GLO Tanning Franchise Cost, Revenue & Review 2026
- Investment
- $759K – $1.4M
- Disclosed sales
- $725K
- gross sales, not profit
- SBA charge-off
- Limited · 42 loans
Data from FDD filing + SBA 7(a) records
Analysis by FranchiseVerdict Research · Methodology
GLO Tanning is a personal-care franchise operating tanning salons offering UV and spray tanning plus skincare on a membership model. Franchisees run salons managing equipment, memberships, and retail.
FranchiseVerdict summary · 2026
A GLO Tanning franchise requires a total initial investment of $759K – $1.4M, including a $45K franchise fee and an ongoing 6.5% royalty[2]. Per the 2026 FDD, average unit revenue was $725K[2]. FranchiseVerdict grade: B (Above average), an editorial assessment, not investment advice. Run a live ROI scan →
Sources, dates and evidence
FDD issued: · Data extracted: · Last cited check: · Staleness risk: low - issued within the last 12 months
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 scored6 of 7 headline figures on this page cite a page of the filing; the rest are marked “Not cited” beside the figure.
Overview
- Investment
- $759K – $1.4M
- 58th pct Personal Care…
- Avg gross sales
- $725K
- Outlet subset21st pct Personal Care…
- Royalty
- 6.5%
- 43rd pct Personal Care…
- Units
- 108
- 43rd pct Personal Care…
- SBA charge-off
- N/A
Quick verdict · Personal Care & Beauty · color = vs category peers
Green = favorable by >10% vs Personal Care & Beauty 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 $759K – $1.4M including a $45K franchise fee, 6.5% ongoing royalty.
- RETURNSAverage unit revenue of $725K/year (reported for a subset of outlets rather than the whole system). Note: this is gross profit, not take-home income.
- RISKVerdict B (Above average), verdict score 53/100 (higher is better).
- GROWTHPositive: net +21 franchised outlets in the latest year (21 opened, 0 closed); 104 signed but not yet open (Item 20).
- GROWTHSystem growing at 175.0% CAGR over 3 years with 108 total units. Strong expansion trajectory.
Item 1 · who you're contracting with
The Franchisor
Corporate structure & franchisor financials
- Legal entity
- GLO Tanning Franchise, LLC
- Parent company
- Glo Tanning Centers Inc
- FDD Item 1, page 8 of the 2026 FDD
- CEO title
- Co-Founder and CEO
- Onyi Odunukwe
- CEO experience
- 2018 yrs
- Years in role or industry
- Founder active
- Yes
- Original founder still leading the business
- Incorporated in
- Oklahoma
- HQ
- 12335 N. Rockwell Avenue, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73142
- Auditor
- Metwally CPA PLLC
- Audited financials
- Franchisor revenue
- $5.3M
- vs $2.8M prior year
- Management churn noted
- Frequent turnover
- Item 2 disclosed frequent executive changes
Overview
About
- CEO
- Onyi Odunukwe
- Headquarters
- Oklahoma
- Founded
- 2018
- FDD year
- 2026
- States available
- 15
Can you afford it, and what does the money buy?
Entry cost runs 174% above the typical personal care & beauty franchise.
Source: FDD 2026 · Items 5–7
Full Item 7 breakdown16 line items
Initial investment breakdown
| Line item | Low | High | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Initial franchise fee | $45K | $45K | |
| Initial training | $3K | $5K | |
| Opening training and assistance | $0 | $7K | |
| Real estate improvements | $258K | $565K | |
| Rent (3 months of rent, plus deposit) | $6K | $92K | |
| Architect/Engineering Fee | $5K | $15K | |
| Equipment, furniture, fixtures, décor, and supplies | $315K | $500K | |
| POS system, computer hardware, and software | $16K | $30K | |
| Music system | $0 | $2K | |
| Signs | $6K | $20K | |
| Miscellaneous opening costs | $500 | $3K | |
| Professional Fees | $500 | $5K | |
| Insurance premiums | $6K | $13K | |
| Opening inventory | $8K | $13K | |
| Grand Opening Advertising | $50K | $50K | |
| Additional funds | $41K | $85K | |
| Total initial investment | $759K | $1.4M |
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
- $759K – $1.4M
- Middle of category vs category
- Liquid capital req'd
- $41K – $85K
- Middle of category vs category
- Franchise fee
- $45K – $45K
- Top 40% of category vs category
- Royalty
- 6.5%
- typical 6–8%
- Ad fund
- 3.0%
- typical 3–5%
- Total fee load
- 0.1%
- vs 9–13% typical
Ongoing fees · Item 6
| Fee | Amount |
|---|---|
| Royalty | 6.5% of gross sales |
| Marketing / ad fund | 3.0% of gross sales |
| Technology fee | $250 |
| Training fee | $3K |
| Transfer fee | $10K |
| Renewal fee | $10K |
| Inventory (initial) | $8K – $13K |
| Total fee load | 0.1% of rev |
A 0.1% total fee load is unusually lean. More of each revenue dollar stays with the franchisee.
What do units actually make?
Average unit sales run 38% above the personal care & beauty norm.
Reported for a subset of outlets rather than the whole system
Source: FDD 2026 · Item 19
Single-unit · not modelled
Returns at a glance
An FDD discloses gross sales, not profit, and the operating costs that turn one into the other are in no filing. We publish no modelled return for GLO Tanning until someone supplies them — yours, in the models below.
—
Not modelled yet
An FDD discloses gross sales, not profit. We hold no sourced figure for 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.
Total invested capital · disclosed
$1.2M
Item 7 initial investment plus working capital, as filed — the one figure here that needs no assumption.
ROI & LBO modelsSingle-unit · 25-unit portfolio · editable
What one unit earns on your invested capital
Model A · Single-Unit Return
Computes unlevered return on invested capital (ROIC) for a single franchise unit, read against the 30–60% reference band · Yale SOM, Post-MBA Path Exhibit 2 (2023). Below that band a passive index fund likely outperforms; above it the franchisor has pricing power you're subsidizing.
Note: Item 19 revenue is what the franchisor discloses, and it is the top line only — gross sales are not profit. No FDD discloses the operating costs that turn one into the other, so those fields start empty and nothing is modelled until you supply them from your own lease quote, labor market and build-out budget.
Returns model · single-unit ROIC
What would one GLO Tanning 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 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.
What 25 units return when you use SBA financing
Model B · Return on Equity: Debt-Financed Acquisition
Models a 25-unit portfolio acquisition financed with an SBA 7(a) loan. Shows equity IRR (your return on cash invested), DSCR (how safely the cash flow covers debt service), and the capital stack (SBA + seller + equity breakdown).
This is the “search fund” or “entrepreneurship through acquisition” scenario: you buy an existing multi-unit operator, use leverage to amplify returns, and either operate or hire management. The 25-unit size is the typical minimum for an SBA-backed franchise portfolio acquisition to pencil as a full-time income.
What “return on equity” means here: if you put in $500K of your own cash and the business generates enough EBITDA to pay down debt and grow, your equity IRR is the annual return on that $500K, including the value created when you eventually sell. Target IRR for a search fund is typically 25–35%.
Not modelled yet
An FDD discloses gross sales, not profit. We hold no sourced figure for 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.
A 25-unit return is built on a per-unit EBITDA. Fill in the operating costs in Model A above and this model runs on that figure, or take the whole scenario to the full ROI workbench, where the portfolio and LBO models accept your own per-unit economics directly.
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: 2026 FDD
Financial Performance
Reported for a subset of outlets rather than the whole system
- Avg gross sales
- $725K
- Per unit, per year
Gross sales are revenue before expenses — not profit. Actual owner earnings depend on rent, labor, royalties, marketing fees, and debt service.
- Item 19 type
- quartile gross sales averages/medians (franchised and company-owned)
- Sample size
- 65 outlets
- vs category median 38
- Range (low → high)
- $463K→$1.5MCited, not corroborated — printed on page 43 of the 2026 FDD. Nothing else in our record independently restates or re-derives it.
- Cohort dispersion (min → max)
- Quartile band
- $530K→$1.0M
- Bottom 25% → top 25%
- Reporting year
- 2025
- Fiscal year the figures cover
- Source filing
- FDD 2026
- Disclosed in the 2026 filing, covering 2025
- Transparency
- 7 / 10
- vs category median 4 / 10 · above
Compared against 177 Personal Care & Beauty brands
Revenue is only 0.7x the investment. This means each unit may take 5+ years to recoup the initial outlay at typical margins.
Operator outlook
What the numbers say
Data-driven interpretation of this brand's financial disclosures, fee structure, and system trajectory.
Unit economics
Average unit generates $725K/year in gross sales. Revenue-to-investment ratio: 0.7x. Reported for a subset of outlets rather than the whole system.
Fee burden
Total ongoing fee load of 0.1% — below the Personal Care & Beauty median of 7.9%.
Disclosure
Transparency score 7/10 — this franchisor discloses detailed breakdowns (quartiles, segments, or cohort data). Buyers can model unit economics with higher confidence.
Operator retention
System expanding at 175.0% CAGR over 3 years across 108 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 Personal Care & Beauty medians
How GLO Tanning Compares
Category median of published Personal Care & Beauty 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 2026 · Item 20
Unit growth
Item 20 · unit dynamics
The Growth Chart
- Total units
- 108
- Opened
- 21
- Last reporting year
- Closed
- 0
- Terminated
- 0
- Franchisor ended the franchise (per Item 20)
- Non-renewed
- 0
- Term expired, not renewed (per Item 20)
- Turnover rate
- N/A
- Company-owned
- 5
- Corporate units in the system
- % franchised
- 95%
- vs corporate-owned
- Net growth (3-yr)
- +175.0%
- Net unit change over 3 years
- 3-yr CAGR
- +175.0%
- Compounded over last 3 years
Last fiscal year · Item 20 exits and transfers
- Terminated
- 0
- Not renewed
- 0
- Transferred
- 4
- Reacquired
- 0
- Franchisor bought back
- Signed, not yet open
- 104
- 0.96 per open outlet · Item 20 Table 5
- Projected new
- 75
- Franchisor's next-year forecast
- Ceased ops
- 8.5%
- Units that stopped operating
Year-over-year franchised unit counts and net change. Source: FDD Item 20.
Item 20 · 16 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.
Where the owners are · Item 20 owner list
79 current owners across 16 states.
- TX 18
- OK 16
- MD 7
- FL 6
- CO 5
- AR 4
- MO 4
- OH 4
- PA 4
- GA 3
- DE 2
- TN 2
- +4 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 7(a) and 504 loan disclosures, public data unique to FranchiseVerdict.
- Total loans
- 42
- Loan volume
- $34.4M
- Median loan
- $838K
- 50th percentile
- Charge-off rate
- Limited · 42 loans
- Limited SBA coverage: 42 loans, rate hidden until 10 have resolved and loans reach 2% of franchised units
Historical SBA 7(a) lending data, not predictive of future performance. How SBA charge-off rates are calculated
- Repayment rate (PIF)
- Limited · 42 loans
- 5-yr charge-off
- 0.0%
- Loans approved 2021+
- Active lenders
- 16
- Defaults
- 0
- Typical loan rate
- 9.7%
- avg rate to borrowers
- Franchised industry avg
- 17.4%
- n=2,725 loans
- Jobs supported
- 430
- 1.4 per loan
- Lender concentration
- 21%
- top lender's share
Borrower mix: 68% went to startups / new businesses, 32% to established operators
Franchise vs independent — in other personal care services, franchised businesses charge off at 17.4% vs 20.9% for independents — franchising is associated with 17% lower SBA default risk in this category.
Top lenders financing GLO Tanning franchisees
Showing 3 of 16 lenders. The full breakdown — every lender, state distribution, interest rates & risk ratings — is in the SBA Lending Report below.
Explore lender portfolios on Bank Reports or regional data on State Reports.
Lender network · 7(a) + 504
SBA Lending Report
Full lending analysis for GLO Tanning from SBA 7(a) FOIA data.
- Principal loss rate
- 0.0%
- Avg SBA guarantee
- 74%
- Avg interest rate
- 9.74%
- Lender concentration
- 21.1%
- Job velocity
- 1.4 per $100K
- Startup risk premium
- 0.0pp
- NAICS benchmark
- 5.1%
- NAICS 812199
- Jobs supported
- 430
Top SBA lendersTop lender holds 21% of loans
| # | Lender | Loans | Volume | Default % |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | BayFirst National Bank | 8 | $7.9M | 0.0% |
| 2 | First Internet Bank of Indiana | 8 | $7.8M | 0.0% |
| 3 | Grasshopper Bank National Association | 4 | $2.8M | 0.0% |
| 4 | The Huntington National Bank | 3 | $600K | 0.0% |
| 5 | Community Bank & Trust-West Georgia | 3 | $2.3M | N/A |
| 6 | Southern Bank | 2 | $689K | 0.0% |
| 7 | HomeTrust Bank | 2 | $2.4M | 0.0% |
| 8 | Cadence Bank | 1 | $733K | N/A |
| 9 | First Community Bank | 1 | $752K | N/A |
| 10 | VelocitySBA, LLC | 1 | $938K | 0.0% |
Geographic failure vector
| State | Loans | Defaults | Rate |
|---|---|---|---|
| TXTexas | 17 | 0 | 0.0% |
| ARArkansas | 5 | 0 | 0.0% |
| FLFlorida | 4 | 0 | -- |
| MOMissouri | 3 | 0 | -- |
| OKOklahoma | 2 | 0 | -- |
| AZArizona | 1 | 0 | -- |
| CACalifornia | 1 | 0 | -- |
| COColorado | 1 | 0 | -- |
| NCNorth Carolina | 1 | 0 | -- |
| OHOhio | 1 | 0 | 0.0% |
SBA 7(a) lending trend
Borrower profile
Source: SBA 7(a) + 504 FOIA loan-level data, matched by FranchiseVerdict
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
GLO Tanning presents moderate-to-cautionary risk: lack of verified financial disclosures, aggressive growth without performance transparency, and headwinds in a declining category warrant detailed validation before committing $750k+.
Litigation (Item 3)
Subject: the franchisor is a named party (defendant).
State of Maryland Securities Commission Consent Order (Case No. 2025-0409, Dec 22, 2025): alleged GLO Tanning sold 15 franchises to one individual in Maryland/Delaware/New Jersey/Pennsylvania without registering under Maryland Franchise Law; franchisor agreed to offer rescission (accepted for all 15 units), register FDD in Maryland, and pay a $15,000 penalty.
Bankruptcy (Item 4)
None disclosed
Audited financials (Item 21)
Yes · Metwally CPA PLLC
Franchisor revenue (Item 21)
Franchisor entity revenue (not unit-level)
Supplier relationship · Items 8 & 16
- Franchisor sells you products: Yes
- Kickbacks from required suppliers: No
- Must buy proprietary products: Yes
- Restricted to system-approved products: Yes
- Can negotiate own supplier terms: No
Score breakdown · what drove the 53 / 100 verdict
- 01MINORHigh unit growth (71.1% YoY) suggests rapid expansion that may outpace market demand or franchisee quality control
- 02MEDTanning industry structural decline due to health awareness and regulatory headwinds — revenue sustainability questionable long-term
Severity inferred from the FDD text · not a regulatory classification
What are you signing up for?
Ongoing fees run about 0.1% of sales (royalty + ad fund), before rent and labor.
Source: FDD 2026 · Items 11, 12, 17
FDD Items 12, 15, 17 · continued from Risk & Legal
Contract & Territory Detail
| Initial term | 10 years |
|---|---|
| Renewal term | 10 years |
| Allowed renewalsℹ | 1 |
| Territory type | Exclusive territory |
| Protected territory | Yes |
| Exclusive territoryℹ | Yes |
| Territory radius | 2 mi |
| Online sales rightsℹ | Restricted |
| Franchisor can compete | Yes |
| Hire a manager? | Allowed |
| Owner-operator | Optional |
| Non-compete (years)ℹ | 2 years |
| Non-compete (miles)ℹ | 5 mi |
| Right of first refusalℹ | Yes |
| RoFR response window | 45 days |
| Transfer requires consent | Yes |
| Termination notice | 30 days |
| Curable defaultsℹ | 9 |
| Mandatory arbitration | Yes |
| Arbitration location | Oklahoma City, Oklahoma |
| Jury trial waiver | Yes |
| Governing law | Oklahoma |
| Litigation count | 1 |
View Item 3 litigation summary
State of Maryland Securities Commission Consent Order (Case No. 2025-0409, Dec 22, 2025): alleged GLO Tanning sold 15 franchises to one individual in Maryland/Delaware/New Jersey/Pennsylvania without registering under Maryland Franchise Law; franchisor agreed to offer rescission (accepted for all 15 units), register FDD in Maryland, and pay a $15,000 penalty.
Items 10, 11
Training & Operations
- Classroom training
- 23 hrs
- On-the-job training
- 42 hrs
- Training location
- Virtual (TalentLMS/Google Classroom) and Dallas, Texas or franchisor headquarters
- Ongoing training
- Required
- Time to open
- 12 mo
- From signing to launch
- Site selection
- franchisor
- Franchisor financing
- Not offered
- Item 10
- POS system
- Sunlync POS
- Operating tech stack
Items 5 & 11
Franchisor Support
Technology: Sunlync POS
Item 20 · call current owners
Franchisee Contacts
79 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 GLO Tanning franchise?
The total investment to open a GLO Tanning franchise ranges from $759K – $1.4M, 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 GLO Tanning franchise owners earn?
According to Item 19 of the GLO Tanning FDD, the average gross sales per unit is $725K. Important context: Reported for a subset of outlets rather than the whole system. Note: this is gross revenue, not profit. Actual owner earnings vary based on location, operating costs, and management.
Who owns GLO Tanning?
GLO Tanning is franchised by GLO Tanning Franchise, LLC. Its parent company is Glo Tanning Centers Inc. Source: FDD Item 1, 2026 filing.
What is Item 19 in the GLO Tanning 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 GLO Tanning FDD and qualifies whose outlets they describe.
What is GLO Tanning's franchise failure rate?
SBA 7(a) loan charge-off data is not available for GLO Tanning (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 GLO Tanning franchise locations are there?
As of their most recent FDD filing, GLO Tanning has 108 total units in the United States, including 103 franchised units and 5 company-owned units. 21 new units were opened in the latest reporting year.
Is GLO Tanning a good franchise to buy?
FranchiseVerdict rates GLO Tanning as a B-grade franchise with a verdict score of 53 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 GLO Tanning, you can request corrections or provide updated information.
Other Personal Care & Beauty franchises
Compare similar franchise opportunities in the Personal Care & Beauty 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.