units older than 1978 in the City housing-quality review, Housing units dating from before 1940 in the City housing-quality review, Rochester winters are cold, snowy, and changeable with frequent thaws and substantial lake-effect snowfall, and Overall Rochester industrial-market vacancy in Q2 2026
- 3Franchise data - remake - B start(5)Internal or supplied research; not publicly accessible.
Used for: University of Rochester current employment scale, Internally lit sign permissions vary by Rochester zoning district and arterial location, and Non-maintenance exterior changes to Preservation District properties and local landmarks require Preservation Board approval before a permit can be issued
- 4QuickFacts: Rochester city, New York
Used for: Resident population estimate on July 1, 2025, Population change from the April 2020 estimate base to July 2025, Households, 2020-2024, Owner-occupied housing unit rate, 2020-2024, and Median household income in 2024 dollars, 2020-2024
- 5QuickFacts: Monroe County, New York
Used for: Employer establishments in Monroe County in 2023, Employment in Monroe County in 2023, and Monroe County household income and poverty context compared with Rochester city
- 6June 2022 Housing Quality Task Force final report & recommendations
Used for: Housing units older than 1978 in the City housing-quality review, Housing units dating from before 1940 in the City housing-quality review, and City housing-quality review links older stock to substantial deferred maintenance, especially in lower-demand areas
- 7Rochester Climate Narrative
Used for: Rochester winters are cold, snowy, and changeable with frequent thaws and substantial lake-effect snowfall
- 8Winter & snow parking rules
Used for: Snow plans can require alternate-side parking or prohibit parking on designated routes and announced residential streets
- 9Parking emergency streets
Used for: Designated Parking Emergency Streets
- 10Winter weather safety
Used for: Residential plows are generally mobilized at three inches of new snow; a routine residential plow run is about eight miles and five hours
- 11Inner Loop North Transformation Project
Used for: Inner Loop North is in preliminary engineering design rather than active corridor reconstruction
- 12Occupational Employment and Wages in Rochester, NY — May 2025
Used for: Average hourly wage for all occupations in the Rochester metropolitan area in May 2025, Selected lower-paid major occupational-group mean wages in the Rochester metropolitan area in May 2025, and Healthcare practitioners and technical occupations in the Rochester metropolitan area in May 2025
- 13History of the Minimum Wage in New York State
Used for: General hourly minimum wage for the remainder of New York State effective January 1, 2026
- 14Labor Statistics for the Finger Lakes Region
Used for: Rochester metro private-sector jobs and twelve-month change ending June 2026
- 15University of Rochester Common Data Set
Used for: University of Rochester student enrollment in the 2025-2026 Common Data Set
- 16Working Here
Used for: University of Rochester current employment scale
- 17Article XX: Requirements Applying To All Districts - City of Rochester, NY
Used for: Window signs may not exceed 25 percent of a window under the current city code and Internally lit sign permissions vary by Rochester zoning district and arterial location
- 18Historic Preservation: The Rochester Preservation Ordinance
Used for: Non-maintenance exterior changes to Preservation District properties and local landmarks require Preservation Board approval before a permit can be issued
- 19Rochester Preservation Board Public Meeting — August 5, 2026
Used for: Non-maintenance exterior changes to Preservation District properties and local landmarks require Preservation Board approval before a permit can be issued
- 20City of Rochester advances Zoning Code update
Used for: The final proposed updated Zoning Code and Map were released in April 2026 and remained in the review process rather than adopted as the current code
- 21Bureau of Zoning and Permitting
Used for: The final proposed updated Zoning Code and Map were released in April 2026 and remained in the review process rather than adopted as the current code
- 22Contracts, Bids and RFPs
Used for: City procurement uses competitive bidding for applicable purchases and public work and RFP processes for professional services; professional agreements over $10,000 require City Council approval
- 23RFP: Professional Engineering Services for IIJA-LSLR Groups 6A, 6B, and 6C
Used for: A 2025-2026 City professional-engineering RFP scheduled 127 calendar days from release to City Council approval
- 24Purchasing and Central Services
Used for: Monroe County public-bidding thresholds and quotation process
- 25Rochester MarketBeat Reports
Used for: Overall Rochester industrial-market vacancy in Q2 2026
- 26County Business Patterns: 2023
Used for: County Business Patterns provides establishment and employment counts by detailed NAICS and subnational geography
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.