FDD-Backed Franchise Analysis
Most franchise marketing leans on a big top-line number — “average gross sales of $1.4M” — without telling you what actually lands in the owner’s pocket. After caregiver payroll (50–60% of revenue), royalty and brand-fund fees (5–10%), and overhead, the owner’s discretionary cash flow is usually 10–25% of gross sales. This page works the math the other way: starting from what each Franchise Disclosure Document (FDD) Item 19 actually reports, we estimate the probability that an owner clears the $100K, $200K, and $300K take-home thresholds.
Coverage spans 28 franchise systems across non-medical home care, senior placement, home health, and senior transitions. Where a franchisor discloses a full P&L (CarePatrol, ABS, 1Heart, Griswold), we use their actual margin data. Everywhere else, we apply industry-benchmark gross margins (38–45%) and overhead (15–20%) to disclosed revenue distributions or median/average pairs — and we tag every estimate with a data-quality tier so you can see how confident the number is.
Toggle between Owner Profit Odds and Revenue Milestones, sort any column, and click any franchise name (in the table or the chart) to open its full profile with FDD breakdown, fee stack, and growth history.
Last updated: June 5, 2026 · Sources: 2024–2026 Franchise Disclosure Documents
What are the odds of earning $100K, $200K, or $300K+ per year as an owner?
Estimated owner take-home (net profit + owner salary). Click any bar for details.
Upfront cost vs. estimated annual owner take-home. Higher bar ratio = faster payback.
Larger systems tend to have higher revenue but are more competitive. Bubble size = investment.
Distribution data
Computed from individual franchise revenues or disclosed distribution bands. Direct counting — no modeling assumptions on revenue shape.
Median + average
Lognormal fit from disclosed median and average revenue. Assumes right-skewed distribution (standard for franchise revenue data).
Insufficient data
Not enough data for probability computation. Median or average may be available but not both, or no Item 19 data disclosed.
Sensitivity note: Franchises without disclosed P&L use a 42% industry-benchmark gross margin (midpoint of 38-45% observed range) and 20% overhead. A 5-point change in gross margin shifts probabilities by approximately 5-10 percentage points depending on the revenue distribution. Only CarePatrol, 1Heart, ABS, and Griswold have disclosed margin data.
Methodology last updated: April 2026. Tier A/B statistical methodology replaces prior heuristic estimates.
Item 19 of the FDD lets a franchisor disclose financial performance — but it doesn’t require them to, and most disclose only gross revenue or net billings. Gross revenue is not profit. A $1.5M home care franchise can leave the owner with $50K take-home if caregiver wages and royalty fees are high, while a $400K senior placement franchise can produce $150K–$200K because referral-fee economics carry an 85%+ gross margin. The brands at the top of our profit-odds chart aren’t always the ones with the largest top-line numbers — they’re the ones whose revenue model leaves more margin per dollar.
The badge in the right-most column of the profit table tells you how the probability was computed. Distribution data (Tier A) means the franchisor disclosed individual location revenues or banded counts — the gold standard, no shape assumption needed. Median + average (Tier B) means we fitted a lognormal distribution to the two disclosed values, which is reasonable but assumes a standard right-skewed shape. Insufficient data (Tier C/D) means Item 19 was thin or absent; we don’t guess in those cases. When two franchises look similar on paper, prefer the one with the higher tier.
Non-medical home care franchises (Visiting Angels, Home Instead, Right at Home) generate revenue from billable caregiver hours; gross margins are 35–45% because the largest cost is caregiver payroll. Senior placement franchises (CarePatrol, Senior Care Authority, Assisted Living Locators) collect referral fees from senior living communities — lower revenue per unit ($200K–$400K vs. $1M–$2M) but 85%+ gross margins because there’s no caregiver workforce to pay. Both can be profitable; the choice depends on whether you’d rather scale a labor-heavy operations business or run a lean referral practice.
Three signals correlate strongly with above-median owner take-home in this dataset: (1) recruiting support — the binding constraint in home care isn’t demand, it’s caregivers, and brands with applicant-tracking systems and centralized recruiting tend to outperform; (2) protected territory size — territories sized by population over 65 (rather than total population) leave more demand per unit; and (3) royalty structure — flat or tiered royalties hurt less than uncapped percentage royalties as revenue scales. A franchise that scores well on all three, even with a higher initial investment, generally produces a faster payback than a low-cost system that leaves you alone on recruiting.
Use this dashboard as a starting filter, not a final answer. Once you have a shortlist, request the franchisor’s Item 7 (initial investment), Item 19 (financial performance), and the full list of current and former franchisees in Item 20. Call at least 8–10 owners across tenure brackets — not just the names the franchisor recommends — and ask specifically about caregiver wage rates, overtime exposure, time to break even, and what they would change about their first 12 months. A franchise attorney and a CPA familiar with home care should review the FDD before you commit.
Most non-medical home care franchises are profitable for owners who reach scale, but the spread is wide. Across the 28 brands tracked here, owner discretionary cash flow (ODCF) at the median location typically runs 10–25% of gross sales. That works out to roughly $50K–$300K of annual take-home depending on system size, payer mix, and how well the owner controls caregiver overtime, recruiting costs, and overhead.
Owner take-home depends mostly on revenue. A median-performing non-medical home care location grossing $1M typically nets the owner $100K–$200K after caregiver payroll (50–60% of revenue), royalty and brand fund fees (5–10%), and overhead. Top-quartile multi-territory operators can clear $400K+, while bottom-quartile single-territory owners often run at or near break-even for the first 18–24 months.
Item 19 is the Financial Performance Representation in a Franchise Disclosure Document. It is the only section where a franchisor can disclose actual unit-level financial data — revenue, costs, or profit — and it is voluntary. Franchisors that choose to include Item 19 must back every claim with a written substantiation. Most home care brands disclose only gross sales averages and medians; a small number (CarePatrol, ABS, 1Heart, Griswold) disclose full P&Ls.
ODCF is what the owner actually takes home: net profit plus the owner's salary, plus add-backs for one-time and non-cash expenses. It is the most useful single number for comparing franchises because it strips out accounting choices like depreciation and owner compensation that distort net income. Where a franchisor discloses ODCF directly, we use that figure; otherwise we estimate it from disclosed revenue and industry-benchmark margins.
Senior placement franchises (CarePatrol, Senior Care Authority, Assisted Living Locators) tend to have higher gross margins (~85–90%) because they collect referral fees from communities rather than paying caregivers — but their revenue per unit is lower, often $200K–$400K vs. $1M–$2M for home care. Home care produces larger absolute take-home for owners who can scale, while placement is generally lower-investment and faster to break even.
For non-medical home care, the typical owner reaches operating break-even in 12–24 months and recovers their initial investment in 3–5 years. Brands with strong recruiting support and protected territories (Home Instead, Right at Home, Visiting Angels) tend to hit break-even faster than lower-cost upstarts because client acquisition is the rate-limiting step, not initial capital.
Gross margin on billable caregiver hours is typically 35–45% (revenue minus caregiver wages, payroll taxes, and workers' comp). After subtracting royalty (5–7%), brand fund (1–3%), local marketing, technology, insurance, and office overhead, owner net profit is usually 8–15% of revenue, with another 5–10% added back as the owner's discretionary cash flow.
Tier A estimates (computed from disclosed individual location revenues or distribution bands) are highly accurate for the brand's reported population. Tier B estimates (modeled from disclosed median plus average) are good directional comparisons but assume a lognormal revenue shape standard for franchise data. Where Item 19 data is missing or thin, we mark the row "insufficient data" rather than guess. Margin assumptions are an industry benchmark, not a guarantee — your actual results will vary based on local market, recruiting, and execution.
Drill into FDD details, fee stack, growth history, and revenue distribution for the brands tracked above.
Revenue source: Gross revenue or net billings from FDD Item 19 disclosures. Where individual location data is available, we use the actual distribution. Otherwise, we use disclosed averages and medians.
Profit estimation: Owner take-home (ODCF) = revenue × net margin + owner salary. Non-medical home care: 10% net margin. Senior placement: 25%. Where a full P&L is disclosed (e.g., CarePatrol), we use the disclosed ODCF directly.
Probability estimation: For franchises with full revenue distributions (e.g., Visiting Angels, 539 outlets), probabilities are computed by applying margin assumptions to each revenue band. For others, probabilities are approximated from the median ODCF and system characteristics.
Limitations: Most franchises disclose revenue only, not profit. Margin estimates use industry benchmarks which may not reflect individual franchisee operations. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
