Local operating-model alignment analysis

Best Franchise Opportunities We Assessed in Tampa, Florida

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

What “best” means in this ranking“Best” means the strongest modeled local operating alignment among the franchise concepts assessed on this page. It does not estimate earnings or determine which franchise is best for a particular candidate.
Analysis by Thomas Jepsen, MSc Model: 0.9.0
14Concepts evaluated
19Sources used
15Primary sources
25Local metrics

Evaluation set

Why these concepts were evaluated

This is not a ranking of every franchise that may be offered in the city.

14Concepts assessed

Concepts were included when enough operating-model information existed to assign a provisional local-sensitivity profile. Unresolved inputs reduce confidence or remain conditional rather than automatically excluding a concept.

A brand’s participation in our referral network does not add points or change its position.

City-level conclusions

What stood out in our assessment

Highest category average (limited comparison)Restoration

70.6 average across 2 concepts

Largest positive factorTarget-market demand

0.6 points average among 11 affected concepts

Largest negative factorLabor and staffing friction

0.2 points average reduction among 9 affected concepts

Most assumption-sensitive rankJan-Pro International

Tested rank range spans 8 positions

Executive conclusion

What the ranking means for Tampa, Florida

Our Tampa, Florida analysis favored concepts whose operating requirements matched the city’s strongest service-demand conditions without depending too heavily on inexpensive labor, easy routing, or low-cost commercial space. City Wide, ActionCOACH, and FASTSIGNS produced the three highest modeled alignment scores in the evaluated set. Target-market demand was the strongest positive factor: it materially affected 11 concepts and added 0.6 points on average among them. Labor and staffing friction was the broadest negative pressure, reducing the 9 exposed concepts by 0.2 points on average. The result is not that the highest-ranked brand is universally better. It means that, under the documented city assumptions and the operating profiles available to us, its local advantages outweighed its modeled constraints more effectively. Territory boundaries, candidate capabilities, capital structure, franchise economics, current FDD disclosures, and local franchisee validation remain outside this ranking and can materially change the decision.

How this differs from a directory: the model does not award points for brand popularity, advertising placement, or referral compensation. It tests how documented local conditions interact with each concept’s operating requirements.

Best franchise opportunities assessed

Top 10 local-alignment scores from 14 concepts assessed

“Best” refers to modeled local operating alignment among the concepts assessed—not expected earnings, franchise-system quality, or candidate fit.

Rankings use full-precision scores.Displayed values use one decimal place. Identical displayed scores can therefore have different ranks, and close results should be treated as effectively similar.
RankFranchiseAlignment and tierLargest advantageLargest constraintEvidence confidence
1City WideFacility management
72.2Tier 2 · Favorable modeled alignment
+1.6 ptsTarget-market demandNo material negative local adjustmentModerate evidence confidence
2ActionCOACHBusiness coaching
71.8Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment
+1.2 ptsTarget-market demandNo material negative local adjustmentModerate evidence confidence
3FASTSIGNSSigns and graphics
71.6Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment
+1.4 ptsTarget-market demand-0.1 ptsLabor and staffing frictionModerate evidence confidence
4Jan-Pro InternationalCommercial cleaning
71.5Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment
+1.4 ptsTarget-market demandNo material negative local adjustmentModerate evidence confidence
5HomeSmilesProperty maintenance services
71.3Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment
+0.8 ptsTarget-market demand-0.1 ptsLabor and staffing frictionModerate evidence confidence
6ZOOM DRAINDrain and sewer service
70.7Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment
+0.4 ptsReferral ecosystem-0.3 ptsLabor and staffing frictionModerate evidence confidence
7Pillar To Post Home InspectorsHome inspection
70.6Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment
+0.4 ptsReferral ecosystemNo material negative local adjustmentModerate evidence confidence
8Rainbow International RestorationRestoration
70.6Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment
+0.5 ptsReferral ecosystem-0.1 ptsLabor and staffing frictionModerate evidence confidence
9PuroCleanRestoration
70.6Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment
+0.5 ptsReferral ecosystem-0.1 ptsLabor and staffing frictionModerate evidence confidence
10Tiger AdjustersPublic insurance adjusting
70.5Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment
+0.4 ptsReferral ecosystem-0.1 ptsLabor and staffing frictionModerate evidence confidence

View all 14 score calculations

Original factor comparison

How each factor affected the highest-rated franchise concepts

The graph includes the top 14 concepts by local-alignment score. Only nonzero score contributions are plotted. A factor is removed when every displayed concept received 0.0 points from it. Hover or focus a concept name to highlight all of its remaining data points.

Factor impact among the highest-rated franchise conceptsDiverging dot plot showing nonzero factor score contributions for the top 14 concepts. Zero-point concept-factor pairs are omitted, and factors with no nonzero contributions are excluded.+2.0+1.00.0-1.0-2.0
Target-market demand
#1 City Wide · Target-market demand · +1.6 pts1#2 ActionCOACH · Target-market demand · +1.2 pts2#3 FASTSIGNS · Target-market demand · +1.4 pts3#4 Jan-Pro International · Target-market demand · +1.4 pts4#5 HomeSmiles · Target-market demand · +0.8 pts5#6 ZOOM DRAIN · Target-market demand · +0.3 pts6#7 Pillar To Post Home Inspectors · Target-market demand · +0.1 pts7#10 Tiger Adjusters · Target-market demand · +0.2 pts10#11 Mr. Rooter · Target-market demand · +0.2 pts11#12 Aire Serv · Target-market demand · +0.2 pts12#14 Workout Anytime · Target-market demand · -0.5 pts14
Property replacement-cycle demand
#6 ZOOM DRAIN · Property replacement-cycle demand · +0.3 pts6#7 Pillar To Post Home Inspectors · Property replacement-cycle demand · +0.1 pts7#8 Rainbow International Restoration · Property replacement-cycle demand · +0.2 pts8#9 PuroClean · Property replacement-cycle demand · +0.2 pts9#11 Mr. Rooter · Property replacement-cycle demand · +0.3 pts11#12 Aire Serv · Property replacement-cycle demand · +0.3 pts12#13 Mister Sparky Electric · Property replacement-cycle demand · +0.3 pts13
Labor and staffing friction
#3 FASTSIGNS · Labor and staffing friction · -0.1 pts3#5 HomeSmiles · Labor and staffing friction · -0.1 pts5#6 ZOOM DRAIN · Labor and staffing friction · -0.3 pts6#8 Rainbow International Restoration · Labor and staffing friction · -0.1 pts8#9 PuroClean · Labor and staffing friction · -0.1 pts9#10 Tiger Adjusters · Labor and staffing friction · -0.1 pts10#11 Mr. Rooter · Labor and staffing friction · -0.3 pts11#12 Aire Serv · Labor and staffing friction · -0.3 pts12#13 Mister Sparky Electric · Labor and staffing friction · -0.3 pts13
Referral ecosystem
#1 City Wide · Referral ecosystem · +0.7 pts1#2 ActionCOACH · Referral ecosystem · +0.6 pts2#3 FASTSIGNS · Referral ecosystem · +0.3 pts3#4 Jan-Pro International · Referral ecosystem · +0.2 pts4#5 HomeSmiles · Referral ecosystem · +0.5 pts5#6 ZOOM DRAIN · Referral ecosystem · +0.4 pts6#7 Pillar To Post Home Inspectors · Referral ecosystem · +0.4 pts7#8 Rainbow International Restoration · Referral ecosystem · +0.5 pts8#9 PuroClean · Referral ecosystem · +0.5 pts9#10 Tiger Adjusters · Referral ecosystem · +0.4 pts10#11 Mr. Rooter · Referral ecosystem · +0.2 pts11#13 Mister Sparky Electric · Referral ecosystem · +0.1 pts13
Primary source records by factorTarget-market demand: [1] [2] [3] [5] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [13]Property replacement-cycle demand: [1] [2] [12] [19]Competitive environment: [5] [1] [8] [16]Labor and staffing friction: [6] [7] [11] [13] [2]Transportation, routing, and parking: [14] [15] [9] [10]Real estate and site feasibility: [16] [2] [4] [17] [18] [19]Sales and customer acquisition: [5] [1] [8]Referral ecosystem: [11] [12] [13] [9] [10] [8] [5]Territory quality: [1] [2] [8] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19]Regulatory and operating friction: [4] [17] [18] [19] [3]
View the chart data as a table
ConceptTarget-market demandProperty replacement-cycle demandLabor and staffing frictionReferral ecosystem
#1 City Wide+1.6 pts+0.7 pts
#2 ActionCOACH+1.2 pts+0.6 pts
#3 FASTSIGNS+1.4 pts-0.1 pts+0.3 pts
#4 Jan-Pro International+1.4 pts+0.2 pts
#5 HomeSmiles+0.8 pts-0.1 pts+0.5 pts
#6 ZOOM DRAIN+0.3 pts+0.3 pts-0.3 pts+0.4 pts
#7 Pillar To Post Home Inspectors+0.1 pts+0.1 pts+0.4 pts
#8 Rainbow International Restoration+0.2 pts-0.1 pts+0.5 pts
#9 PuroClean+0.2 pts-0.1 pts+0.5 pts
#10 Tiger Adjusters+0.2 pts-0.1 pts+0.4 pts
#11 Mr. Rooter+0.2 pts+0.3 pts-0.3 pts+0.2 pts
#12 Aire Serv+0.2 pts+0.3 pts-0.3 pts
#13 Mister Sparky Electric+0.3 pts-0.3 pts+0.1 pts
#14 Workout Anytime-0.5 pts

Rank stability

Which positions depend most on individual assumptions?

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

#1 City WideStable · tested #1–#1
#2 ActionCOACHModerately sensitive · tested #2–#4
#3 FASTSIGNSHighly sensitive · tested #3–#9
#4 Jan-Pro InternationalHighly sensitive · tested #2–#10
#5 HomeSmilesStable · tested #5–#6
#6 ZOOM DRAINModerately sensitive · tested #6–#8
#7 Pillar To Post Home InspectorsHighly sensitive · tested #5–#10
#8 Rainbow International RestorationHighly sensitive · tested #3–#11
#9 PuroCleanHighly sensitive · tested #4–#12
#10 Tiger AdjustersHighly sensitive · tested #6–#11
#11 Mr. RooterHighly sensitive · tested #7–#11
#12 Aire ServHighly sensitive · tested #8–#14
#13 Mister Sparky ElectricStable · tested #12–#13
#14 Workout AnytimeStable · 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 baseline70.0
Target-market demand+1.6
Property replacement-cycle demandNot applicable to this operating model
Competitive environmentNot included in the score
Labor and staffing frictionNot applicable to this operating model
Transportation, routing, and parkingDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Real estate and site feasibilityMeasured; no meaningful local adjustment
Sales and customer acquisitionDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Referral ecosystem+0.7
Territory qualityDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Regulatory and operating frictionDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Full-precision calculated score72.25
Published local-market alignment72.2

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

Starting pointThe operating-model baseline shown in the first ledger row.
InteractionsAny interaction or gate is included in the relevant contribution or calibration row.
Confidence treatmentEvidence confidence is disclosed separately unless the model definition explicitly applies a calibration adjustment.
RoundingFull-precision contributions are summed before the final displayed score is rounded to one decimal place; whole-number results are shown without a trailing decimal.

Interpretation

How to interpret the result

City Wide, ActionCOACH, FASTSIGNS led because their operating requirements captured more of the local support from target-market demand while remaining less exposed to labor and staffing friction. The same city condition can help one operating model and constrain another, so score differences should be read through each concept's factor pattern rather than as a universal franchise-quality verdict. The ordering is most assumption-sensitive for FASTSIGNS, Jan-Pro International, Pillar To Post Home Inspectors; their ranks move more widely when individual factors are neutralized.

Factor impact

Which local conditions changed scores or rankings?

We neutralized one factor at a time, recalculated every score, and then measured both absolute score movement and changes in rank order.

Operating environment53Mixed or model dependent

Target-market demand

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

We applied a measurable adjustment to 11 of 14 concepts. When we neutralized the factor and recalculated the table, 13 concepts changed position. Jan-Pro International moved from #4 to #11, the largest movement among concepts directly affected by this factor.

Concepts adjusted11 of 14
Average among affected+0.6 pts
Average across all concepts+0.5 pts
Concepts changing rank13

Concepts helped most

City WideFacility management
+1.6 pts
FASTSIGNSSigns and graphics
+1.4 pts
Jan-Pro InternationalCommercial cleaning
+1.4 pts
ActionCOACHBusiness coaching
+1.2 pts
HomeSmilesProperty maintenance services
+0.8 pts

Concepts challenged most

Workout AnytimeFitness
-0.5 pts
Measured but not differentiating in this concept set
  • Competitive environmentNo material score adjustment
  • Transportation, routing, and parkingNo material score adjustment
  • Real estate and site feasibilityNo material score adjustment
  • Sales and customer acquisitionNo material score adjustment
  • Territory qualityNo material score adjustment
  • Regulatory and operating frictionNo material score adjustment

Category comparisons

Best franchise categories we assessed in Tampa, Florida

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

Limited two-concept comparison

Best Restoration franchise opportunities we assessed in Tampa, Florida

70.6

2 Restoration concepts qualified for comparison, with scores ranging from 70.6 to 70.6. Rainbow International Restoration ranked highest at 70.6. Referral ecosystem added 0.5 points on average among the affected concepts. Labor and staffing friction reduced the exposed concepts by 0.1 points on average.

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
70.6–70.6
Category average
70.6
Rainbow International Restoration70.6
PuroClean70.6

Compare all assessed concepts

Explore the complete score calculations

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

#1Tier 2 · Favorable modeled alignment72.2

City Wide

Facility management · B2B facility management and vendor coordination

Increase +1.6 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 baseline70.0
Target-market demand+1.6
Property replacement-cycle demandNot applicable to this operating model
Competitive environmentNot included in the score
Labor and staffing frictionNot applicable to this operating model
Transportation, routing, and parkingDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Real estate and site feasibilityMeasured; no meaningful local adjustment
Sales and customer acquisitionDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Referral ecosystem+0.7
Territory qualityDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Regulatory and operating frictionDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Full-precision calculated score72.25
Published local-market alignment72.2

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
Limited
Overall evidence confidence
Moderate evidence confidence
Largest absolute effect
Target-market demand +1.6 pts
Tested rank range
#1–#1

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 alignment71.8

ActionCOACH

Business coaching · home-based B2B advisory

Increase +1.2 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 baseline70.0
Target-market demand+1.2
Property replacement-cycle demandNot applicable to this operating model
Competitive environmentNot included in the score
Labor and staffing frictionNot applicable to this operating model
Transportation, routing, and parkingDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Real estate and site feasibilityMeasured; no meaningful local adjustment
Sales and customer acquisitionDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Referral ecosystem+0.6
Territory qualityDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Regulatory and operating frictionDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Full-precision calculated score71.82
Published local-market alignment71.8

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
Limited
Overall evidence confidence
Moderate evidence confidence
Largest absolute effect
Target-market demand +1.2 pts
Tested rank range
#2–#4

Most important next check

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

#3Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment71.6

FASTSIGNS

Signs and graphics · B2B production and installation center

Increase +1.4 pts Target-market demandReduction -0.1 pts Labor and staffing friction

Rank sensitivity: Highly sensitive

How we scored this concept

Full score ledger

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

Neutral model baseline70.0
Target-market demand+1.4
Property replacement-cycle demandNot applicable to this operating model
Competitive environmentNot included in the score
Labor and staffing friction-0.1
Transportation, routing, and parkingDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Real estate and site feasibilityMeasured; no meaningful local adjustment
Sales and customer acquisitionDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Referral ecosystem+0.3
Territory qualityDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Regulatory and operating frictionDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Full-precision calculated score71.62
Published local-market alignment71.6

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

Evidence confidence

City Modifier Evidence
Adequate
Factor Research Coverage
Strong
Franchise-profile completeness
Limited
Source-evidence confidence
Strong
Geographic applicability
Limited
Overall evidence confidence
Moderate evidence confidence
Largest absolute effect
Target-market demand +1.4 pts
Tested rank range
#3–#9

Most important next check

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

#4Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment71.5

Jan-Pro International

Commercial cleaning · recurring commercial route service

Increase +1.4 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 baseline70.0
Target-market demand+1.4
Property replacement-cycle demandNot applicable to this operating model
Competitive environmentNot included in the score
Labor and staffing frictionNot applicable to this operating model
Transportation, routing, and parkingDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Real estate and site feasibilityMeasured; no meaningful local adjustment
Sales and customer acquisitionDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Referral ecosystem+0.2
Territory qualityDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Regulatory and operating frictionDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Full-precision calculated score71.53
Published local-market alignment71.5

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
Limited
Overall evidence confidence
Moderate evidence confidence
Largest absolute effect
Target-market demand +1.4 pts
Tested rank range
#2–#10

Most important next check

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

#5Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment71.3

HomeSmiles

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

Increase +0.8 pts Target-market demandReduction -0.1 pts Labor and staffing friction

Rank sensitivity: Stable

How we scored this concept

Full score ledger

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

Neutral model baseline70.0
Target-market demand+0.8
Property replacement-cycle demandNot applicable to this operating model
Competitive environmentNot included in the score
Labor and staffing friction-0.1
Transportation, routing, and parkingDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Real estate and site feasibilityMeasured; no meaningful local adjustment
Sales and customer acquisitionDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Referral ecosystem+0.5
Territory qualityDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Regulatory and operating frictionDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Full-precision calculated score71.25
Published local-market alignment71.3

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

Evidence confidence

City Modifier Evidence
Adequate
Factor Research Coverage
Strong
Franchise-profile completeness
Adequate
Source-evidence confidence
Strong
Geographic applicability
Limited
Overall evidence confidence
Moderate evidence confidence
Largest absolute effect
Target-market demand +0.8 pts
Tested rank range
#5–#6

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 alignment70.7

ZOOM DRAIN

Drain and sewer service · emergency skilled-trade route service

Increase +0.4 pts Referral ecosystemReduction -0.3 pts Labor and staffing friction

Rank sensitivity: Moderately sensitive

How we scored this concept

Full score ledger

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

Neutral model baseline70.0
Target-market demand+0.3
Property replacement-cycle demand+0.3
Competitive environmentNot included in the score
Labor and staffing friction-0.3
Transportation, routing, and parkingDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Real estate and site feasibilityMeasured; no meaningful local adjustment
Sales and customer acquisitionDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Referral ecosystem+0.4
Territory qualityDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Regulatory and operating frictionDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Full-precision calculated score70.70
Published local-market alignment70.7

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
Limited
Overall evidence confidence
Moderate evidence confidence
Largest absolute effect
Referral ecosystem +0.4 pts
Tested rank range
#6–#8

Most important next check

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

#7Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment70.6

Pillar To Post Home Inspectors

Home inspection · mobile property inspection service

Increase +0.4 pts Referral ecosystemNo 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 baseline70.0
Target-market demand+0.1
Property replacement-cycle demand+0.1
Competitive environmentNot included in the score
Labor and staffing frictionEffect below the publication threshold
Transportation, routing, and parkingDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Real estate and site feasibilityMeasured; no meaningful local adjustment
Sales and customer acquisitionDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Referral ecosystem+0.4
Territory qualityDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Regulatory and operating frictionDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Full-precision calculated score70.58
Published local-market alignment70.6

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

Evidence confidence

City Modifier Evidence
Adequate
Factor Research Coverage
Strong
Franchise-profile completeness
Limited
Source-evidence confidence
Strong
Geographic applicability
Limited
Overall evidence confidence
Moderate evidence confidence
Largest absolute effect
Referral ecosystem +0.4 pts
Tested rank range
#5–#10

Most important next check

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

#8Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment70.6

Rainbow International Restoration

Restoration · emergency property restoration

Increase +0.5 pts Referral ecosystemReduction -0.1 pts Labor and staffing friction

Rank sensitivity: Highly sensitive

How we scored this concept

Full score ledger

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

Neutral model baseline70.0
Target-market demandNot applicable to this operating model
Property replacement-cycle demand+0.2
Competitive environmentNot included in the score
Labor and staffing friction-0.1
Transportation, routing, and parkingDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Real estate and site feasibilityMeasured; no meaningful local adjustment
Sales and customer acquisitionDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Referral ecosystem+0.5
Territory qualityDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Regulatory and operating frictionDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Full-precision calculated score70.57
Published local-market alignment70.6

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

Evidence confidence

City Modifier Evidence
Adequate
Factor Research Coverage
Strong
Franchise-profile completeness
Limited
Source-evidence confidence
Strong
Geographic applicability
Limited
Overall evidence confidence
Moderate evidence confidence
Largest absolute effect
Referral ecosystem +0.5 pts
Tested rank range
#3–#11

Most important next check

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

#9Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment70.6

PuroClean

Restoration · emergency property restoration

Increase +0.5 pts Referral ecosystemReduction -0.1 pts Labor and staffing friction

Rank sensitivity: Highly sensitive

How we scored this concept

Full score ledger

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

Neutral model baseline70.0
Target-market demandNot applicable to this operating model
Property replacement-cycle demand+0.2
Competitive environmentNot included in the score
Labor and staffing friction-0.1
Transportation, routing, and parkingDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Real estate and site feasibilityMeasured; no meaningful local adjustment
Sales and customer acquisitionDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Referral ecosystem+0.5
Territory qualityDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Regulatory and operating frictionDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Full-precision calculated score70.57
Published local-market alignment70.6

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

Evidence confidence

City Modifier Evidence
Adequate
Factor Research Coverage
Strong
Franchise-profile completeness
Limited
Source-evidence confidence
Strong
Geographic applicability
Limited
Overall evidence confidence
Moderate evidence confidence
Largest absolute effect
Referral ecosystem +0.5 pts
Tested rank range
#4–#12

Most important next check

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

#10Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment70.5

Tiger Adjusters

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

Increase +0.4 pts Referral ecosystemReduction -0.1 pts Labor and staffing friction

Rank sensitivity: Highly sensitive

How we scored this concept

Full score ledger

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

Neutral model baseline70.0
Target-market demand+0.2
Property replacement-cycle demandNot applicable to this operating model
Competitive environmentNot included in the score
Labor and staffing friction-0.1
Transportation, routing, and parkingDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Real estate and site feasibilityMeasured; no meaningful local adjustment
Sales and customer acquisitionDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Referral ecosystem+0.4
Territory qualityDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Regulatory and operating frictionDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Full-precision calculated score70.50
Published local-market alignment70.5

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
Limited
Overall evidence confidence
Moderate evidence confidence
Largest absolute effect
Referral ecosystem +0.4 pts
Tested rank range
#6–#11

Most important next check

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

#11Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment70.4

Mr. Rooter

Plumbing · scheduled and emergency skilled-trade service

Increase +0.3 pts Property replacement-cycle demandReduction -0.3 pts Labor and staffing friction

Rank sensitivity: Highly sensitive

How we scored this concept

Full score ledger

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

Neutral model baseline70.0
Target-market demand+0.2
Property replacement-cycle demand+0.3
Competitive environmentNot included in the score
Labor and staffing friction-0.3
Transportation, routing, and parkingDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Real estate and site feasibilityMeasured; no meaningful local adjustment
Sales and customer acquisitionDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Referral ecosystem+0.2
Territory qualityDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Regulatory and operating frictionDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Full-precision calculated score70.39
Published local-market alignment70.4

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
Limited
Overall evidence confidence
Moderate evidence confidence
Largest absolute effect
Property replacement-cycle demand +0.3 pts
Tested rank range
#7–#11

Most important next check

Which ZIP codes and appointment density assumptions define Mr. Rooter's practical service territory?

#12Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment70.2

Aire Serv

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

Increase +0.3 pts Property replacement-cycle demandReduction -0.3 pts Labor and staffing friction

Rank sensitivity: Highly sensitive

How we scored this concept

Full score ledger

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

Neutral model baseline70.0
Target-market demand+0.2
Property replacement-cycle demand+0.3
Competitive environmentNot included in the score
Labor and staffing friction-0.3
Transportation, routing, and parkingDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Real estate and site feasibilityMeasured; no meaningful local adjustment
Sales and customer acquisitionDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Referral ecosystemNot applicable to this operating model
Territory qualityDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Regulatory and operating frictionDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Full-precision calculated score70.21
Published local-market alignment70.2

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

Evidence confidence

City Modifier Evidence
Adequate
Factor Research Coverage
Strong
Franchise-profile completeness
Adequate
Source-evidence confidence
Strong
Geographic applicability
Limited
Overall evidence confidence
Moderate evidence confidence
Largest absolute effect
Labor and staffing friction -0.3 pts
Tested rank range
#8–#14

Most important next check

Which ZIP codes and appointment density assumptions define Aire Serv's practical service territory?

#13Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment70.1

Mister Sparky Electric

Electrical · skilled-trade home service

Increase +0.3 pts Property replacement-cycle demandReduction -0.3 pts Labor and staffing friction

Rank sensitivity: Stable

How we scored this concept

Full score ledger

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

Neutral model baseline70.0
Target-market demandNot applicable to this operating model
Property replacement-cycle demand+0.3
Competitive environmentNot included in the score
Labor and staffing friction-0.3
Transportation, routing, and parkingDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Real estate and site feasibilityMeasured; no meaningful local adjustment
Sales and customer acquisitionDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Referral ecosystem+0.1
Territory qualityDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Regulatory and operating frictionDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Full-precision calculated score70.06
Published local-market alignment70.1

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

Evidence confidence

City Modifier Evidence
Adequate
Factor Research Coverage
Strong
Franchise-profile completeness
Limited
Source-evidence confidence
Strong
Geographic applicability
Limited
Overall evidence confidence
Moderate evidence confidence
Largest absolute effect
Labor and staffing friction -0.3 pts
Tested rank range
#12–#13

Most important next check

Which ZIP codes and appointment density assumptions define Mister Sparky Electric's practical service territory?

#14Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment69.5

Workout Anytime

Fitness · fixed-location membership fitness

No material positive local adjustment identifiedReduction -0.5 pts Target-market demand

Rank sensitivity: Stable

How we scored this concept

Full score ledger

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

Neutral model baseline70.0
Target-market demand-0.5
Property replacement-cycle demandNot applicable to this operating model
Competitive environmentNot included in the score
Labor and staffing frictionNot applicable to this operating model
Transportation, routing, and parkingDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Real estate and site feasibilityMeasured; no meaningful local adjustment
Sales and customer acquisitionDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Referral ecosystemNot applicable to this operating model
Territory qualityDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Regulatory and operating frictionDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition
Full-precision calculated score69.46
Published local-market alignment69.5

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
Limited
Overall evidence confidence
Moderate evidence confidence
Largest absolute effect
Target-market demand -0.5 pts
Tested rank range
#13–#14

Most important next check

What trade-area boundary and population base would Workout Anytime use to evaluate the proposed location?

Metric registry

The 25 local metrics behind this analysis

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

View all local metrics
MetricRaw valuePeriodGeographyHow usedSource
Resident population estimate on July 1, 2025413,554peopleJuly 1, 2025 population estimate and 2020-2024 selected characteristicsTampa, FloridaEvidence for Target-market demand, Territory quality [1]
Population change from the April 2020 estimate base to July 20257.3percentJuly 1, 2025 population estimate and 2020-2024 selected characteristicsTampa, FloridaEvidence for Target-market demand [1]
Households and owner-occupied housing sharehouseholds: 166,278; owner occupied housing share: 50.3households and percentJuly 1, 2025 population estimate and 2020-2024 selected characteristicsTampa, FloridaEvidence for Target-market demand, Property replacement-cycle demand [1]
Estimated shortage of affordable and available rental units for households earning up to 50 percent of area median income26,153rental unitsPrimarily 2021-2023, with residential permitting through 2022 and projections through 2050Tampa, Florida renter marketEvidence for Target-market demand, Labor and staffing friction [2]
Median combined housing and transportation cost share and planning-district rangecitywide: 53; minimum: 40; minimum district: New Tampa; maximum: 66; maximum district: USF Institutionalpercent of household incomePrimarily 2021-2023, with residential permitting through 2022 and projections through 2050City of Tampa planning districtsEvidence for Target-market demand, Territory quality [2]
Permitted residential units from 2018 through 2022total: 16,980; single family: 5,873; duplex: 73; tri quad: 140; multifamily: 10,894permitted housing unitsPrimarily 2021-2023, with residential permitting through 2022 and projections through 2050City of TampaEvidence for Target-market demand, Property replacement-cycle demand, Real estate and site feasibility [2]
Housing units in the Florida Department of Revenue inventory built before 200037.8percent of listed unitsPrimarily 2021-2023, with residential permitting through 2022 and projections through 2050Tampa units in 2022 Florida Department of Revenue inventoryEvidence for Property replacement-cycle demand [2]
Housing units in the Florida Department of Revenue inventory built before 199017.3percent of listed unitsPrimarily 2021-2023, with residential permitting through 2022 and projections through 2050Tampa units in 2022 Florida Department of Revenue inventoryEvidence for Property replacement-cycle demand [2]
Housing units in structures with 50 or more units15.1percent of occupied unitsPrimarily 2021-2023, with residential permitting through 2022 and projections through 2050Tampa, FloridaEvidence for Target-market demand, Property replacement-cycle demand, Territory quality [2]
Short-term-rental share of housing stock varied across listed Tampa ZIP-code areasmaximum: 15.6; maximum zip: 33607; minimum: 1.9; minimum zip: 33647; listed total properties: 17,975percent of zip housing stock and propertiesPrimarily 2021-2023, with residential permitting through 2022 and projections through 2050Tampa ZIP-code areas; some ZIPs only partially inside city limitsEvidence for Target-market demand, Real estate and site feasibility, Territory quality [2]
Paid business tax receipt records in the indexed City of Tampa registry32,915receipt recordsPaid business tax receipt records for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2025; search index refreshed June 12, 2025City of Tampa business tax receipt searchEvidence for Target-market demand, Competitive environment, Sales and customer acquisition, Referral ecosystem [5]
Building permits issued or approved and inspections conducted in fiscal year 2025permits issued or approved: 29,835; inspections and reinspections conducted: 138,769; dedicated personnel: 102annual actions and personnelCity fiscal year 2025City of TampaEvidence for Regulatory and operating friction, Real estate and site feasibility [4]
Mean hourly wages for operationally relevant major occupational groups compared with national averagesall occupations: tampa msa: 31.96, united states: 33.54; food preparation and serving: tampa msa: 18.23, united states: 17.86; building and grounds cleaning: tampa msa: 18.07, united states: 19.66; construction and extraction: tampa msa: 26.69, united states: 31.42; installation maintenance and repair: tampa msa: 27.57, united states: 30.44; transportation and material moving: tampa msa: 21.28, united states: 23.96usd per hourMay 2025Tampa-StEvidence for Labor and staffing friction [6]
Metropolitan labor force and employment in May 2026labor force thousands: 1,690.6; employment thousands: 1,613.8thousands of peopleLabor force and employment through May 2026Tampa-StEvidence for Target-market demand, Labor and staffing friction [7]
Hillsborough County visitors, direct spending, and tourism-supported jobs in 2025visitors: 28,000,000; direct visitor spending usd: 6,000,000,000; supported jobs approximate: 62,000; visitation change: -0.6people usd jobs and percentCalendar year 2025Hillsborough County, FloridaEvidence for Target-market demand, Referral ecosystem, Territory quality [8]
Port Tampa Bay fiscal-year 2025 cargo and passenger activitycargo net tons: 32,415,926; teus: 262,803; cruise passengers: 1,660,315; cruise sailings: 368tons teus passengers and sailingsPort fiscal year 2025Port Tampa BayEvidence for Target-market demand, Transportation, routing, and parking, Referral ecosystem [9]
Projected Tampa International Airport passenger traffic for fiscal year 202625,700,000passenger movements projectedFY2026 budget and FY2025 passenger baselineTampa International AirportEvidence for Target-market demand, Transportation, routing, and parking, Referral ecosystem [10]
University of South Florida system student and employee scalestudents approximate: 50,000; employees more than: 16,000peopleFall 2025 enrollment and current employee countUniversity of South Florida system across Tampa Bay campusesEvidence for Target-market demand, Referral ecosystem, Labor and staffing friction [11]
USF Tampa campus physical footprintbuildings: 249; building square feet: 10,600,000; campus acres: 1,562buildings square feet and acresCurrent campus facts accessed July 2026University of South Florida Tampa campusEvidence for Target-market demand, Property replacement-cycle demand, Referral ecosystem [12]
MacDill Air Force Base community and economic scaleeconomic impact usd: 4,100,000,000; payroll usd: 1,500,000,000; indirect jobs: 18,200; dod beneficiaries: 240,000usd jobs and beneficiaries2023 economic impact; fact sheet current April 2025MacDill Air Force Base and Tampa Bay communityEvidence for Target-market demand, Referral ecosystem, Labor and staffing friction [13]
Downtown Tampa I-275/I-4 interchange construction statusproject start: fall 2023; expected completion: spring 2027; construction cost usd: 227,500,000; current work reference: June 2026project statusCurrent work activities June 2026; construction fall 2023 through expected spring 2027Downtown Tampa I-275/I-4 interchange and connected rampsEvidence for Transportation, routing, and parking, Territory quality [14]
Westshore I-275/SR 60 Priority 1A construction and listed closuresproject start: 2026-01-01; phase 1a cost usd: 653,300,000; frontage road lane closure through: late 2026; continuous frontage road closure through: 2027-01-31project statusPriority 1A construction beginning January 2026; listed closures through January 2027Westshore I-275/SR 60, airport approaches, and affected frontage roadsEvidence for Transportation, routing, and parking, Territory quality [15]
Tampa industrial market showed positive absorption and building-size segmentationpositive net absorption since early 2025 sqft approximate: 1,800,000; relative performance: smaller and mid sized buildings outperformed larger bulk distribution facilitiessquare feet and directional market conditionQ2 2026 and absorption since early 2025Tampa industrial marketEvidence for Real estate and site feasibility, Territory quality [16]
Construction in designated Tampa historic districts is reviewed under district design guidelinesarc districts: Hyde Park, Seminole Heights, Tampa Heights; blc district: Ybor City Historic Districtdistricts and review processCurrent guidance accessed July 2026Designated local historic districts in TampaEvidence for Regulatory and operating friction, Real estate and site feasibility, Territory quality [17] [18]
Flood maps determine property risk, insurance, elevation information, and building requirementsprimary causes: localized thunderstorm and tropical rainfall, tidally influenced flooding, storm surge; crs class: 5; flood zone policy discount percent: 25; outside flood zone policy discount percent: 10conditions and percentCurrent flood-map, insurance, and building-requirement guidance accessed July 2026City of Tampa FEMA and localized flood-hazard areasEvidence for Property replacement-cycle demand, Real estate and site feasibility, Territory quality, Regulatory and operating friction [19]

How to use the ranking

What the model can and cannot establish

  • Scores measure local operating alignment, not expected financial performance or franchise-system quality.
  • Citywide evidence may not describe the exact site or territory ultimately offered.
  • Conditional effects are shown for diligence but do not change the published score until their applicability is established.

Methodology

How the local-alignment ranking is calculated

01

Measure the city

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

02

Profile each operating model

Map each franchise to controlled operating attributes and local sensitivities.

03

Apply scoreable effects

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

04

Preserve conditional effects

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

05

Test rank sensitivity

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

06

Generate public output

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

Why every concept begins at 70.0

70.0 is a neutral display baseline shared by every concept. Local conditions can move a score by no more than 18.0 points in either direction under the current model. It is not a percentage, probability, or estimate of investment quality.

Precision and materiality

Calculations use full-precision values. Published scores and factor contributions display one decimal place, while ranks use full precision. Effects smaller than 0.1 points are identified as below the publication threshold rather than presented as a meaningful zero.

Score tiers

Tier 1 · Strongest modeled alignment80.0–100.0
Tier 2 · Favorable modeled alignment72.0–80.0
Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment64.0–72.0
Tier 4 · Higher-friction modeled alignment0.0–64.0

How factor rows are classified

Positive local adjustmentNegative local adjustmentMeasured; no meaningful local adjustmentEffect below the publication thresholdNot applicable to this operating modelDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating conditionNot included in the score
What “best” means here

“Best” means the strongest modeled local operating alignment among the franchise concepts assessed on this page.

Model 0.9.0 · Compiler 0.9.10-nonzero-markers-only · Analysis updated August 5, 2026

Model governance

How this report is calculated and corrected

Calculation controls

Model designer
Thomas Jepsen

No concept’s final score is manually raised or lowered after calculation. Before this template is activated, the report is reviewed for source scope, classification, arithmetic, unsupported claims, duplication, and readability.

Model history

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

Corrections policy

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

Source registry

Evidence represented in this report

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

  1. 1
    QuickFacts: Tampa city, Florida

    Used for: Resident population estimate on July 1, 2025, Population change from the April 2020 estimate base to July 2025, and Households and owner-occupied housing share

    Publisher
    U.S. Census Bureau
    Published
    May 14, 2026
    Data period
    July 1, 2025 population estimate and 2020-2024 selected characteristics
    Scope
    Tampa city, Florida
    Locator
    Population estimates and selected housing and household characteristics
    Source tier
    Tier 1 · government
    Accessed
    July 31, 2026
  2. 2
    City of Tampa Housing Needs Assessment — Data Report

    Used for: Estimated shortage of affordable and available rental units for households earning up to 50 percent of area median income, Median combined housing and transportation cost share and planning-district range, Permitted residential units from 2018 through 2022, Housing units in the Florida Department of Revenue inventory built before 2000, and Housing units in the Florida Department of Revenue inventory built before 1990

    Publisher
    City of Tampa City Planning Department
    Published
    March 1, 2024
    Data period
    Primarily 2021-2023, with residential permitting through 2022 and projections through 2050
    Scope
    City of Tampa, with explicitly labeled county, ZIP-code, block-group, and planning-district details
    Locator
    Pages 2, 9, 11, 16-18, 22-23, 27-28
    Source tier
    Tier 1 · government
    Accessed
    July 31, 2026
  3. 3
    Housing Needs Evaluation
    Publisher
    City of Tampa
    Data period
    Assessment completed summer 2025; demand forecast through 2045
    Scope
    City of Tampa
    Locator
    Overview, background, completion status, and housing-supply policy summary
    Source tier
    Tier 1 · government
    Accessed
    July 31, 2026
  4. 4
    Building Permit and Inspection Utilization Report (FY25)

    Used for: Building permits issued or approved and inspections conducted in fiscal year 2025

    Publisher
    City of Tampa Construction Services
    Data period
    City fiscal year 2025
    Scope
    City of Tampa permitting jurisdiction
    Locator
    Permit and inspection utilization table
    Source tier
    Tier 1 · government
    Accessed
    July 31, 2026
  5. 5
    Business Tax Receipts Search

    Used for: Paid business tax receipt records in the indexed City of Tampa registry

    Publisher
    City of Tampa
    Data period
    Paid business tax receipt records for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2025; search index refreshed June 12, 2025
    Scope
    City of Tampa business-tax registry; includes some professional, duplicate, and no-local-address records
    Locator
    Business Listings total in indexed search result
    Source tier
    Tier 1 · government
    Accessed
    July 31, 2026
  6. 6
    Occupational Employment and Wages in Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater, FL — May 2025

    Used for: Mean hourly wages for operationally relevant major occupational groups compared with national averages

    Publisher
    U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics
    Published
    July 7, 2026
    Data period
    May 2025
    Scope
    Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater metropolitan statistical area
    Locator
    Table A major occupational groups and technical note
    Source tier
    Tier 1 · government
    Accessed
    July 31, 2026
  7. 7
    Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater, FL Economy at a Glance

    Used for: Metropolitan labor force and employment in May 2026

    Publisher
    U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics
    Data period
    Labor force and employment through May 2026
    Scope
    Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater metropolitan statistical area
    Locator
    Labor force data table
    Source tier
    Tier 1 · government
    Accessed
    July 31, 2026
  8. 8
    2025 Tourism Campaigns Net $9.5 Billion Economic Impact to Support Hillsborough County

    Used for: Hillsborough County visitors, direct spending, and tourism-supported jobs in 2025

    Publisher
    Visit Tampa Bay
    Published
    June 5, 2026
    Data period
    Calendar year 2025
    Scope
    Hillsborough County visitor economy
    Locator
    Visitor count, direct spending, jobs, and year-over-year visitation section
    Source tier
    Tier 3 · credible industry with named methodology provider
    Accessed
    July 31, 2026
  9. 9
    Port Tampa Bay Statistics

    Used for: Port Tampa Bay fiscal-year 2025 cargo and passenger activity

    Publisher
    Port Tampa Bay
    Published
    November 10, 2025
    Data period
    Port fiscal year 2025
    Scope
    Port Tampa Bay facilities and traffic
    Locator
    FY25 cargo, TEU, cruise-passenger, and sailing totals
    Source tier
    Tier 1 · public authority
    Accessed
    July 31, 2026
  10. 10
    HCAA Approves FY2026 Budget, Including Main Terminal Upgrades

    Used for: Projected Tampa International Airport passenger traffic for fiscal year 2026

    Publisher
    Hillsborough County Aviation Authority / Tampa International Airport
    Published
    September 16, 2025
    Data period
    FY2026 budget and FY2025 passenger baseline
    Scope
    Tampa International Airport
    Locator
    Projected passenger traffic and capital-project summary
    Source tier
    Tier 1 · public authority
    Accessed
    July 31, 2026
  11. 11
    About USF

    Used for: University of South Florida system student and employee scale

    Publisher
    University of South Florida
    Data period
    Fall 2025 enrollment and current employee count
    Scope
    University of South Florida system across the Tampa Bay region
    Locator
    At a Glance
    Source tier
    Tier 2 · recognized institution
    Accessed
    July 31, 2026
  12. 12
    Tampa Campus

    Used for: USF Tampa campus physical footprint

    Publisher
    University of South Florida
    Data period
    Current campus facts accessed July 2026
    Scope
    USF Tampa campus
    Locator
    Campus acreage, building count, and square footage
    Source tier
    Tier 2 · recognized institution
    Accessed
    July 31, 2026
  13. 13
    MacDill Air Force Base Fact Sheet

    Used for: MacDill Air Force Base community and economic scale

    Publisher
    MacDill Air Force Base, U.S. Air Force
    Published
    April 1, 2025
    Data period
    2023 economic impact; fact sheet current April 2025
    Scope
    MacDill Air Force Base and Tampa Bay community impact
    Locator
    Community Engagement and economic-impact section
    Source tier
    Tier 1 · government
    Accessed
    July 31, 2026
  14. 14
    Downtown Tampa Interchange (I-275/I-4) Safety and Operational Improvements

    Used for: Downtown Tampa I-275/I-4 interchange construction status

    Publisher
    Florida Department of Transportation District Seven
    Data period
    Current work activities June 2026; construction fall 2023 through expected spring 2027
    Scope
    I-275/I-4 Downtown Tampa interchange and adjacent ramps
    Locator
    Project Details, About, Current Work Activities, and expected completion
    Source tier
    Tier 1 · government
    Accessed
    July 31, 2026
  15. 15
    Tampa’s Westshore Interchange (I-275/SR 60) Safety and Operational Improvements

    Used for: Westshore I-275/SR 60 Priority 1A construction and listed closures

    Publisher
    Florida Department of Transportation District Seven
    Data period
    Priority 1A construction beginning January 2026; listed closures through January 2027
    Scope
    I-275/SR 60 Westshore area, airport approaches, and affected frontage roads
    Locator
    Project Details, Priority 1A, funding schedule, and closures
    Source tier
    Tier 1 · government
    Accessed
    July 31, 2026
  16. 16
    Tampa Industrial Figures — Q2 2026

    Used for: Tampa industrial market showed positive absorption and building-size segmentation

    Publisher
    CBRE
    Published
    July 9, 2026
    Data period
    Q2 2026 and absorption since early 2025
    Scope
    Tampa industrial market
    Locator
    Market balance, absorption, building-size segmentation, and construction pipeline
    Source tier
    Tier 3 · credible industry
    Accessed
    July 31, 2026
  17. 17
    Design Guidelines

    Used for: Construction in designated Tampa historic districts is reviewed under district design guidelines

    Publisher
    City of Tampa Historic Preservation
    Data period
    Current guidance accessed July 2026
    Scope
    Hyde Park, Seminole Heights, Tampa Heights, and Ybor City historic districts
    Locator
    District design-guideline use by the Architectural Review Commission and Barrio Latino Commission
    Source tier
    Tier 1 · government
    Accessed
    July 31, 2026
  18. 18
    Barrio Latino Commission

    Used for: Construction in designated Tampa historic districts is reviewed under district design guidelines

    Publisher
    City of Tampa Historic Preservation
    Data period
    Current process and 2026 meeting information accessed July 2026
    Scope
    Ybor City Historic District
    Locator
    Commission responsibility, design-review framework, construction review, forms, and fee-schedule link
    Source tier
    Tier 1 · government
    Accessed
    July 31, 2026
  19. 19
    Flooding

    Used for: Flood maps determine property risk, insurance, elevation information, and building requirements

    Publisher
    City of Tampa Stormwater Division
    Data period
    Current flood-map, insurance, and building-requirement guidance accessed July 2026
    Scope
    City of Tampa, with property-specific FEMA and localized flood-hazard applicability
    Locator
    Flood causes, FIRM use, property inquiries, NFIP participation, and Community Rating System status
    Source tier
    Tier 1 · government
    Accessed
    July 31, 2026

Before contacting a franchisor

Complete the next layer of due diligence

  • Confirm the exact protected territory and neighboring units.
  • Review the current Franchise Disclosure Document.
  • Validate local staffing, licensing, insurance, and service-base assumptions.
  • Obtain location, vehicle, buildout, or working-capital estimates.
  • Speak with current and former franchisees.
  • Build a candidate-specific financial scenario.

Apply the analysis to your situation

Review how these market findings apply to your budget, role, and proposed territory.

The city score does not include your experience, capital structure, time commitment, financing, or exact territory.

Request a private franchise review
View methodologyView source registry

Twenty Twenty-Five

Take Free Franchise Match Quiz