Avis Franchise Cost, Revenue & Review 2026
- Investment
- $626K – $1.6M
- Disclosed sales
- not disclosed
- SBA charge-off
- Under 10 loans (9)
Data from FDD filing + SBA 7(a) records
Analysis by FranchiseVerdict Research · Methodology
Avis is a car-rental franchise operating rental branches for business and leisure travelers. Franchisees manage a vehicle fleet, the rental counter, reservations, and staff within Avis brand standards.
FranchiseVerdict summary · 2026
A Avis franchise requires a total initial investment of $626K – $1.6M, including a $45K franchise fee and an ongoing 7.5% royalty[2]. This franchisor makes no financial performance representation in Item 19 of its FDD. Item 19 is voluntary under the FTC Franchise Rule, and this filing states that it makes none, so no revenue or earnings figures are disclosed. Declining to publish one is lawful and is not evidence of how the outlets perform. It does mean that less about this brand can be verified from its filing, and the FranchiseVerdict grade - an editorial assessment, not investment advice - reflects that. FranchiseVerdict grade: B (Above average), an editorial assessment, not investment advice. Run a live ROI scan →
Sources, dates and evidence
FDD issued: 2025 filing · Data extracted: · Last cited check: · Staleness risk: medium - a newer filing may exist
Evidence: strong✓ Investment (Item 7)✓ Item 19 status✓ Units and owners (Item 20)✗ SBA loan coverage✓ Litigation (Item 3)✓ Financial statements (Item 21)✓ Franchisor identityhow this is scored3 of 5 headline figures on this page cite a page of the filing; the rest are marked “Not cited” beside the figure.
Overview
- Investment
- $626K – $1.6M
- 50th pct Automotive
- Avg gross sales
- N/A
- Royalty
- 7.5%
- 37th pct Automotive
- Units
- 1,900
- 54th pct Automotive
- SBA charge-off
- N/A
Quick verdict · Automotive · color = vs category peers
Green = favorable by >10% vs Automotive median · No shading = within ±10% · Red = unfavorable by >10% · Source: FDD filings + SBA 7(a)
Data from public FDD filings and SBA records. Not financial advice. Methodology
Bottom line
- COSTTotal investment $626K – $1.6M including a $45K franchise fee, 7.5% ongoing royalty.
- RETURNSThis franchisor makes no financial performance representation in Item 19 of its FDD. Item 19 is voluntary under the FTC Franchise Rule, and this filing states that it makes none, so no revenue or earnings figures are disclosed. Declining to publish one is lawful and is not evidence of how the outlets perform. It does mean that less about this brand can be verified from its filing, and the FranchiseVerdict grade - an editorial assessment, not investment advice - reflects that.
- RISKVerdict B (Above average), verdict score 60/100 (higher is better).
- GROWTHPositive: net +17 franchised outlets in the latest year (20 opened, 3 closed) (Item 20).
- LEGAL21 litigation matters disclosed in Item 3, higher than typical. Of the 15 listed on this page, 4 name the franchisor itself, 11 its parent, affiliates or predecessor. Pending claims are allegations, not findings.
Item 1 · who you're contracting with
The Franchisor
Corporate structure & franchisor financials
- Legal entity
- Avis Rent A Car System, LLC
- Parent company
- Avis Budget Car Rental, LLC
- FDD Item 1, page 9 of the 2025 FDD
- Ultimate parent
- Avis Budget Group, Inc.
- FDD Item 1, page 9 of the 2025 FDD
- Predecessor
- Avis Rent A Car System, Inc. (ARACS)
- Prior franchisor entity
- Incorporated in
- DE
- HQ
- 379 Interpace Parkway, Parsippany, New Jersey 07054
- Auditor
- Deloitte & Touche LLP
- Audited financials
- Franchisor revenue
- $12.0B
- vs $11.8B prior year
Same owner · FDD Item 1, page 9
2 other brands on this site name Avis Budget Group, Inc. as parent or ultimate parent in their own FDD.
Grouped by the owner's name as each filing prints it (this page: the 2025 FDD). Spelling variants of the same group may be listed apart; a brand is never grouped with an owner its filing does not name.
Overview
About
- CEO
- Joseph A. Ferraro
- Headquarters
- NJ
- Founded
- 1946
- FDD year
- 2025
- States available
- 22
Can you afford it, and what does the money buy?
Entry cost runs 201% above the typical automotive franchise.
Source: FDD 2025 · Items 5–7
Full Item 7 breakdown12 line items
Initial investment breakdown
| Line item | Low | High | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Initial License Purchase Feenot refundable | $50K | $50K | |
| Construction, remodeling, decorating, and leasehold improvements | $15K | $50K | |
| Furniture, fixtures, other fixed assets, and equipment | $15K | $28K | |
| Signage | $10K | $25K | |
| 3 months' rent and security deposits | $9K | $18K | |
| Vehicle Insurance Premiums | $15K | $38K | |
| Grand opening advertising and promotional costs | $2K | $5K | |
| Office supplies | $500 | $2K | |
| Miscellaneous opening costs | $1K | $3K | |
| Automobiles | $450K | $1.3M | |
| Travel and living expenses during training (3 months) | $3K | $8K | |
| Additional funds - three months | $55K | $72K | |
| Total initial investment | $626K | $1.6M |
Line items extracted from FDD Item 7. Ranges reflect the franchisor's stated low and high per line. Total is the sum of line-item lows / highs — actual costs may fall outside this range depending on market and build-out scope.
Item 7 · what it costs to open + operate
The Vitals
- Total investment
- $626K – $1.6M
- Middle of category vs category
- Liquid capital req'd
- $55K – $72K
- Middle of category vs category
- Franchise fee
- $45K – $45K
- Top 40% of category vs category
- Royalty
- 7.5%
- typical 6–8%
- Ad fund
- 0.0%
- typical 3–5%
- Total fee load
- 7.5%
- vs 9–13% typical
Ongoing fees · Item 6
| Fee | Amount |
|---|---|
| Royalty | 7.5% of gross sales |
| Marketing / ad fund | 0.0% |
| Transfer fee | $3K |
| Renewal fee | $3K |
| Inventory (initial) | $500 – $2K |
| Total fee load | 7.5% of rev |
ROI & LBO modelsSingle-unit · 25-unit portfolio · editable
Avis makes no financial performance representation in Item 19 of its FDD - a voluntary item under the FTC Franchise Rule - so no unit revenue figures are disclosed. The return models need a revenue figure to start from, and the operating costs that turn gross sales into a profit are in no FDD. Enter your own and the calculator runs on your assumptions — nothing here is modelled until you do.
Returns model · single-unit ROIC
What would one Avis unit return on the cash you put in?
Illustrative category typicals — not sourced to any filing, survey or sample. Replace them with figures from franchisee validation calls before you rely on the output.
Unlevered ROIC · per unit
Your modelled return on total invested capital, before any debt financing.
—
An FDD discloses gross sales, not profit. We hold no sourced figure for annual revenue, COGS, labour, rent / occupancy and other operating costs, and will not substitute an assumed one. Enter your own and the model runs on your assumptions.
These models are for research and scenario planning only. Not investment advice. Actual results depend on your specific location, management, and market conditions. Consult a franchise attorney and accountant before signing any franchise agreement.
Item 19 · Source: 2025 FDD
Financial Performance
No financial performance representation
This franchisor makes no financial performance representation in Item 19 of its FDD. Item 19 is voluntary under the FTC Franchise Rule, and this filing states that it makes none, so no revenue or earnings figures are disclosed. Declining to publish one is lawful and is not evidence of how the outlets perform. It does mean that less about this brand can be verified from its filing, and the FranchiseVerdict grade - an editorial assessment, not investment advice - reflects that.
Item 20 of the FDD lists current and former franchisees; asking them directly is the standard way to fill this gap.
Operator outlook
What the numbers say
Data-driven interpretation of this brand's financial disclosures, fee structure, and system trajectory.
Fee burden
Total ongoing fee load of 7.5% (near the Automotive median).
Disclosure
This franchisor makes no financial performance representation in Item 19 of its FDD. Item 19 is voluntary under the FTC Franchise Rule, and this filing states that it makes none, so no revenue or earnings figures are disclosed. Declining to publish one is lawful and is not evidence of how the outlets perform. It does mean that less about this brand can be verified from its filing, and the FranchiseVerdict grade - an editorial assessment, not investment advice - reflects that. Item 20 of the FDD lists current and former franchisees; asking them directly is the standard way to fill this gap.
Operator retention
System expanding at 11.4% CAGR over 3 years across 1,900 units — operators are staying and new ones are joining.
Source: FDD Item 19 financial performance representations and publicly filed FDD data. Past performance is not indicative of future results. Verify all figures with the franchisor and current franchisees before making any investment decision.
vs Automotive medians
How Avis Compares
Category median of published Automotive brands that report the figure; the middle half spans the 25th to 75th percentile and n counts the brands behind it. Medians are used because a few very large systems pull an average far from the typical brand. Revenue is disclosed gross sales, not profit.
Is the system healthy?
Source: FDD 2025 · Item 20
Unit growth
Item 20 · unit dynamics
The Growth Chart
- Total units
- 1,900
- Opened
- 20
- Last reporting year
- Closed
- 3
- Turnover rate
- 0.2%
- Company-owned
- 1,714
- Corporate units in the system
- % franchised
- 10%
- vs corporate-owned
- Net growth (3-yr)
- +11.4%
- Net unit change over 3 years
- 3-yr CAGR
- +11.4%
- Compounded over last 3 years
Last fiscal year · Item 20 exits and transfers
- Signed, not yet open
- 0
- 0.00 per open outlet · Item 20 Table 5
- Projected new
- 0
- Franchisor's next-year forecast
Year-over-year franchised unit counts and net change. Source: FDD Item 20.
Item 20 · 22 states with active franchisees
The Territory Map
Derived from franchisee contact records. Shows states with at least one current operator. Not where the franchisor is registered to sell new units (that data is re-extracting in a future refresh).
States derived from franchisee contact records (FDD Item 20). Shows states with at least one current operator on file. Full state registration data (Item 12) will appear on a future FDD refresh.
Available to sell in · Item 12
- Hawaii
- Illinois
- Maryland
- Michigan
- New York
- Rhode Island
- Virginia
States where the franchisor is registered to sell new franchises (FDD registration filings).
Where the owners are · Item 20 owner list
112 current owners across 22 states.
- NJ 18
- WI 18
- AK 11
- PA 11
- ND 7
- AL 6
- MO 6
- GA 4
- SD 4
- UT 4
- IA 3
- LA 3
- +10 more states
Counts only, from the list the franchisor prints in Item 20. Names and phone numbers are for your own due diligence and are not shown here.
SBA loan performance
Government records
SBA Loan Data
Aggregated from SBA loan disclosures. This brand has only 9 7(a) loans on file; statistical reliability is limited below 10 loans.
- Total loans
- 9
- Loan volume
- $1.5M
- Median loan
- $170K
- average
- Charge-off rate
- Under 10 loans (9)
- Insufficient SBA coverage: 9 loans, rate hidden below 10
Historical SBA 7(a) lending data, not predictive of future performance. How SBA charge-off rates are calculated
- Repayment rate (PIF)
- Under 10 loans (9)
- 5-yr charge-off
- Under 10 loans (9)
- Loans approved 2021+
- Active lenders
- 8
- Defaults
- N/A
Explore lender portfolios on Bank Reports or regional data on State Reports.
What could kill this investment?
Source: SBA 7(a) FOIA · FDD Items 3, 21
Risk analysis
FranchiseVerdict rating + FDD Items 3, 4, 8, 16, 21
Risk & Legal
Avis franchising presents high risk due to active consumer fraud litigation, undisclosed financial performance metrics, pattern of settlement-generating business practices, and unprotected territories that could undermine franchisee profitability.
Why this reads harsher than the B grade: the grade weighs financial health, unit economics, unit growth, scale, legal, and transparency across the whole filing, while this summary lists individual flags without that weighting. The flags are worth checking with current owners; neither is investment advice.
Litigation (Item 3)
Subject: the franchisor is a named party (defendant).
5 pending actions including class actions re fraudulent counter sales (Bacon v ABG), toll fee claims (Valli v ABG), shareholder derivative suit (De Angelis), and two Travelers United consumer fraud complaints. Several concluded matters resolved by settlement. FTC consent orders for Budget affiliate (fuel charges, damage disclosures).
Largest disclosed settlement: $33,956,613
Bankruptcy (Item 4)
None disclosed
Audited financials (Item 21)
Yes · Deloitte & Touche LLP
Franchisor revenue (Item 21)
Franchisor entity revenue (not unit-level)
Item 21 financial statements are the audited consolidated statements of Avis Budget Group, Inc. (the parent/guarantor), not the franchisor entity Avis Rent A Car System, LLC. Audited by Deloitte & Touche LLP (New York, NY; auditor since 1997), opinion dated February 14, 2025, covering balance sheets as of Dec 31, 2024 and 2023. The numeric balance sheet and statement of operations tables (Exhibit G) are not present in the provided text extract, so dollar figures could not be extracted.
ⓘ These are the parent company's consolidated financials (the parent guarantees the franchisor), not this brand's standalone results — the figure reflects the whole corporate group, not this brand alone.
Supplier relationship · Items 8 & 16
- Franchisor sells you products: Yes
- Kickbacks from required suppliers: Yes
- Must buy proprietary products: Yes
- Restricted to system-approved products: Yes
Score breakdown · what drove the 60 / 100 verdict
- 01HIGHActive litigation involving consumer fraud, deceptive counter sales practices, and contractor misclassification suggests systemic operational issues that could expose franchisees to legal liability
- 02MEDNo disclosed average revenue or net income data prevents accurate ROI calculation; combined with high investment range ($625.5K-$1.59M), franchisees cannot validate unit economics
- 03MEDMultiple concluded settlements for undisclosed surcharges, unwanted text messages, and administrative fees indicate pattern of problematic revenue collection practices that could damage franchisee reputation
- 04MINORUnprotected territory creates cannibalization risk in dense markets; with only 10.1% YoY unit growth and 1,900 locations, saturation concerns are legitimate
- 05MINORHigh 7.5% royalty on gross revenue (not net profit) compounds cash flow pressure, especially given industry's thin margins in car rental
Severity inferred from the FDD text · not a regulatory classification
Litigation case detail21 matters · Item 3
Litigation cases
The franchisor
Pending (1)
Travelers United, Inc. v. Avis Rent A Car System, LLC et al
pendingThird-party plaintiff · filed 2024-09-11 · District of Columbia Superior Court · 2024-CAB-005792
“Travelers United, Inc. v. Avis Rent A Car System, LLC et al (District of Columbia Superior Court, Case No. 2024-CAB-005792). On September 11, 2024, plaintiff Travelers United Inc. filed a complaint alleging that Avis has been systematically cheating consumers by refusing to rent vehicles for advertised prices.”Page 14 of the 2025 FDD, Item 3
Concluded (3)
Lecrimar Enterprises (Avis Cyprus) Termination.
settledBrought by a franchisee · filed 2016-03-24
“Lecrimar Enterprises (Avis Cyprus) Termination. This lawsuit filed on March 24, 2016 involves a dispute with a terminated Avis Cypriot licensee claiming EUR 2 million in damages. The matter has further to the order of the Court been referred to Mediation on March 2, 2017. The matter was settled at mediation for £685,000 on June 28, 2017.”Page 16 of the 2025 FDD, Item 3
Faiz Ahmed, d/b/a Premium Autos, LLC and Ahsan Syed, d/b/a ARS, Inc. v. Avis Rent A Car System, Inc., a Delaware Corporation, Budget Rent A Car System, Inc., a Delaware Corporation, Avis Budget Group, Inc., a Delaware Corporation and DOES 1-100, Inclusive
settledThird-party plaintiff · filed 2013-12-31 · Superior Court for the State of California for the District of Rancho Cucamonga, County of San Bernardino · CIVRS 1308871
“Case No. CIVRS 1308871). On December 31, 2013, plaintiffs, agency operators of Avis and Budget, filed a complaint against Avis, Budget, and ABG, seeking relief under California’s wage and hour laws to remedy the alleged misclassification of agency operators as independent contractors rather than classifying each of the Plaintiffs as employees.”Page 15 of the 2025 FDD, Item 3
Outcome:“The parties entered into settlement agreements in December 2018 where a total settlement of $1,758,000 (Ahmed: $500,000, Syed: $500,000, Huseinbhai: $250,000, and Sansone: $250,000) was paid to the trust account of LA Superlawyers, Inc. on behalf of each of the plaintiffs.”
Lakeisha McClain, Leonard McClain and L&M Agency v. Avis Rent A Car System, Inc.
dismissedThird-party plaintiff · filed 2012-08-15 · United States District Court for the District of New Jersey · 2:12-cv-05151
“Lakeisha McClain, Leonard McClain and L&M Agency v. Avis Rent A Car System, Inc. (United States District Court for the District of New Jersey, Case No. 2:12-cv-05151). Plaintiff L&M Agency (“L&M”), a former independent operator of an Avis location, and its individual owners filed an action against Avis on August 15, 2012”Page 16 of the 2025 FDD, Item 3
Outcome:“On March 23, 2015, the court entered an order that granted a motion for summary judgment filed by Avis and dismissed the case. Plaintiff is appealing the dismissal of the case.”
Parent, affiliates and predecessor
Pending (4)
Paula De Angelis v. Bernardo Hees, Jagdeep Pahway, Anu Hariharan, Lyn Krominga, Glen Lurie, Karthik Sarma, Joseph A. Ferraro, Izilda P. Martins, and SRS Investment Management LLC, Defendants and Avis Budget Group, Inc. Nominal Defendant
pendingThird-party plaintiff · Avis Budget Group, Inc. (nominal defendant); directors and SRS Investment Management LLC are the defendants · filed 2024-04-26 · United States District Court for the District of New Jersey · 2:24-cv-05687
“Case No. 2:24-cv-05687). On April 26, 2024, plaintiff Paula De Angelis, filed a shareholder derivative action alleging violations of federal securities laws, breaches of the directors’ and controlling shareholders fiduciary duties, and for unjust enrichment.”Page 14 of the 2025 FDD, Item 3
Travelers United, Inc. v. Budget Rent A Car System, Inc. et al
pendingThird-party plaintiff · Budget Rent A Car System, Inc., et al. · filed 2024-09-11 · District of Columbia Superior Court · 2024-CAB-005736
“Travelers United, Inc. v. Budget Rent A Car System, Inc. et al (District of Columbia Superior Court, Case No. 2024-CAB-005736). On September 11, 2024, plaintiff Travelers United Inc. filed a complaint alleging that Budget has been systematically cheating consumers by refusing to rent vehicles for advertised prices.”Page 14 of the 2025 FDD, Item 3
Abigail Bacon, Arcadia Lee, Jeannine Devries, Lisa Geary, Richard Alexander, Yvonne Wheeler and George Davidson and on behalf of themselves and the putative class v. Avis Budget Group, Inc. and Payless Car Rental, Inc.
pendingThird-party plaintiff · Avis Budget Group, Inc. (with affiliate Payless Car Rental, Inc.) · filed 2016-09-26 · United States District Court for the District of New Jersey · 2:16-cv-05939-KM-JBC
“Case No. 2:16-cv- 05939-KM-JBC). Plaintiffs filed this lawsuit on September 26, 2016 alleging that Payless has a pattern and practice of fraudulent counter sales including: 1) “add-on” sales—practice of adding coverages that were declined by customers; and 2) Fuel charges-customers were charged for fuel reserving services even though they returned the vehicle full.”Page 13 of the 2025 FDD, Item 3
Outcome:“As of December 2024, the parties are discussing settlement while moving forward with motion to dismiss briefing.”
Dawn Valli vs. Avis Budget Group, Inc.
pendingThird-party plaintiff · Avis Budget Group, Inc. · filed 2014-09-30 · United States District Court, District of New Jersey · 2:2014-cv-06072-CCC-JBC
“Dawn Valli vs. Avis Budget Group, Inc. (United States District Court, District of New Jersey, Case No. 2:2014-cv-06072-CCC-JBC ) On September 30, 2014, Plaintiff Dawn Valli filed an alleged class action suit for violation of the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act, breach of good faith, and unjust enrichment arising from payment of speeding violation incurred in Washington DC and administrative fees.”Page 13 of the 2025 FDD, Item 3
Concluded (7)
Kirit Bakshi v. ABCR Avis Budget Group, et als.
settledThird-party plaintiff · ABCR Avis Budget Group, et als. · filed 2020-02-18 · United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan · 2:20-cv-10419-DML-MJH
“Kirit Bakshi v. ABCR Avis Budget Group, et als. – (United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, Case No. 2:20-cv-10419-DML-MJH) On February 18, 2020, Plaintiff filed a complaint alleging violations of the Michigan Consumer Protection Act, California Unfair Business Practices (Bus. & Prof. Code Section 17200) and the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act.”Page 15 of the 2025 FDD, Item 3
Outcome:“The parties settled this case on December 2, 2022 for $20,000 and the case was closed on December 14, 2022.”
Canadian Competition Authority
settledGovernment or regulatory action · Avis Budget Group, Inc. and two of its Canadian subsidiaries · filed 2015 · Competition Tribunal
“Canadian Competition Authority. In March 2015, the Canadian Competition Bureau filed an application with the Competition Tribunal alleging that ABG and two of its Canadian subsidiaries engaged in deceptive marketing practices with regard to certain charges that consumers are invoiced related to renting a vehicle and associated products in Canada.”Page 16 of the 2025 FDD, Item 3
Outcome:“The case was settled with ABG paying $3.25 million on June 2, 2016.”
Venerus v. Avis Budget Car Rental, LLC et al.
settledThird-party plaintiff · Avis Budget Car Rental, LLC (ABCR) and Budget Rent A Car System, Inc. · filed 2013-06-12 · United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida · 13-CV-921
“Venerus v. Avis Budget Car Rental, LLC et al. (United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida, Case No. 13-CV-921). On June 12, 2013, plaintiff Heather Venerus, a renter of a Budget vehicle, filed a purported class action lawsuit against ABCR and Budget.”Page 17 of the 2025 FDD, Item 3
Outcome:“The Class Action Settlement Agreement was approved and the case was dismissed with prejudice on March 30, 2023. Class Counsel was awarded $8,525,000 in fees and $400,000 in costs. ABCR and Budget agreed to make a total of up to $33,956,613.00 available for settlement of all claims in this matter.”
Jose Mendez v. Avis Budget Group and Highway Toll Administration
settledThird-party plaintiff · Avis Budget Group, Inc. · filed 2011-11-07 · United States District Court for the District of New Jersey · 2:11-CV-06537
“Jose Mendez v. Avis Budget Group and Highway Toll Administration (United States District Court for the District of New Jersey, Case No. 2:11-CV-06537). On November 7, 2011, Jose Mendez filed a putative nationwide class action lawsuit for breach of contract, unjust enrichment, and breach of the implied covenant of good faith”Page 14 of the 2025 FDD, Item 3
Outcome:“The parties signed a settlement agreement on June 29, 2022. Avis Budget Group paid $6,700,000 in legal fees and $2,700,000 in settlement costs.” (page 15)
In the Matter of Budget Rent A Car System, Inc. (Federal Trade Commission Docket No. C-4212)
concludedGovernment or regulatory action · Budget Rent A Car System, Inc. · Federal Trade Commission · Docket No. C-4212
“In the Matter of Budget Rent A Car System, Inc. (Federal Trade Commission Docket No. C-4212). The Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) undertook an investigation of Budget’s practices alleging that Budget engaged in unfair and deceptive practices related to fuel charges imposed upon renters who drive less than 75 miles.”Page 14 of the 2025 FDD, Item 3
Outcome:“On January 2, 2008, the FTC signed the Decision and Consent Order. Budget is obligated to comply with the Consent Order until January 2, 2028.”
Skylink Rent A Car Ltd (Plaintiff) / Avis Europe Holdings Limited and one other: Termination of Licensee.
settledBrought by a franchisee · Avis Europe Holdings Limited (the Licensor) and one other
“Skylink Rent A Car Ltd (Plaintiff) / Avis Europe Holdings Limited and one other: Termination of Licensee. Plaintiff is an ex-licensee for Tanzania on whom Avis Europe Holdings Limited (the Licensor) served one year Notice of Termination on September 16, 2013.”Page 16 of the 2025 FDD, Item 3
Outcome:“This case settled on September 15, 2017 for $60,000.”
Thomas McCabe v. Avis Budget Group, Inc., et al.
settledThird-party plaintiff · Avis Budget Group, Inc., et al. · Hartford Superior Court · HHD-CV-20-6127745-S
“Thomas McCabe v. Avis Budget Group, Inc., et al. (Hartford Superior Court Docket No.: HHD- CV-20-6127745-S) Plaintiff filed an administrative complaint alleging fraud, bad faith, unfair trade practices and breach arising from erroneous Wizard number applied to transaction.”Page 17 of the 2025 FDD, Item 3
Outcome:“The case was settled on March 11, 2021 in a settlement in the amount of $8,750 was paid to the plaintiff.”
This list shows 15 of the 21 matters Item 3 discloses; the rest are in the filing.
Item 3 lists the litigation the franchisor must disclose; a matter against a parent, an affiliate or a named officer is not a matter against the franchisor, and pending claims are allegations, not findings.
What are you signing up for?
Ongoing fees run about 7.5% of sales (royalty + ad fund), before rent and labor.
Source: FDD 2025 · Items 11, 12, 17
FDD Items 12, 15, 17 · continued from Risk & Legal
Contract & Territory Detail
| Initial term | 10 years |
|---|---|
| Renewal term | 5 years |
| Territory type | Protected territory |
| Protected territory | Yes |
| Exclusive territoryℹ | No |
| Territory population | 25,000 |
| Online sales rightsℹ | Granted |
| Franchisor can compete | Yes |
| Hire a manager? | Allowed |
| Owner-operator | Optional |
| Non-compete (years)ℹ | 1 year |
| Non-compete (miles)ℹ | 5 mi |
| Right of first refusalℹ | Yes |
| RoFR response window | 60 days |
| Transfer requires consent | Yes |
| Termination notice | 180 days |
| Mandatory arbitration | No |
| Arbitration location | Delaware |
| Jury trial waiver | No |
| Governing law | NJ |
| Litigation count | 21 |
View Item 3 litigation summary
5 pending actions including class actions re fraudulent counter sales (Bacon v ABG), toll fee claims (Valli v ABG), shareholder derivative suit (De Angelis), and two Travelers United consumer fraud complaints. Several concluded matters resolved by settlement. FTC consent orders for Budget affiliate (fuel charges, damage disclosures).
Items 10, 11
Training & Operations
- Classroom training
- 4436 hrs
- On-the-job training
- 0 hrs
- Training location
- Online (Workday Learning — web-based training)
- Ongoing training
- Required
- Time to open
- 3 mo
- From signing to launch
- Site selection
- Franchisee, subject to Avis approval
- Franchisor financing
- Not offered
- Item 10
- POS system
- Wizard
- Operating tech stack
Items 5 & 11
Franchisor Support
Technology: Wizard
Item 20 · call current owners
Franchisee Contacts
112 owners to call
Name · phone · city · state. Extracted from FDD Item 20
Frequently asked questions
Frequently Asked Questions
How much does it cost to open a Avis franchise?
The total investment to open a Avis franchise ranges from $626K – $1.6M, with an initial franchise fee of $45K. This includes real estate, equipment, inventory, and working capital as disclosed in their Franchise Disclosure Document (FDD).
What do Avis franchise owners earn?
Avis makes no financial performance representation in Item 19 of its FDD - a voluntary item under the FTC Franchise Rule - so no unit revenue figures are disclosed. Declining to publish one is lawful and is not evidence of how the outlets perform. It does mean that less about this brand can be verified from its filing, and the FranchiseVerdict grade - an editorial assessment, not investment advice - reflects that. Item 20 of the FDD lists current and former franchisees; asking them directly is the standard way to fill this gap.
Who owns Avis?
Avis is franchised by Avis Rent A Car System, LLC. Its parent company is Avis Budget Car Rental, LLC. The ultimate parent named in the FDD is Avis Budget Group, Inc.. Source: FDD Item 1, 2025 filing.
What is Item 19 in the Avis FDD?
The FDD section where a franchisor may disclose financial performance of its outlets. Disclosure is optional and formats vary; figures are typically gross sales, which is revenue before expenses, not profit. FranchiseVerdict extracts these figures directly from the Avis FDD and qualifies whose outlets they describe.
What is Avis's franchise failure rate?
SBA 7(a) loan charge-off data is not available for Avis (fewer than 10 loans on file). Charge-off rates are one way to gauge franchise risk, but not all franchise loans go through the SBA program. We recommend reviewing turnover and closure data in the FDD and speaking with current franchisees.
How many Avis franchise locations are there?
As of their most recent FDD filing, Avis has 1,900 total units in the United States, including 186 franchised units and 1,714 company-owned units. 20 new units were opened in the latest reporting year.
Is Avis a good franchise to buy?
FranchiseVerdict rates Avis as a B-grade franchise with a verdict score of 60 out of 100 (higher is better). The grade is a deterministic score built from six weighted dimensions — financial health, unit economics, unit growth, scale, legal, and transparency — then calibrated against SBA loan charge-off rates and FDD age. Transparency is one of the six, so a filing that discloses less scores lower on that dimension than one that discloses more. Our rating is based solely on publicly available FDD and government data; we recommend speaking with current franchisees before making any investment decision. This is not investment advice.
Data sourced from public FDD filings and SBA 7(a) FOIA records. Not financial advice.
For franchisors
Are you the franchisor?
If you represent Avis, you can request corrections or provide updated information.
Other Automotive franchises
Compare similar franchise opportunities in the Automotive category
Data extracted from public FDD filings and SBA 7(a) loan disclosures (FOIA). This information is provided for research purposes only and does not constitute financial, legal, or investment advice. Verify all figures with the franchisor's current Franchise Disclosure Document before making any investment decision.