70.1 average across 2 concepts
Local operating-model alignment analysis
Best Franchise Opportunities We Assessed in Youngstown, Ohio
We compared 14 franchise concepts for Youngstown, Ohio. Replacement and repair demand was a leading positive mechanism. Winter parking and access pressure was a leading operating constraint.
What “best” means in this ranking“Best” means the strongest modeled local operating alignment among the franchise concepts assessed on this page. It does not estimate earnings or determine which franchise is best for a particular candidate.
14Concepts evaluated
19Sources used
12Primary 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
0.7 points average among 7 affected concepts
0.4 points average reduction among 13 affected concepts
Tested rank range spans 8 positions
Executive conclusion
What the ranking means for Youngstown, Ohio
City Wide, Jan-Pro International, and ActionCOACH produced the highest modeled local-alignment scores in the evaluated set. Replacement and repair demand was the strongest positive scored mechanism among 7 exposed concepts, adding 0.7 points on average. One important asymmetry was that the same local condition supported replacement and repair demand while also creating legacy-system service complexity. These scores describe local operating alignment, not expected returns or overall franchise quality; the offered territory and franchise economics still require separate diligence.
How this differs from a directory: the model does not award points for brand popularity, advertising placement, or referral compensation. It tests how documented local conditions interact with each concept’s operating requirements.
Best franchise opportunities assessed
Top 10 local-alignment scores from 14 concepts assessed
“Best” refers to modeled local operating alignment among the concepts assessed—not expected earnings, franchise-system quality, or candidate fit.
Rankings use full-precision scores.Displayed values use one decimal place. Identical displayed scores can therefore have different ranks, and close results should be treated as effectively similar.
| Rank | Franchise | Alignment and tier | Largest advantage | Largest constraint | Evidence confidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | City WideFacility managementInvestment: $229,729–$410,730 | 72.1Tier 2 · Favorable modeled alignment | +2.0 ptsTarget-market demand | -0.1 ptsTransportation, routing, and parking | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 2 | Jan-Pro InternationalCommercial cleaningInvestment: $130,000–$421,500 | 71.1Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +1.4 ptsTarget-market demand | -0.3 ptsTransportation, routing, and parking | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 3 | ActionCOACHBusiness coachingInvestment: $71,668–$303,513 | 70.7Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +0.3 ptsReferral ecosystem | No material negative local adjustment | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 4 | FASTSIGNSSigns and graphicsInvestment: $231,226–$386,285 | 70.4Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +0.8 ptsTarget-market demand | -0.5 ptsTransportation, routing, and parking | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 5 | HomeSmilesProperty maintenance servicesInvestment: $148,110–$201,800 | 70.4Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +0.7 ptsTarget-market demand | -0.3 ptsTransportation, routing, and parking | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 6 | Rainbow International RestorationRestorationInvestment: $185,336–$351,900 | 70.2Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +0.6 ptsProperty replacement-cycle demand | -0.4 ptsTransportation, routing, and parking | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 7 | PuroCleanRestorationInvestment: $54,575–$262,145 | 70.0Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +0.6 ptsProperty replacement-cycle demand | -0.3 ptsLabor and staffing friction | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 8 | Pillar To Post Home InspectorsHome inspectionInvestment: $102,690–$134,290 | 69.9Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +0.4 ptsProperty replacement-cycle demand | -0.3 ptsTransportation, routing, and parking | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 9 | Tiger AdjustersPublic insurance adjustingInvestment: $43,050–$159,500 | 69.8Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | No material positive local adjustment | -0.2 ptsTransportation, routing, and parking | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 10 | ZOOM DRAINDrain and sewer serviceInvestment: $266,250–$570,500 | 69.6Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +0.9 ptsProperty replacement-cycle demand | -0.7 ptsLabor and staffing friction | Moderate evidence confidence |
Conditions that changed the analysis
What mattered most in Youngstown, Ohio
Predominantly pre-1980 housing stock supports repair and replacement demand while increasing legacy-system service complexity
The same local condition created complementary effects: replacement and repair demand supported exposed concepts while legacy-system service complexity constrained others. [4]
Freeze-thaw street impacts and snow-emergency parking bans create recurring winter access friction
This relationship affected 13 concepts and reduced 0.4 points on average among those exposed. Local evidence: Freeze-thaw, salting, and plowing impacts on city streets: The Youngstown Street Department states that freeze-thaw cycles and consistent salting and plowing significantly affect streets and prioritizes main and secondary streets for pothole repairs before local low-volume streets. qualitative finding. [7] [8]
Youngstown's population estimate declined 2.0 percent from the April 2020 estimate base to July 2025
Citywide population decline is a meaningful consumer-market constraint but does not imply uniform weak demand across buyer types or corridors. The current city plan reports 40.3 percent of jobs in education and health care services, identifies YSU, Youngstown City Schools, and Mercy Health among major employers, and describes material corridor differences: Belmont is institutionally anchored while parts of the East Side have relatively low traffic and little walkability. Institutional service demand can therefore remain material even as discretionary household demand and some fixed-location trade areas face pressure. [3] [4] [13] [15]
Evidence behind the city mechanisms
Predominantly pre-1980 housing stock supports repair and replacement demand while increasing legacy-system service complexity3 local facts · 2 modeled effects · 1 source
- Housing units by broad construction era: built before 1950: 43; built 1950 through 1979: 48 percent of housing units [4]
- Share of occupied housing by tenure built before 1980 in the plan's lead-risk table: owner occupied: 96; renter occupied: 85 percent by tenure [4]
- Official plan finding on older-stock maintenance and rehabilitation need: The city plan states that older housing requires more continual maintenance, identifies approximately 50 years as a common potential-deficiency threshold, and reports repair costs and household income as barriers to bringing stock up to standard. qualitative finding [4]
Replacement and repair demandProperty replacement-cycle demand
Legacy-system service complexityLabor and staffing friction
High poverty and housing cost burden constrain discretionary household spending for exposed concepts1 modeled effect
Discretionary-spending pressureTarget-market demand
Healthcare is a major component of Youngstown's institutional employment and service base1 modeled effect
Healthcare institutional service demandTarget-market demand
Youngstown State University and public-sector institutions support institutional accounts and a professional relationship base3 local facts · 2 modeled effects · 3 sources
- Youngstown State University total headcount change in Fall 2025: 2.1 percent year over year [13]
- Companies assisted by YSU's Export Assistance Network in the past year: 104 companies [14]
- City-plan description of commercial-corridor differences: south side: Market Street, Glenwood Avenue, Canfield Road, and South Avenue are described as walkable with many commercially zoned properties.; east side: McGuffey Road and Oak Street/MacCartney Road are primarily residential with developable land but relatively low traffic and little walkability.; north side us 422: US 422 is described as dominated by manufacturing and lacking walkability.; north side belmont: Belmont Avenue is described as diversified and anchored by Youngstown State University and Mercy Health St. Elizabeth Hospital. qualitative submarket profile [4]
University and government account demandTarget-market demand
Institutional professional relationship baseReferral ecosystem
Freeze-thaw street impacts and snow-emergency parking bans create recurring winter access friction1 modeled effect
Winter parking and access pressureTransportation, routing, and parking
Compare all assessed concepts
Local impact by franchise concept
14 concepts shown. Expand a concept to see the score-changing factors and their modeled drivers; the full audit ledger stays collapsed.
#1Tier 2 · Favorable modeled alignment72.1
City Wide
Initial investment: $229,729–$410,730
Increase +2.0 pts Target-market demandReduction -0.1 pts Transportation, routing, and parking
Rank sensitivity: Stable
Why it ranks here
Score-changing local factors only. Evidence links open the underlying city finding.
| Local factor | Modeled drivers | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +2.0 pts | |
| Referral ecosystem |
| +0.2 pts |
| Transportation, routing, and parking |
| -0.1 pts |
| Net local movement | +2.10 pts | |
Net uses full-precision effects; displayed factor and driver rows are rounded.
Franchise evidence
Source material assessed
Item 3 — Litigation
1 image
Item 6 — Other Fees
1 image
Item 7 — Estimated Initial Investment
2 images
Item 12 — Territory
1 image
Item 20 — Outlets and Franchise Information
1 image
Full calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not mistaken for a score-changing effect.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +2.0 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Not included in the score |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | -0.1 |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | +0.2 |
| 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 | 72.10 |
| Published local-market alignment | 72.1 |
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
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Adequate
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Target-market demand +2.0 pts
- Tested rank range
- #1–#2
#2Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment71.1
Jan-Pro International
Initial investment: $130,000–$421,500
Increase +1.4 pts Target-market demandReduction -0.3 pts Transportation, routing, and parking
Rank sensitivity: Highly sensitive
Why it ranks here
Score-changing local factors only. Evidence links open the underlying city finding.
| Local factor | Modeled drivers | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +1.4 pts | |
| Transportation, routing, and parking |
| -0.3 pts |
| Net local movement | +1.08 pts | |
Net uses full-precision effects; displayed factor and driver rows are rounded.
Franchise evidence
Source material assessed
Item 3 — Litigation
1 image
Item 6 — Other Fees
1 image
Item 7 — Estimated Initial Investment
1 image
Item 12 — Territory
1 image
Item 20 — Outlets and Franchise Information
1 image
Full calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not mistaken for a score-changing effect.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +1.4 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Not included in the score |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | -0.3 |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | Not included in the score |
| Territory quality | 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 | 71.08 |
| Published local-market alignment | 71.1 |
Factor calculations use full precision. Contributions and published scores are displayed to one decimal place; ranking order uses the full-precision score.
Evidence confidence
- City Modifier Evidence
- Strong
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Adequate
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Target-market demand +1.4 pts
- Tested rank range
- #2–#9
#3Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment70.7
ActionCOACH
Initial investment: $71,668–$303,513
Increase +0.3 pts Referral ecosystemNo material negative local adjustment identified
Rank sensitivity: Highly sensitive
Why it ranks here
Score-changing local factors only. Evidence links open the underlying city finding.
| Local factor | Modeled drivers | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Referral ecosystem |
| +0.3 pts |
| Target-market demand | +0.3 pts | |
| Net local movement | +0.68 pts | |
Net uses full-precision effects; displayed factor and driver rows are rounded.
Franchise evidence
Source material assessed
Item 3 — Litigation
1 image
Item 6 — Other Fees
1 image
Item 7 — Estimated Initial Investment
2 images
Item 12 — Territory
1 image
Item 20 — Outlets and Franchise Information
1 image
Full calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not mistaken for a score-changing effect.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +0.3 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Not included in the score |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | +0.3 |
| Territory quality | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 70.68 |
| Published local-market alignment | 70.7 |
Factor calculations use full precision. Contributions and published scores are displayed to one decimal place; ranking order uses the full-precision score.
Evidence confidence
- City Modifier Evidence
- Strong
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Adequate
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Referral ecosystem +0.3 pts
- Tested rank range
- #1–#5
#4Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment70.4
FASTSIGNS
Initial investment: $231,226–$386,285
Increase +0.8 pts Target-market demandReduction -0.5 pts Transportation, routing, and parking
Rank sensitivity: Highly sensitive
Why it ranks here
Score-changing local factors only. Evidence links open the underlying city finding.
| Local factor | Modeled drivers | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +0.8 pts | |
| Transportation, routing, and parking |
| -0.5 pts |
| Referral ecosystem |
| +0.1 pts |
| Net local movement | +0.40 pts | |
Net uses full-precision effects; displayed factor and driver rows are rounded.
Franchise evidence
Source material assessed
Item 3 — Litigation
1 image
Item 6 — Other Fees
1 image
Item 7 — Estimated Initial Investment
2 images
Item 12 — Territory
1 image
Item 20 — Outlets and Franchise Information
1 image
Item 19 — Financial Performance Representation
2 images
Public company data assessed
3 sourcesFull calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not mistaken for a score-changing effect.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +0.8 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Not included in the score |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | -0.5 |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | +0.1 |
| Territory quality | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 70.40 |
| Published local-market alignment | 70.4 |
Factor calculations use full precision. Contributions and published scores are displayed to one decimal place; ranking order uses the full-precision score.
Evidence confidence
- City Modifier Evidence
- Strong
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Adequate
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Target-market demand +0.8 pts
- Tested rank range
- #3–#11
#5Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment70.4
HomeSmiles
Initial investment: $148,110–$201,800
Increase +0.7 pts Target-market demandReduction -0.3 pts Transportation, routing, and parking
Rank sensitivity: Highly sensitive
Why it ranks here
Score-changing local factors only. Evidence links open the underlying city finding.
| Local factor | Modeled drivers | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +0.7 pts | |
| Transportation, routing, and parking |
| -0.3 pts |
| Net local movement | +0.37 pts | |
Net uses full-precision effects; displayed factor and driver rows are rounded.
Franchise evidence
Source material assessed
Item 3 — Litigation
1 image
Item 6 — Other Fees
1 image
Item 7 — Estimated Initial Investment
2 images
Item 12 — Territory
1 image
Item 20 — Outlets and Franchise Information
1 image
Full calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not mistaken for a score-changing effect.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +0.7 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Not included in the score |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | -0.3 |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | Not included in the score |
| Territory quality | 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 | 70.37 |
| Published local-market alignment | 70.4 |
Factor calculations use full precision. Contributions and published scores are displayed to one decimal place; ranking order uses the full-precision score.
Evidence confidence
- City Modifier Evidence
- Strong
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Adequate
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Adequate
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Target-market demand +0.7 pts
- Tested rank range
- #3–#8
#6Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment70.2
Rainbow International Restoration
Initial investment: $185,336–$351,900
Increase +0.6 pts Property replacement-cycle demandReduction -0.4 pts Transportation, routing, and parking
Rank sensitivity: Highly sensitive
Why it ranks here
Score-changing local factors only. Evidence links open the underlying city finding.
| Local factor | Modeled drivers | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Property replacement-cycle demand |
| +0.6 pts |
| Transportation, routing, and parking |
| -0.4 pts |
| Labor and staffing friction |
| -0.3 pts |
| Target-market demand | +0.3 pts | |
| Net local movement | +0.18 pts | |
Net uses full-precision effects; displayed factor and driver rows are rounded.
Franchise evidence
Source material assessed
Item 3 — Litigation
1 image
Item 6 — Other Fees
1 image
Item 7 — Estimated Initial Investment
2 images
Item 12 — Territory
1 image
Item 20 — Outlets and Franchise Information
1 image
Full calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not mistaken for a score-changing effect.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +0.3 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | +0.6 |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | -0.3 |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | -0.4 |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | 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 | 70.18 |
| 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
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Adequate
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Property replacement-cycle demand +0.6 pts
- Tested rank range
- #4–#8
#7Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment70.0
PuroClean
Initial investment: $54,575–$262,145
Increase +0.6 pts Property replacement-cycle demandReduction -0.3 pts Labor and staffing friction
Rank sensitivity: Highly sensitive
Why it ranks here
Score-changing local factors only. Evidence links open the underlying city finding.
| Local factor | Modeled drivers | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Property replacement-cycle demand |
| +0.6 pts |
| Labor and staffing friction |
| -0.3 pts |
| Transportation, routing, and parking |
| -0.3 pts |
| Net local movement | +0.01 pts | |
Net uses full-precision effects; displayed factor and driver rows are rounded.
Franchise evidence
Source material assessed
Item 3 — Litigation
1 image
Item 6 — Other Fees
1 image
Item 7 — Estimated Initial Investment
2 images
Item 12 — Territory
1 image
Item 20 — Outlets and Franchise Information
1 image
Full calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not mistaken for a score-changing effect.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | +0.6 |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | -0.3 |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | -0.3 |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | 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 | 70.01 |
| Published local-market alignment | 70.0 |
Factor calculations use full precision. Contributions and published scores are displayed to one decimal place; ranking order uses the full-precision score.
Evidence confidence
- City Modifier Evidence
- Strong
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Adequate
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Property replacement-cycle demand +0.6 pts
- Tested rank range
- #3–#9
#8Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment69.9
Pillar To Post Home Inspectors
Initial investment: $102,690–$134,290
Increase +0.4 pts Property replacement-cycle demandReduction -0.3 pts Transportation, routing, and parking
Rank sensitivity: Highly sensitive
Why it ranks here
Score-changing local factors only. Evidence links open the underlying city finding.
| Local factor | Modeled drivers | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Property replacement-cycle demand |
| +0.4 pts |
| Transportation, routing, and parking |
| -0.3 pts |
| Labor and staffing friction |
| -0.1 pts |
| Net local movement | -0.07 pts | |
Net uses full-precision effects; displayed factor and driver rows are rounded.
Franchise evidence
Source material assessed
Item 3 — Litigation
1 image
Item 6 — Other Fees
1 image
Item 7 — Estimated Initial Investment
2 images
Item 12 — Territory
1 image
Item 19 — Financial Performance Representation
1 image
Public company data assessed
2 sourcesFull calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not mistaken for a score-changing effect.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | +0.4 |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | -0.1 |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | -0.3 |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | Not included in the score |
| Territory quality | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 69.93 |
| Published local-market alignment | 69.9 |
Factor calculations use full precision. Contributions and published scores are displayed to one decimal place; ranking order uses the full-precision score.
Evidence confidence
- City Modifier Evidence
- Strong
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Adequate
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Property replacement-cycle demand +0.4 pts
- Tested rank range
- #4–#12
#9Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment69.8
Tiger Adjusters
Initial investment: $43,050–$159,500
No material positive local adjustment identifiedReduction -0.2 pts Transportation, routing, and parking
Rank sensitivity: Highly sensitive
Why it ranks here
Score-changing local factors only. Evidence links open the underlying city finding.
| Local factor | Modeled drivers | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Transportation, routing, and parking |
| -0.2 pts |
| Net local movement | -0.19 pts | |
Net uses full-precision effects; displayed factor and driver rows are rounded.
Franchise evidence
Source material assessed
Item 3 — Litigation
1 image
Item 6 — Other Fees
1 image
Item 7 — Estimated Initial Investment
2 images
Item 12 — Territory
1 image
Item 19 — Financial Performance Representation
1 image
Public company data assessed
1 sourceFull calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not mistaken for a score-changing effect.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Not included in the score |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | -0.2 |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | Not included in the score |
| Territory quality | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 69.81 |
| Published local-market alignment | 69.8 |
Factor calculations use full precision. Contributions and published scores are displayed to one decimal place; ranking order uses the full-precision score.
Evidence confidence
- City Modifier Evidence
- Strong
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Adequate
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Adequate
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Transportation, routing, and parking -0.2 pts
- Tested rank range
- #6–#13
#10Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment69.6
ZOOM DRAIN
Initial investment: $266,250–$570,500
Increase +0.9 pts Property replacement-cycle demandReduction -0.7 pts Labor and staffing friction
Rank sensitivity: Moderately sensitive
Why it ranks here
Score-changing local factors only. Evidence links open the underlying city finding.
| Local factor | Modeled drivers | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Property replacement-cycle demand |
| +0.9 pts |
| Labor and staffing friction |
| -0.7 pts |
| Transportation, routing, and parking |
| -0.5 pts |
| Net local movement | -0.36 pts | |
Net uses full-precision effects; displayed factor and driver rows are rounded.
Franchise evidence
Source material assessed
Item 3 — Litigation
1 image
Item 6 — Other Fees
1 image
Item 7 — Estimated Initial Investment
2 images
Item 12 — Territory
1 image
Item 20 — Outlets and Franchise Information
1 image
Full calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not mistaken for a score-changing effect.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | +0.9 |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | -0.7 |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | -0.5 |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | Not included in the score |
| Territory quality | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 69.64 |
| Published local-market alignment | 69.6 |
Factor calculations use full precision. Contributions and published scores are displayed to one decimal place; ranking order uses the full-precision score.
Evidence confidence
- City Modifier Evidence
- Strong
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Adequate
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Property replacement-cycle demand +0.9 pts
- Tested rank range
- #7–#10
#11Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment69.6
Mr. Rooter
Initial investment: $152,900–$298,675
Increase +0.8 pts Property replacement-cycle demandReduction -0.7 pts Labor and staffing friction
Rank sensitivity: Highly sensitive
Why it ranks here
Score-changing local factors only. Evidence links open the underlying city finding.
| Local factor | Modeled drivers | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Property replacement-cycle demand |
| +0.8 pts |
| Labor and staffing friction |
| -0.7 pts |
| Transportation, routing, and parking |
| -0.5 pts |
| Net local movement | -0.41 pts | |
Net uses full-precision effects; displayed factor and driver rows are rounded.
Franchise evidence
Source material assessed
Item 3 — Litigation
1 image
Item 6 — Other Fees
1 image
Item 7 — Estimated Initial Investment
2 images
Item 12 — Territory
1 image
Item 20 — Outlets and Franchise Information
1 image
Full calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not mistaken for a score-changing effect.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | +0.8 |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | -0.7 |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | -0.5 |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | Not included in the score |
| Territory quality | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 69.59 |
| Published local-market alignment | 69.6 |
Factor calculations use full precision. Contributions and published scores are displayed to one decimal place; ranking order uses the full-precision score.
Evidence confidence
- City Modifier Evidence
- Strong
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Adequate
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Property replacement-cycle demand +0.8 pts
- Tested rank range
- #9–#13
#12Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment69.5
Aire Serv
Initial investment: $113,308–$271,708
Increase +0.8 pts Property replacement-cycle demandReduction -0.8 pts Labor and staffing friction
Rank sensitivity: Moderately sensitive
Why it ranks here
Score-changing local factors only. Evidence links open the underlying city finding.
| Local factor | Modeled drivers | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Property replacement-cycle demand |
| +0.8 pts |
| Labor and staffing friction |
| -0.8 pts |
| Transportation, routing, and parking |
| -0.5 pts |
| Net local movement | -0.46 pts | |
Net uses full-precision effects; displayed factor and driver rows are rounded.
Franchise evidence
Source material assessed
Item 3 — Litigation
1 image
Item 6 — Other Fees
1 image
Item 7 — Estimated Initial Investment
1 image
Item 12 — Territory
1 image
Item 20 — Outlets and Franchise Information
1 image
Item 19 — Financial Performance Representation
1 image
Public company data assessed
1 sourceFull calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not mistaken for a score-changing effect.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | +0.8 |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | -0.8 |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | -0.5 |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | Not included in the score |
| Territory quality | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 69.54 |
| Published local-market alignment | 69.5 |
Factor calculations use full precision. Contributions and published scores are displayed to one decimal place; ranking order uses the full-precision score.
Evidence confidence
- City Modifier Evidence
- Strong
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Adequate
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Adequate
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Property replacement-cycle demand +0.8 pts
- Tested rank range
- #10–#13
#13Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment69.5
Mister Sparky Electric
Increase +0.7 pts Property replacement-cycle demandReduction -0.8 pts Labor and staffing friction
Rank sensitivity: Moderately sensitive
Why it ranks here
Score-changing local factors only. Evidence links open the underlying city finding.
| Local factor | Modeled drivers | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Labor and staffing friction |
| -0.8 pts |
| Property replacement-cycle demand |
| +0.7 pts |
| Transportation, routing, and parking |
| -0.5 pts |
| Net local movement | -0.53 pts | |
Net uses full-precision effects; displayed factor and driver rows are rounded.
Full calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not mistaken for a score-changing effect.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | +0.7 |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | -0.8 |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | -0.5 |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | Not included in the score |
| Territory quality | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 69.47 |
| Published local-market alignment | 69.5 |
Factor calculations use full precision. Contributions and published scores are displayed to one decimal place; ranking order uses the full-precision score.
Evidence confidence
- City Modifier Evidence
- Strong
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Adequate
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Labor and staffing friction -0.8 pts
- Tested rank range
- #11–#14
#14Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment68.6
Workout Anytime
Initial investment: $1,060,850–$1,840,550
No material positive local adjustment identifiedReduction -1.2 pts Target-market demand
Rank sensitivity: Highly sensitive
Why it ranks here
Score-changing local factors only. Evidence links open the underlying city finding.
| Local factor | Modeled drivers | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Target-market demand |
| -1.2 pts |
| Transportation, routing, and parking |
| -0.3 pts |
| Net local movement | -1.45 pts | |
Net uses full-precision effects; displayed factor and driver rows are rounded.
Franchise evidence
Source material assessed
Item 3 — Litigation
1 image
Item 6 — Other Fees
1 image
Item 7 — Estimated Initial Investment
2 images
Item 12 — Territory
1 image
Item 20 — Outlets and Franchise Information
1 image
Full calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not mistaken for a score-changing effect.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | -1.2 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Not included in the score |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | -0.3 |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | Not included in the score |
| Territory quality | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 68.55 |
| Published local-market alignment | 68.6 |
Factor calculations use full precision. Contributions and published scores are displayed to one decimal place; ranking order uses the full-precision score.
Evidence confidence
- City Modifier Evidence
- Strong
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Adequate
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Target-market demand -1.2 pts
- Tested rank range
- #7–#14
No franchise concepts match the selected filters.
Worked score example
How we calculated City Wide
This example uses the same ledger shown for every concept and must reconcile exactly to the published score.
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not mistaken for a score-changing effect.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +2.0 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Not included in the score |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | -0.1 |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | +0.2 |
| 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 | 72.10 |
| Published local-market alignment | 72.1 |
Factor calculations use full precision. Contributions and published scores are displayed to one decimal place; ranking order uses the full-precision score.
Starting pointThe operating-model baseline shown in the first ledger row.
InteractionsAny interaction or gate is included in the relevant contribution or calibration row.
Confidence treatmentEvidence confidence is disclosed separately unless the model definition explicitly applies a calibration adjustment.
RoundingFull-precision contributions are summed before the final displayed score is rounded to one decimal place; whole-number results are shown without a trailing decimal.
Factor impact
Which local conditions changed scores or rankings?
We neutralized one factor at a time, recalculated every score, and then measured both absolute score movement and changes in rank order.
Observed model effectMixed or model dependent
Target-market demand
We tested how much of the city’s theoretical customer and business demand remained usable after operating friction.
Why concepts react differently
We applied a measurable adjustment to 7 of 14 concepts. When we neutralized the factor and recalculated the table, 12 concepts changed position. FASTSIGNS moved from #4 to #12, the largest movement among concepts directly affected by this factor.
Concepts adjusted7 of 14
Average among affected+0.6 pts
Average across all concepts+0.3 pts
Concepts changing rank12
What we observed
- Median Household Income In 2024 Dollars34,408 usd 2024
- Persons In Poverty37.3 percent of persons
- Households With Housing Cost Burden Of More Than 30 Percent Of Income31.8 percent of households
Concepts helped most
City WideFacility management
+2.0 pts
Jan-Pro InternationalCommercial cleaning
+1.4 pts
FASTSIGNSSigns and graphics
+0.8 pts
HomeSmilesProperty maintenance services
+0.7 pts
ActionCOACHBusiness coaching
+0.3 pts
Concepts challenged most
Workout AnytimeFitness
-1.2 pts
Observed model effectMixed or model dependent
Property replacement-cycle demand
We compared the age and condition of relevant property systems with the services each concept is actually equipped to provide.
Why concepts react differently
We applied a measurable adjustment to 7 of 14 concepts. When we neutralized the factor and recalculated the table, 6 concepts changed position. Mister Sparky Electric moved from #13 to #10, the largest movement among concepts directly affected by this factor.
Concepts adjusted7 of 14
Average among affected+0.7 pts
Average across all concepts+0.3 pts
Concepts changing rank6
Concepts helped most
ZOOM DRAINDrain and sewer service
+0.9 pts
Mr. RooterPlumbing
+0.8 pts
Aire ServHVAC installation, repair, and maintenance
+0.8 pts
Mister Sparky ElectricElectrical
+0.7 pts
PuroCleanRestoration
+0.6 pts
Observed model effectMixed or model dependent
Labor and staffing friction
We compared each concept’s frontline and specialist staffing requirements with the local labor environment.
Why concepts react differently
We applied a measurable adjustment to 7 of 14 concepts. When we neutralized the factor and recalculated the table, 10 concepts changed position. Mr. Rooter moved from #11 to #7, the largest movement among concepts directly affected by this factor.
Concepts adjusted7 of 14
Average among affected-0.5 pts
Average across all concepts-0.3 pts
Concepts changing rank10
Concepts challenged most
Mister Sparky ElectricElectrical
-0.8 pts
Aire ServHVAC installation, repair, and maintenance
-0.8 pts
Mr. RooterPlumbing
-0.7 pts
ZOOM DRAINDrain and sewer service
-0.7 pts
PuroCleanRestoration
-0.3 pts
Observed model effectMixed or model dependent
Transportation, routing, and parking
We recalculated route-dependent models after accounting for travel corridors, parking, and the number of productive stops they require.
Why concepts react differently
We applied a measurable adjustment to 13 of 14 concepts. When we neutralized the factor and recalculated the table, 5 concepts changed position. Mr. Rooter moved from #11 to #9, the largest movement among concepts directly affected by this factor.
Concepts adjusted13 of 14
Average among affected-0.4 pts
Average across all concepts-0.3 pts
Concepts changing rank5
What we observed
- Freeze Thaw, Salting, And Plowing Impacts On City StreetsThe Youngstown Street Department states that freeze-thaw cycles and consistent salting and plowing significantly affect streets and prioritizes main and secondary streets for pothole repairs before local low-volume streets. qualitative finding
- Snow Emergency Parking Restriction And Triggertrigger: snow accumulation totaling or exceeding 4 inches within 24 hours; parking rule: parking ban on streets when a snow emergency is declared; exemption: streets or alleys 25 feet wide or less without driveways; enforcement: vehicles in violation may be towed at the owner's expense; 2026 example effective date: 2026-01-25
Concepts challenged most
Mr. RooterPlumbing
-0.5 pts
ZOOM DRAINDrain and sewer service
-0.5 pts
Aire ServHVAC installation, repair, and maintenance
-0.5 pts
FASTSIGNSSigns and graphics
-0.5 pts
Mister Sparky ElectricElectrical
-0.5 pts
Observed model effectMixed or model dependent
Referral ecosystem
We tested whether the local professional and institutional referral ecosystem materially separated the assessed concepts.
Why concepts react differently
We applied a measurable adjustment to 3 of 14 concepts. When we neutralized the factor and recalculated the table, 3 concepts changed position. ActionCOACH moved from #3 to #4, the largest movement among concepts directly affected by this factor.
Concepts adjusted3 of 14
Average among affected+0.2 pts
Average across all concepts+0.0 pts
Concepts changing rank3
Concepts helped most
ActionCOACHBusiness coaching
+0.3 pts
City WideFacility management
+0.2 pts
FASTSIGNSSigns and graphics
+0.1 pts
Measured but not differentiating in this concept set
- Competitive environmentNo material score adjustment
- Real estate and site feasibilityNo material score adjustment
- Sales and customer acquisitionNo material score adjustment
- Territory qualityNo material score adjustment
- Regulatory and operating frictionNo material score adjustment
Rank stability
Which positions depend most on individual assumptions?
The line shows the best and worst rank reached when one factor was removed from every concept. A narrow range indicates a more stable position.
#1 City WideStable · tested #1–#2
#2 Jan-Pro InternationalHighly sensitive · tested #2–#9
#3 ActionCOACHHighly sensitive · tested #1–#5
#4 FASTSIGNSHighly sensitive · tested #3–#11
#5 HomeSmilesHighly sensitive · tested #3–#8
#6 Rainbow International RestorationHighly sensitive · tested #4–#8
#7 PuroCleanHighly sensitive · tested #3–#9
#8 Pillar To Post Home InspectorsHighly sensitive · tested #4–#12
#9 Tiger AdjustersHighly sensitive · tested #6–#13
#10 ZOOM DRAINModerately sensitive · tested #7–#10
#11 Mr. RooterHighly sensitive · tested #9–#13
#12 Aire ServModerately sensitive · tested #10–#13
#13 Mister Sparky ElectricModerately sensitive · tested #11–#14
#14 Workout AnytimeHighly sensitive · tested #7–#14
Neutralizing a factor removes it from every concept. A concept can move down even when its own score improves because competitors may benefit more.
Original factor comparison
How each factor affected the highest-rated franchise concepts
The graph includes the top 14 concepts by local-alignment score. Only nonzero score contributions are plotted. A factor is removed when every displayed concept received 0.0 points from it. Hover or focus a concept name to highlight all of its remaining data points.
Primary source records by factorTarget-market demand: [3] [4] [13] [15] [1]Property replacement-cycle demand: [4] [1] [2]Competitive environment: [19] [3] [18] [1]Labor and staffing friction: [5] [6] [4] [1] [2]Transportation, routing, and parking: [7] [8] [2]Real estate and site feasibility: [16] [17] [18] [4] [11] [12] [1]Sales and customer acquisition: [19] [3] [18] [1]Referral ecosystem: [4] [14] [13] [15]Territory quality: [4] [3] [9] [1]Regulatory and operating friction: [9] [10] [11] [12] [2] [18]
View the chart data as a table
| Concept | Target-market demand | Property replacement-cycle demand | Labor and staffing friction | Transportation, routing, and parking | Referral ecosystem |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| #1 City Wide | +2.0 pts | — | — | -0.1 pts | +0.2 pts |
| #2 Jan-Pro International | +1.4 pts | — | — | -0.3 pts | — |
| #3 ActionCOACH | +0.3 pts | — | — | — | +0.3 pts |
| #4 FASTSIGNS | +0.8 pts | — | — | -0.5 pts | +0.1 pts |
| #5 HomeSmiles | +0.7 pts | — | — | -0.3 pts | — |
| #6 Rainbow International Restoration | +0.3 pts | +0.6 pts | -0.3 pts | -0.4 pts | — |
| #7 PuroClean | — | +0.6 pts | -0.3 pts | -0.3 pts | — |
| #8 Pillar To Post Home Inspectors | — | +0.4 pts | -0.1 pts | -0.3 pts | — |
| #9 Tiger Adjusters | — | — | — | -0.2 pts | — |
| #10 ZOOM DRAIN | — | +0.9 pts | -0.7 pts | -0.5 pts | — |
| #11 Mr. Rooter | — | +0.8 pts | -0.7 pts | -0.5 pts | — |
| #12 Aire Serv | — | +0.8 pts | -0.8 pts | -0.5 pts | — |
| #13 Mister Sparky Electric | — | +0.7 pts | -0.8 pts | -0.5 pts | — |
| #14 Workout Anytime | -1.2 pts | — | — | -0.3 pts | — |
Interpretation
How to interpret the result
City Wide, Jan-Pro International, ActionCOACH led because their operating requirements captured more of the local support from property replacement-cycle demand while remaining less exposed to transportation, routing, and parking. 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 Jan-Pro International, ActionCOACH, FASTSIGNS; their ranks move more widely when individual factors are neutralized.
Category comparisons
Best franchise categories we assessed in Youngstown, Ohio
Category summaries are shown only when at least two concepts qualified. Two-concept comparisons are explicitly labeled as limited.
Limited two-concept comparison
70.1Best Restoration franchise opportunities we assessed in Youngstown, Ohio
2 Restoration concepts qualified for comparison, with scores ranging from 70.0 to 70.2. Rainbow International Restoration ranked highest at 70.2. Property replacement-cycle demand added 0.6 points on average among the affected concepts. Transportation, routing, and parking reduced the exposed concepts by 0.4 points on average.
Interpret cautiously: A 0.2-point spread is too small to support a strong brand-level conclusion from city alignment alone.
- Concepts compared
- 2
- Score range
- 70.0–70.2
- Category average
- 70.1
Rainbow International Restoration70.2
PuroClean70.0
Metric registry
The 25 local metrics behind this analysis
The registry shows each public metric’s raw value, period, geography, source, and its actual role in the compiled analysis.
View all local metrics
| Metric | Raw value | Period | Geography | Role in analysis | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Resident population estimate on July 1, 2025 | 58,832people | July 1, 2025 population estimate; 2020-2024 ACS-derived characteristics; 2022 economic receipts and sales | Youngstown city, Ohio | Context only | [3] |
| Population change from April 2020 estimate base to July 2025 | -2percent | July 1, 2025 population estimate; 2020-2024 ACS-derived characteristics; 2022 economic receipts and sales | Youngstown city, Ohio | Conditional relationship | [3] |
| Median household income in 2024 dollars | 34,408usd 2024 | July 1, 2025 population estimate; 2020-2024 ACS-derived characteristics; 2022 economic receipts and sales | Youngstown city, Ohio | Used in scoring | [3] |
| Persons in poverty | 37.3percent of persons | July 1, 2025 population estimate; 2020-2024 ACS-derived characteristics; 2022 economic receipts and sales | Youngstown city, Ohio | Used in scoring | [3] |
| Households with housing cost burden of more than 30 percent of income | 31.8percent of households | Plan period FY2025-FY2029; underlying tables include 2016-2020 CHAS/ACS, 2019-2023 ACS, and 2020 LEHD | City of Youngstown | Used in scoring | [4] |
| Housing units by broad construction era | built before 1950: 43; built 1950 through 1979: 48percent of housing units | Plan period FY2025-FY2029; underlying tables include 2016-2020 CHAS/ACS, 2019-2023 ACS, and 2020 LEHD | City of Youngstown | Supports modeled relationship | [4] |
| Share of occupied housing by tenure built before 1980 in the plan's lead-risk table | owner occupied: 96; renter occupied: 85percent by tenure | Plan period FY2025-FY2029; underlying tables include 2016-2020 CHAS/ACS, 2019-2023 ACS, and 2020 LEHD | City of Youngstown | Supports modeled relationship | [4] |
| Official plan finding on older-stock maintenance and rehabilitation need | The city plan states that older housing requires more continual maintenance, identifies approximately 50 years as a common potential-deficiency threshold, and reports repair costs and household income as barriers to bringing stock up to standard.qualitative finding | Plan period FY2025-FY2029; underlying tables include 2016-2020 CHAS/ACS, 2019-2023 ACS, and 2020 LEHD | City of Youngstown housing stock | Supports modeled relationship | [4] |
| Health care and social assistance receipts or revenue in 2022 | 1,319,173,000usd | July 1, 2025 population estimate; 2020-2024 ACS-derived characteristics; 2022 economic receipts and sales | Youngstown city, Ohio | Used in scoring | [3] |
| Share of Youngstown jobs in education and health care services | 40.3percent of jobs | Plan period FY2025-FY2029; underlying tables include 2016-2020 CHAS/ACS, 2019-2023 ACS, and 2020 LEHD | City of Youngstown | Used in scoring | [4] |
| Named large institutional employers in the city plan | Youngstown State University, Youngstown City Schools, Mercy Healthnamed entities | Plan period FY2025-FY2029; underlying tables include 2016-2020 CHAS/ACS, 2019-2023 ACS, and 2020 LEHD | City of Youngstown | Used in scoring | [4] [15] |
| Youngstown State University total headcount change in Fall 2025 | 2.1percent year over year | Fall 2025 enrollment | Youngstown State University, Youngstown, Ohio | Supports modeled relationship | [13] |
| Companies assisted by YSU's Export Assistance Network in the past year | 104companies | Past year through March 2026 | YSU-based Export Assistance Network serving 13 Northeast Ohio counties | Supports modeled relationship | [14] |
| Jobs located in Youngstown compared with resident workers in the plan's business-activity table | jobs in city: 21,415; resident workers: 17,833people or jobs | Plan period FY2025-FY2029; underlying tables include 2016-2020 CHAS/ACS, 2019-2023 ACS, and 2020 LEHD | City of Youngstown | Context only | [4] |
| City-plan description of commercial-corridor differences | south side: Market Street, Glenwood Avenue, Canfield Road, and South Avenue are described as walkable with many commercially zoned properties.; east side: McGuffey Road and Oak Street/MacCartney Road are primarily residential with developable land but relatively low traffic and little walkability.; north side us 422: US 422 is described as dominated by manufacturing and lacking walkability.; north side belmont: Belmont Avenue is described as diversified and anchored by Youngstown State University and Mercy Health St. Elizabeth Hospital.qualitative submarket profile | Plan period FY2025-FY2029; underlying tables include 2016-2020 CHAS/ACS, 2019-2023 ACS, and 2020 LEHD | South, East, and North Side corridors within Youngstown | Used in scoring | [4] |
| Mean hourly wage for all occupations in the Youngstown-Warren MSA compared with the United States | youngstown warren msa: 26.03; united states: 33.54usd per hour | May 2025 | Youngstown-Warren, OH MSA | Context only | [5] |
| Selected major occupational-group mean wages in the Youngstown-Warren MSA | food preparation and serving: 15.22; building and grounds cleaning and maintenance: 17.1; construction and extraction: 29.07; installation maintenance and repair: 27.51; production: 22.52; transportation and material moving: 20.24usd per hour | May 2025 | Youngstown-Warren, OH MSA | Context only | [5] |
| Youngstown-Warren MSA unemployment rate in June 2026 | 4.8percent | June 2026 preliminary labor-force and nonfarm employment data | Youngstown-Warren, OH MSA | Context only | [6] |
| Freeze-thaw, salting, and plowing impacts on city streets | The Youngstown Street Department states that freeze-thaw cycles and consistent salting and plowing significantly affect streets and prioritizes main and secondary streets for pothole repairs before local low-volume streets.qualitative finding | Current street-maintenance and snow-emergency rules accessed August 2026 | City of Youngstown street network | Used in scoring | [7] |
| Snow-emergency parking restriction and trigger | trigger: snow accumulation totaling or exceeding 4 inches within 24 hours; parking rule: parking ban on streets when a snow emergency is declared; exemption: streets or alleys 25 feet wide or less without driveways; enforcement: vehicles in violation may be towed at the owner's expense; 2026 example effective date: 2026-01-25rule | Current street-maintenance and snow-emergency rules accessed August 2026 | City of Youngstown streets | Used in scoring | [7] [8] |
| Design-review applicability trigger for certain projects | geographic or funding gate: Design Review District, Wick Park Historic District, Crandall Park-Fifth Ave Historic District, project receiving a City facade grant or other City funding; project change gate: new construction, addition, demolition, exterior remodeling, signage, lighting, painting, other aesthetic change; application deadline: 10 days before the scheduled Design Review Committee meetingregulatory conditions | Current zoning and design-review guidance accessed August 2026 | Youngstown design-review/historic districts and City-funded aesthetic projects | Conditional relationship | [9] [10] |
| Transfer requirements for properties already subject to Chapter 546 notices or compliance orders | A cited property must be brought into compliance before transfer, or the owner must provide the other party with the violation/compliance notices and submit a signed, notarized Property Transfer Affidavit stating that the other party will be responsible for compliance.regulatory conditions | Current Chapter 546 enforcement and transfer procedures accessed August 2026 | Youngstown properties with Chapter 546 notices or compliance orders | Context only | [11] |
| Active 7th Ward Neighborhood Impact Area window and boundaries | valid from: 2026-07-27; valid until: 2026-08-24; north: Cambridge Avenue between South Avenue and Zedaker Street; east: Zedaker Street between Cambridge Avenue and Roxbury Avenue; south: East Judson east of South Avenue; Roxbury Avenue between Garden Road and Zedaker Street; west: South Avenue between Cambridge Avenue and East Judson Avenuetemporary geographic program | Neighborhood Impact Area declared July 27 through August 24, 2026 | Defined portion of Youngstown 7th Ward | Context only | [12] [11] [2] |
| Current small-bay-size flex units in one Youngstown-addressed listing | available unit sizes sqft: 3,816, 5,040; loading features: loading dock, drive-in door; zoning as listed: I-2 - Industrial; date on market: 2026-04-30listing snapshot | Listing on market April 30, 2026; accessed August 2026 | 1092-1112 N Meridian Rd, Youngstown, OH 44509; municipal boundary not independently verified | Context only | [16] |
| Northeast Ohio industrial vacancy and asking rent in Q2 2026 | vacancy rate: 5.7; asking rent: 4.64 | Second quarter 2026 | Northeast Ohio industrial market; broader than Youngstown city | Context only | [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 whose applicability is established at the report’s current geographic and operating scope.
Preserve conditional effects
Keep location- or territory-dependent issues visible for diligence without automatically changing the score.
Test rank sensitivity
Remove one factor at a time from every concept and rerank using full-precision scores.
Generate public output
Create the ranking, factor-status ledger, visuals, metric registry, and automated quality report from the same data.
How the common baseline becomes a city-specific score
Every concept starts from the same 70.0 reference point, so differences come only from modeled local interactions. In this city, City Wide reached 72.10 after target-market demand +2.0 pts, referral ecosystem +0.2 pts, and transportation, routing, and parking -0.1 pts. The current model caps total local movement at ±18.0 points. The score is not a percentage, probability, or estimate of investment quality.
Precision and materiality
Calculations use full-precision values. Published scores and factor contributions display one decimal place, while ranks use full precision. Effects smaller than 0.1 points are identified as below the publication threshold rather than presented as a meaningful zero.
Score tiers
Tier 1 · Strongest modeled alignment80.0–100.0
Tier 2 · Favorable modeled alignment72.0–<80.0
Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment64.0–<72.0
Tier 4 · Higher-friction modeled alignment0.0–<64.0
How factor rows are classified
Positive local adjustmentNegative local adjustmentMeasured; no meaningful local adjustmentEffect below the publication thresholdNot applicable to this operating modelDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating conditionNot included in the score
What “best” means here
“Best” means the strongest modeled local operating alignment among the franchise concepts assessed on this page.
Model governance
How this report is calculated and corrected
Calculation controls
- Model designer
- Thomas Jepsen
No concept’s final score is manually raised or lowered after calculation. Before this template is activated, the report is reviewed for source scope, classification, arithmetic, unsupported claims, duplication, and readability.
Model history
- Model 0.9.0-calibration · August 19, 2026Added compiler-derived decision intelligence and observation usage mapping., Changed factor sensitivity and channel counterfactuals to full model reruns., Added data-dependent city content signals while preserving legacy public report fields., and Added model-owned semantic compatibility gates and backward-compatible channel-level evidence attribution.
Corrections policy
Corrected source, geography, or operating-profile evidence triggers a full compiler rerun so every dependent score and visual is recalculated.
Source registry
Evidence represented in this report
Each source identifies its period, scope, and the claims or metrics it supports. Internal or supplied research is clearly distinguished from publicly accessible evidence.
- 1Supplied multi-city structural research docket (I 132(6).docx)Internal or supplied research; not publicly accessible.
- 2Forensic Audit of Municipal Deal-Killers and Structural ConstraintsInternal or supplied research; not publicly accessible.
Used for: Active 7th Ward Neighborhood Impact Area window and boundaries
- 3QuickFacts: Youngstown city, Ohio
Used for: Resident population estimate on July 1, 2025, Population change from April 2020 estimate base to July 2025, Median household income in 2024 dollars, Persons in poverty, and Health care and social assistance receipts or revenue in 2022
- 42025-2029 Five-Year Consolidated Plan and 2025 Annual Action Plan
Used for: Households with housing cost burden of more than 30 percent of income, Housing units by broad construction era, Share of occupied housing by tenure built before 1980 in the plan's lead-risk table, Official plan finding on older-stock maintenance and rehabilitation need, and Share of Youngstown jobs in education and health care services
- 5Occupational Employment and Wages in Youngstown-Warren — May 2025
Used for: Mean hourly wage for all occupations in the Youngstown-Warren MSA compared with the United States and Selected major occupational-group mean wages in the Youngstown-Warren MSA
- 6Youngstown-Warren, OH Economy at a Glance
Used for: Youngstown-Warren MSA unemployment rate in June 2026
- 7Street Department
Used for: Freeze-thaw, salting, and plowing impacts on city streets and Snow-emergency parking restriction and trigger
- 8Declaration of Snow Emergency
Used for: Snow-emergency parking restriction and trigger
- 9Zoning
Used for: Design-review applicability trigger for certain projects
- 10City of Youngstown Design Review Process Guide
Used for: Design-review applicability trigger for certain projects
- 11Property Code Enforcement & Demolition
Used for: Transfer requirements for properties already subject to Chapter 546 notices or compliance orders and Active 7th Ward Neighborhood Impact Area window and boundaries
- 127th Ward Neighborhood Impact Area
Used for: Active 7th Ward Neighborhood Impact Area window and boundaries
- 13Youngstown State University sees continued enrollment growth for second consecutive year
Used for: Youngstown State University total headcount change in Fall 2025
- 14Youngstown State University Export Assistance Network earns national excellence award
Used for: Companies assisted by YSU's Export Assistance Network in the past year
- 15Mercy Health — St. Elizabeth Youngstown Hospital
Used for: Named large institutional employers in the city plan
- 161092-1112 N Meridian Rd, Youngstown, OH 44509 — Multi Tenant flex space
Used for: Current small-bay-size flex units in one Youngstown-addressed listing
- 17Northeast Ohio Industrial Market Report — 2026 Q2
Used for: Northeast Ohio industrial vacancy and asking rent in Q2 2026
- 18
- 19
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.