70.0 average across 2 concepts
Local operating-model alignment analysis
Best Franchise Opportunities We Assessed in Staten Island, New York
We compared 14 franchise concepts for Staten Island, New York.
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
17Sources used
13Primary sources
23Local metrics
Evaluation set
Why these concepts were evaluated
This is not a ranking of every franchise that may be offered in the city.
14Concepts assessed
Concepts were included when enough operating-model information existed to assign a provisional local-sensitivity profile. Unresolved inputs reduce confidence or remain conditional rather than automatically excluding a concept.
A brand’s participation in our referral network does not add points or change its position.
City-level conclusions
What stood out in our assessment
0.9 points average among 10 affected concepts
Tested rank range spans 11 positions
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 management | 71.8Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +1.8 ptsTarget-market demand | No material negative local adjustment | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 2 | FASTSIGNSSigns and graphics | 71.7Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +1.7 ptsTarget-market demand | No material negative local adjustment | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 3 | Jan-Pro InternationalCommercial cleaning | 71.6Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +1.6 ptsTarget-market demand | No material negative local adjustment | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 4 | ActionCOACHBusiness coaching | 71.5Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +1.5 ptsTarget-market demand | No material negative local adjustment | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 5 | HomeSmilesProperty maintenance services | 71.0Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +1.0 ptsTarget-market demand | No material negative local adjustment | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 6 | ZOOM DRAINDrain and sewer service | 70.4Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +0.4 ptsTarget-market demand | No material negative local adjustment | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 7 | Aire ServHVAC installation, repair, and maintenance | 70.3Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +0.3 ptsTarget-market demand | No material negative local adjustment | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 8 | Mr. RooterPlumbing | 70.3Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +0.3 ptsTarget-market demand | No material negative local adjustment | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 9 | Tiger AdjustersPublic insurance adjusting | 70.2Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +0.2 ptsTarget-market demand | No material negative local adjustment | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 10 | Pillar To Post Home InspectorsHome inspection | 70.1Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +0.1 ptsTarget-market demand | No material negative local adjustment | Moderate evidence confidence |
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] [17] [1] [3]Property replacement-cycle demand: [4] [13] [14] [1]Competitive environment: [4] [5] [17] [3]Labor and staffing friction: [15] [16] [2]Transportation, routing, and parking: [7] [8] [9] [4] [3]Real estate and site feasibility: [6] [5] [9] [12] [1]Sales and customer acquisition: [4] [5] [17]Referral ecosystem: [4] [17] [3]Territory quality: [5] [17] [12] [3]Regulatory and operating friction: [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [2] [3]
View the chart data as a table
| Concept | Target-market demand |
|---|---|
| #1 City Wide | +1.8 pts |
| #2 FASTSIGNS | +1.7 pts |
| #3 Jan-Pro International | +1.6 pts |
| #4 ActionCOACH | +1.5 pts |
| #5 HomeSmiles | +1.0 pts |
| #6 ZOOM DRAIN | +0.4 pts |
| #7 Aire Serv | +0.3 pts |
| #8 Mr. Rooter | +0.3 pts |
| #9 Tiger Adjusters | +0.2 pts |
| #10 Pillar To Post Home Inspectors | +0.1 pts |
| #11 Mister Sparky Electric | — |
| #12 PuroClean | — |
| #13 Workout Anytime | — |
| #14 Rainbow International Restoration | — |
Rank stability
Which positions depend most on individual assumptions?
The line shows the best and worst rank reached when one factor was removed from every concept. A narrow range indicates a more stable position.
#1 City WideHighly sensitive · tested #1–#12
#2 FASTSIGNSHighly sensitive · tested #2–#6
#3 Jan-Pro InternationalHighly sensitive · tested #3–#14
#4 ActionCOACHStable · tested #4–#5
#5 HomeSmilesModerately sensitive · tested #2–#5
#6 ZOOM DRAINModerately sensitive · tested #4–#6
#7 Aire ServHighly sensitive · tested #1–#7
#8 Mr. RooterStable · tested #7–#8
#9 Tiger AdjustersHighly sensitive · tested #3–#9
#10 Pillar To Post Home InspectorsStable · tested #9–#10
#11 Mister Sparky ElectricModerately sensitive · tested #8–#11
#12 PuroCleanModerately sensitive · tested #10–#12
#13 Workout AnytimeModerately sensitive · tested #11–#13
#14 Rainbow International RestorationStable · tested #13–#14
Neutralizing a factor removes it from every concept. A concept can move down even when its own score improves because competitors may benefit more.
Worked score example
How we calculated City Wide
This example uses the same ledger shown for every concept and must reconcile exactly to the published score.
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not confused with missing, conditional, or non-applicable evidence.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +1.8 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Not included in the score |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Not included in the score |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | Not included in the score |
| Territory quality | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 71.84 |
| 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.
Interpretation
How to interpret the result
City Wide, FASTSIGNS, Jan-Pro International led because their operating requirements captured more of the local support from target-market demand while remaining less exposed to property replacement-cycle demand. The same city condition can help one operating model and constrain another, so score differences should be read through each concept's factor pattern rather than as a universal franchise-quality verdict. The ordering is most assumption-sensitive for City Wide, FASTSIGNS, Jan-Pro International; their ranks move more widely when individual factors are neutralized.
Factor impact
Which local conditions changed scores or rankings?
We neutralized one factor at a time, recalculated every score, and then measured both absolute score movement and changes in rank order.
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.
We applied a measurable adjustment to 10 of 14 concepts. When we neutralized the factor and recalculated the table, 12 concepts changed position. City Wide moved from #1 to #13, the largest movement among concepts directly affected by this factor.
Concepts adjusted10 of 14
Average among affected+0.9 pts
Average across all concepts+0.6 pts
Concepts changing rank12
Concepts helped most
City WideFacility management
+1.8 pts
FASTSIGNSSigns and graphics
+1.7 pts
Jan-Pro InternationalCommercial cleaning
+1.6 pts
ActionCOACHBusiness coaching
+1.5 pts
HomeSmilesProperty maintenance services
+1.0 pts
Measured but not differentiating in this concept set
- Property replacement-cycle demandNo material score adjustment
- Competitive environmentNo material score adjustment
- Labor and staffing frictionNo material score adjustment
- Transportation, routing, and parkingNo material score adjustment
- Real estate and site feasibilityNo material score adjustment
- Sales and customer acquisitionNo material score adjustment
- Referral ecosystemNo material score adjustment
- Territory qualityNo material score adjustment
- Regulatory and operating frictionNo material score adjustment
Category comparisons
Best franchise categories we assessed in Staten Island, 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
70.0Best Restoration franchise opportunities we assessed in Staten Island, New York
2 Restoration concepts qualified for comparison, with scores ranging from 70.0 to 70.0. PuroClean ranked highest at 70.0.
Interpret cautiously: A 0.0-point spread is too small to support a strong brand-level conclusion from city alignment alone.
- Concepts compared
- 2
- Score range
- 70.0–70.0
- Category average
- 70.0
PuroClean70.0
Rainbow International Restoration70.0
Compare all assessed concepts
Explore the complete score calculations
14 concepts shown. Expand a concept to see how each factor was treated and the single next check most capable of changing the result.
#1Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment71.8
City Wide
Increase +1.8 pts Target-market demandNo material negative local adjustment identified
Rank sensitivity: Highly sensitive
How we scored this concept
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not confused with missing, conditional, or non-applicable evidence.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +1.8 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Not included in the score |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Not included in the score |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | Not included in the score |
| Territory quality | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 71.84 |
| 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
- Strong
- Factor Research Coverage
- Limited
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Strong
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Target-market demand +1.8 pts
- Tested rank range
- #1–#12
Most important next check
How many qualified facility and property-management accounts must be reachable for City Wide to support its local contract pipeline?
#2Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment71.7
FASTSIGNS
Increase +1.7 pts Target-market demandNo material negative local adjustment identified
Rank sensitivity: Highly sensitive
How we scored this concept
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not confused with missing, conditional, or non-applicable evidence.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +1.7 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Not included in the score |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Not included in the score |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | Not included in the score |
| Territory quality | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 71.67 |
| Published local-market alignment | 71.7 |
Factor calculations use full precision. Contributions and published scores are displayed to one decimal place; ranking order uses the full-precision score.
Evidence confidence
- City Modifier Evidence
- Strong
- Factor Research Coverage
- Limited
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Strong
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Target-market demand +1.7 pts
- Tested rank range
- #2–#6
Most important next check
Which use, storage, ventilation, or permit requirements apply to FASTSIGNS's proposed production or service base?
#3Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment71.6
Jan-Pro International
Increase +1.6 pts Target-market demandNo material negative local adjustment identified
Rank sensitivity: Highly sensitive
How we scored this concept
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not confused with missing, conditional, or non-applicable evidence.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +1.6 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Not included in the score |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Not included in the score |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | Not included in the score |
| Territory quality | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 71.61 |
| Published local-market alignment | 71.6 |
Factor calculations use full precision. Contributions and published scores are displayed to one decimal place; ranking order uses the full-precision score.
Evidence confidence
- City Modifier Evidence
- Strong
- Factor Research Coverage
- Limited
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Strong
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Target-market demand +1.6 pts
- Tested rank range
- #3–#14
Most important next check
What concentration of recurring commercial accounts is required for Jan-Pro International to build an efficient local book of business?
#4Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment71.5
ActionCOACH
Increase +1.5 pts Target-market demandNo material negative local adjustment identified
Rank sensitivity: Stable
How we scored this concept
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not confused with missing, conditional, or non-applicable evidence.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +1.5 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Not included in the score |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Not included in the score |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | Not included in the score |
| Territory quality | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 71.48 |
| Published local-market alignment | 71.5 |
Factor calculations use full precision. Contributions and published scores are displayed to one decimal place; ranking order uses the full-precision score.
Evidence confidence
- City Modifier Evidence
- Strong
- Factor Research Coverage
- Limited
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Strong
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Target-market demand +1.5 pts
- Tested rank range
- #4–#5
Most important next check
Which business-owner segments are expected to produce the most repeatable coaching demand for ActionCOACH?
#5Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment71.0
HomeSmiles
Increase +1.0 pts Target-market demandNo material negative local adjustment identified
Rank sensitivity: Moderately sensitive
How we scored this concept
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not confused with missing, conditional, or non-applicable evidence.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +1.0 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Not included in the score |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Not included in the score |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | Not included in the score |
| Territory quality | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 70.98 |
| 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
- Strong
- Factor Research Coverage
- Limited
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Adequate
- 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
- #2–#5
Most important next check
How many qualified facility and property-management accounts must be reachable for HomeSmiles to support its local contract pipeline?
#6Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment70.4
ZOOM DRAIN
Increase +0.4 pts Target-market demandNo material negative local adjustment identified
Rank sensitivity: Moderately sensitive
How we scored this concept
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not confused with missing, conditional, or non-applicable evidence.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +0.4 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Not included in the score |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Not included in the score |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | Not included in the score |
| Territory quality | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 70.35 |
| Published local-market alignment | 70.4 |
Factor calculations use full precision. Contributions and published scores are displayed to one decimal place; ranking order uses the full-precision score.
Evidence confidence
- City Modifier Evidence
- Strong
- Factor Research Coverage
- Limited
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Strong
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Target-market demand +0.4 pts
- Tested rank range
- #4–#6
Most important next check
Where must ZOOM DRAIN stage crews and vehicles to protect after-hours response times across the proposed territory?
#7Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment70.3
Aire Serv
Increase +0.3 pts Target-market demandNo material negative local adjustment identified
Rank sensitivity: Highly sensitive
How we scored this concept
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not confused with missing, conditional, or non-applicable evidence.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +0.3 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Not included in the score |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Not included in the score |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | Not included in the score |
| Territory quality | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 70.28 |
| Published local-market alignment | 70.3 |
Factor calculations use full precision. Contributions and published scores are displayed to one decimal place; ranking order uses the full-precision score.
Evidence confidence
- City Modifier Evidence
- Strong
- Factor Research Coverage
- Limited
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Adequate
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Strong
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Target-market demand +0.3 pts
- Tested rank range
- #1–#7
Most important next check
What daily vehicle utilization and travel-time allowance are built into Aire Serv's operating plan?
#8Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment70.3
Mr. Rooter
Increase +0.3 pts Target-market demandNo material negative local adjustment identified
Rank sensitivity: Stable
How we scored this concept
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not confused with missing, conditional, or non-applicable evidence.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +0.3 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Not included in the score |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Not included in the score |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | Not included in the score |
| Territory quality | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 70.26 |
| Published local-market alignment | 70.3 |
Factor calculations use full precision. Contributions and published scores are displayed to one decimal place; ranking order uses the full-precision score.
Evidence confidence
- City Modifier Evidence
- Strong
- Factor Research Coverage
- Limited
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Strong
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Target-market demand +0.3 pts
- Tested rank range
- #7–#8
Most important next check
How many field vehicles must Mr. Rooter deploy, and where would they begin and end each service day?
#9Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment70.2
Tiger Adjusters
Increase +0.2 pts Target-market demandNo material negative local adjustment identified
Rank sensitivity: Highly sensitive
How we scored this concept
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not confused with missing, conditional, or non-applicable evidence.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +0.2 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Not included in the score |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Not included in the score |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | Not included in the score |
| Territory quality | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 70.22 |
| 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
- Strong
- Factor Research Coverage
- Limited
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Adequate
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Strong
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Target-market demand +0.2 pts
- Tested rank range
- #3–#9
Most important next check
What daily vehicle utilization and travel-time allowance are built into Tiger Adjusters's operating plan?
#10Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment70.1
Pillar To Post Home Inspectors
Increase +0.1 pts Target-market demandNo material negative local adjustment identified
Rank sensitivity: Stable
How we scored this concept
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not confused with missing, conditional, or non-applicable evidence.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +0.1 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Not included in the score |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Not included in the score |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | Not included in the score |
| Territory quality | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 70.14 |
| 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
- Strong
- Factor Research Coverage
- Limited
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Strong
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Target-market demand +0.1 pts
- Tested rank range
- #9–#10
Most important next check
What service radius and drive-time ceiling has Pillar To Post Home Inspectors validated for the proposed territory?
#11Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment70.0
Mister Sparky Electric
No material positive local adjustment identifiedNo material negative local adjustment identified
Rank sensitivity: Moderately sensitive
How we scored this concept
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not confused with missing, conditional, or non-applicable evidence.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Not included in the score |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Not included in the score |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | Not included in the score |
| Territory quality | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 70.00 |
| Published local-market alignment | 70.0 |
Factor calculations use full precision. Contributions and published scores are displayed to one decimal place; ranking order uses the full-precision score.
Evidence confidence
- City Modifier Evidence
- Strong
- Factor Research Coverage
- Limited
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Strong
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- 0.0 pts
- Tested rank range
- #8–#11
Most important next check
What daily vehicle utilization and travel-time allowance are built into Mister Sparky Electric's operating plan?
#12Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment70.0
PuroClean
No material positive local adjustment identifiedNo material negative local adjustment identified
Rank sensitivity: Moderately sensitive
How we scored this concept
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not confused with missing, conditional, or non-applicable evidence.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Not included in the score |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Not included in the score |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | Not included in the score |
| Territory quality | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 70.00 |
| Published local-market alignment | 70.0 |
Factor calculations use full precision. Contributions and published scores are displayed to one decimal place; ranking order uses the full-precision score.
Evidence confidence
- City Modifier Evidence
- Strong
- Factor Research Coverage
- Limited
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Strong
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- 0.0 pts
- Tested rank range
- #10–#12
Most important next check
What dispatch zones and maximum drive-time assumptions does PuroClean use for urgent service calls?
#13Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment70.0
Workout Anytime
No material positive local adjustment identifiedNo material negative local adjustment identified
Rank sensitivity: Moderately sensitive
How we scored this concept
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not confused with missing, conditional, or non-applicable evidence.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Not included in the score |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Not included in the score |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | Not included in the score |
| Territory quality | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 70.00 |
| Published local-market alignment | 70.0 |
Factor calculations use full precision. Contributions and published scores are displayed to one decimal place; ranking order uses the full-precision score.
Evidence confidence
- City Modifier Evidence
- Strong
- Factor Research Coverage
- Limited
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Strong
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- 0.0 pts
- Tested rank range
- #11–#13
Most important next check
Which zoning, occupancy, and permit requirements must be cleared before Workout Anytime approves a customer-facing site?
#14Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment70.0
Rainbow International Restoration
No material positive local adjustment identifiedNo material negative local adjustment identified
Rank sensitivity: Stable
How we scored this concept
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not confused with missing, conditional, or non-applicable evidence.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Not included in the score |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Not included in the score |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | Not included in the score |
| Territory quality | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 70.00 |
| Published local-market alignment | 70.0 |
Factor calculations use full precision. Contributions and published scores are displayed to one decimal place; ranking order uses the full-precision score.
Evidence confidence
- City Modifier Evidence
- Strong
- Factor Research Coverage
- Limited
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Strong
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- 0.0 pts
- Tested rank range
- #13–#14
Most important next check
Which ZIP codes can Rainbow International Restoration serve within its target emergency-response time under normal and peak traffic conditions?
No franchise concepts match the selected filters.
Metric registry
The 23 local metrics behind this analysis
The registry exposes the raw value, period, geography, factor mapping, and source for every public metric used in the city research.
View all local metrics
| Metric | Raw value | Period | Geography | How used | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Resident population estimate on July 1, 2025 | 501,290people | July 1, 2025 population and housing estimates; 2020-2024 ACS characteristics; 2023 business data; 2022 economic census sales/receipts | Richmond County / Staten Island, New York | Evidence for Target-market demand, Territory quality | [4] |
| Population change from the April 2020 estimate base to July 2025 | 1percent | July 1, 2025 population and housing estimates; 2020-2024 ACS characteristics; 2023 business data; 2022 economic census sales/receipts | Richmond County / Staten Island, New York | Evidence for Target-market demand | [4] |
| Estimated housing units on July 1, 2025 | 186,310housing units | July 1, 2025 population and housing estimates; 2020-2024 ACS characteristics; 2023 business data; 2022 economic census sales/receipts | Richmond County / Staten Island, New York | Evidence for Target-market demand, Property replacement-cycle demand, Territory quality | [4] |
| Owner-occupied housing unit rate | 67.7percent | July 1, 2025 population and housing estimates; 2020-2024 ACS characteristics; 2023 business data; 2022 economic census sales/receipts | Richmond County / Staten Island, New York | Evidence for Target-market demand, Property replacement-cycle demand | [4] |
| Residential building permits in 2025 | 508permits | July 1, 2025 population and housing estimates; 2020-2024 ACS characteristics; 2023 business data; 2022 economic census sales/receipts | Richmond County / Staten Island, New York | Evidence for Target-market demand, Property replacement-cycle demand | [4] |
| Employer establishments in 2023 | 9,684establishments | July 1, 2025 population and housing estimates; 2020-2024 ACS characteristics; 2023 business data; 2022 economic census sales/receipts | Richmond County / Staten Island, New York | Evidence for Target-market demand, Referral ecosystem, Competitive environment, Sales and customer acquisition | [4] |
| Nonemployer establishments in 2023 | 46,086establishments | July 1, 2025 population and housing estimates; 2020-2024 ACS characteristics; 2023 business data; 2022 economic census sales/receipts | Richmond County / Staten Island, New York | Evidence for Target-market demand, Referral ecosystem, Competitive environment, Sales and customer acquisition | [4] |
| Health care and social assistance receipts/revenue in 2022 | 4,874,842thousand usd | July 1, 2025 population and housing estimates; 2020-2024 ACS characteristics; 2023 business data; 2022 economic census sales/receipts | Richmond County / Staten Island, New York | Evidence for Target-market demand, Referral ecosystem | [4] |
| Mean travel time to work for workers age 16 and over | 43.1minutes | July 1, 2025 population and housing estimates; 2020-2024 ACS characteristics; 2023 business data; 2022 economic census sales/receipts | Richmond County / Staten Island, New York | Evidence for Transportation, routing, and parking, Target-market demand | [4] |
| Median household income and median housing costs | median household income 2024 dollars: 98,333; median owner cost with mortgage monthly: 2,979; median gross rent monthly: 1,733mixed currency metrics | July 1, 2025 population and housing estimates; 2020-2024 ACS characteristics; 2023 business data; 2022 economic census sales/receipts | Richmond County / Staten Island, New York | Evidence for Target-market demand | [4] |
| Staten Island storefront vacancy as of April 15, 2026 | 7.5percent | Storefront status as of April 15, 2026 | Staten Island, New York | Evidence for Target-market demand, Real estate and site feasibility, Territory quality | [5] |
| Higher storefront-vacancy pockets on the North Shore | tompkinsville stapleton clifton fox hills: 14; rosebank shore acres park hill: 12; st george new brighton: 11.9percent | Storefront status as of April 15, 2026 | Staten Island North Shore neighborhood tabulation areas | Evidence for Target-market demand, Real estate and site feasibility, Territory quality | [5] |
| NYC industrial vacancy and asking rent with Staten Island availability context | nyc vacancy rate: 6.9; nyc average asking rent per sqft: 30.07; staten island context: Large move-out and new availability increased citywide vacancy; Staten Island rents trail the other boroughs.mixed market metrics | Q4 2025 and full-year 2025 | New York City industrial market with Staten Island commentary | Evidence for Real estate and site feasibility | [6] |
| Truck-route requirements and Staten Island Limited Truck Zones | truck network required for trucks: yes; staten island has limited truck zones: yes; off route destination access: nearest intersection and most direct routerule | Current rules accessed August 2026 | New York City / Staten Island | Evidence for Transportation, routing, and parking, Territory quality | [7] |
| Commercial-vehicle curb and overnight parking rules | general commercial street parking limit hours: 3; residential overnight prohibition: 9 PM to 5 AM; overnight pilot on staten island: norule | Current rules accessed August 2026 | New York City / Staten Island | Evidence for Transportation, routing, and parking, Real estate and site feasibility | [8] [9] |
| Business-sign permit and licensed-installer gates | permit exception: painted wall sign or non-illuminated sign smaller than 6 sq ft; licensed sign hanger exemption: not exceeding 75 sq ft and 25 lb, or other listed exemptions; separate electrical permit for electrical signs: yes; annual illuminated permit may apply: illuminated and extends beyond building linerule | Current permit and licensing guidance accessed August 2026 | New York City / Staten Island | Evidence for Regulatory and operating friction | [10] |
| Local Law 15 of 2026 temporary accessory-sign protections | summons moratorium end: 2028-02-08; moratorium existing sign cutoff: 2025-02-09; work without permit civil penalty waiver max area sqft: 150; work without permit civil penalty waiver max weight lb: 1,200; temporary assistance end: 2028-08-07rule | Temporary protections and assistance active in 2026 | New York City | Evidence for Regulatory and operating friction | [11] |
| Special South Richmond Development District protects natural features and conditions development on district rules | protects natural features: yes; addresses topography trees drainage and infrastructure: yes; district specific: yesrule | Current zoning text accessed August 2026; maps include amendments adopted November 2, 2023 | Special South Richmond Development District, Staten Island | Evidence for Regulatory and operating friction, Real estate and site feasibility, Territory quality | [12] [3] |
| FEMA flood zones determine property-level flood risk and can determine insurance and building-code requirements | special flood hazard area is property specific: yes; mapped flood zones include: VE, AE, AO, A, Xrule | Current flood-map framework accessed August 2026 | Staten Island flood-map areas | Evidence for Regulatory and operating friction, Property replacement-cycle demand, Real estate and site feasibility | [13] [14] [1] |
| New York City statutory minimum wage effective January 1, 2026 | 17usd per hour | Effective January 1, 2026 | New York City, including Staten Island | Evidence for Labor and staffing friction | [15] |
| Selected New York-Newark-Jersey City mean hourly wages | all occupations: 41.5; food preparation and serving: 22.22; building and grounds cleaning maintenance: 23.02; office and administrative support: 28.72; construction and extraction: 39.49; installation maintenance repair: 34.5; transportation material moving: 27.92usd per hour | May 2025 | New York-Newark-Jersey City MSA, including Richmond County | Evidence for Labor and staffing friction | [16] |
| North Shore population, business, and employment growth | population 2010 2020 percent: 7.9; population 2020: 189,663; business growth 2012 2022 percent: 16.8; employment growth 2012 2022 percent approx: 8; business peak 2021: 3,647mixed growth metrics | Population 2010-2020; businesses, jobs, wages, housing and income through 2022 | Staten Island North Shore | Evidence for Target-market demand, Territory quality, Referral ecosystem | [17] |
| North Shore renter burden and income variation | renter share percent: 44; more than half of renters rent burdened: yes; median household income range usd: 24,000, 160,000mixed metrics | Population 2010-2020; businesses, jobs, wages, housing and income through 2022 | Staten Island North Shore | Evidence for Target-market demand, Territory quality | [17] |
How to use the ranking
What the model can and cannot establish
- Scores measure local operating alignment, not expected financial performance or franchise-system quality.
- Citywide evidence may not describe the exact site or territory ultimately offered.
- Conditional effects are shown for diligence but do not change the published score until their applicability is established.
Methodology
How the local-alignment ranking is calculated
Measure the city
Collect reusable local metrics with source, period, geography, and confidence fields.
Profile each operating model
Map each franchise to controlled operating attributes and local sensitivities.
Apply scoreable effects
Score only effects that apply without an unresolved site, territory, customer, or project gate.
Preserve conditional effects
Keep location- or territory-dependent issues visible for diligence without automatically changing the score.
Test rank sensitivity
Remove one factor at a time from every concept and rerank using full-precision scores.
Generate public output
Create the ranking, factor-status ledger, visuals, metric registry, and automated quality report from the same data.
How the common baseline becomes a city-specific score
Every concept starts from the same 70.0 reference point, so differences come only from modeled local interactions. 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 10, 2026Added conditional scoring gates, factor-status transparency, rank-sensitivity testing, metric registry output, and factor-impact visualization data.
Corrections policy
Corrected source, geography, or operating-profile evidence triggers a full compiler rerun so every dependent score and visual is recalculated.
Source registry
Evidence represented in this report
Each source identifies its period, scope, and the local metrics it supports. Internal or supplied research is not presented as independently accessible evidence.
- 1Structural Inefficiencies and Asymmetric Opportunities in U.S. Sub-Markets: A Utility Delta AuditInternal or supplied research; not publicly accessible.
Used for: FEMA flood zones determine property-level flood risk and can determine insurance and building-code requirements
- 2Forensic Municipal Audit: Structural Constraints and Hidden Capital FrictionsInternal or supplied research; not publicly accessible.
- 3Franchise data - remake - des.csvInternal or supplied research; not publicly accessible.
Used for: Special South Richmond Development District protects natural features and conditions development on district rules
- 4QuickFacts: Richmond County, New York
Used for: Resident population estimate on July 1, 2025, Population change from the April 2020 estimate base to July 2025, Estimated housing units on July 1, 2025, Owner-occupied housing unit rate, and Residential building permits in 2025
- 5Who's Minding the Storefronts? An Analysis of Storefront Vacancies in New York City
Used for: Staten Island storefront vacancy as of April 15, 2026 and Higher storefront-vacancy pockets on the North Shore
- 6New York City Industrial & Logistics Figures Q4 2025
Used for: NYC industrial vacancy and asking rent with Staten Island availability context
- 7Truck Routing
Used for: Truck-route requirements and Staten Island Limited Truck Zones
- 8Truck Driver FAQ
Used for: Commercial-vehicle curb and overnight parking rules
- 9Parking a Truck or Commercial Vehicle
Used for: Commercial-vehicle curb and overnight parking rules
- 10Sign Permit
Used for: Business-sign permit and licensed-installer gates
- 11Accessory Sign Education & Outreach — Local Law 15 of 2026
Used for: Local Law 15 of 2026 temporary accessory-sign protections
- 12Zoning Resolution Article X, Chapter 7 — Special South Richmond Development District
Used for: Special South Richmond Development District protects natural features and conditions development on district rules
- 13About FEMA Flood Maps
Used for: FEMA flood zones determine property-level flood risk and can determine insurance and building-code requirements
- 14Coastal Erosion Hazard Area Map — Staten Island
Used for: FEMA flood zones determine property-level flood risk and can determine insurance and building-code requirements
- 15New York State's Minimum Wage
Used for: New York City statutory minimum wage effective January 1, 2026
- 16Occupational Employment and Wages in New York-Newark-Jersey City — May 2025
Used for: Selected New York-Newark-Jersey City mean hourly wages
- 17DiNapoli: North Shore Leads Staten Island's Growth
Used for: North Shore population, business, and employment growth and North Shore renter burden and income variation
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.