Hardee's Franchise Cost, Revenue & Review 2026
- Investment
- $1.4M – $2.6M
- Disclosed sales
- $1.3M
- gross sales, not profit
- SBA charge-off
- 39.0%
- on 55 loans
Data from FDD filing + SBA 7(a) records
Analysis by FranchiseVerdict Research · Methodology
Hardee's is a quick-service burger franchise known for charbroiled burgers, chicken, and made-from-scratch breakfast biscuits. Franchisees run restaurants managing food prep, drive-thru service, staffing, and local marketing.
FranchiseVerdict summary · 2026
A Hardee's franchise requires a total initial investment of $1.4M – $2.6M, including a $25K franchise fee and an ongoing 4.0% royalty[2]. Per the 2026 FDD, average unit revenue was $1.3M[2]. SBA 7(a) loans show a 39.0% charge-off rate across 55 loans[1]. FranchiseVerdict grade: C (Average), an editorial assessment, not investment advice. Run a live ROI scan →
Sources, dates and evidence
FDD issued: 2026 filing · Data extracted: · Last cited check: · Staleness risk: low - the current year's filing
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 scored8 of 8 headline figures on this page cite a page of the filing.
Overview
- Investment
- $1.4M – $2.6M
- 96th pct Service Resta…
- Avg gross sales
- $1.3M
- 26th pct Service Resta…
- Royalty
- 4.0%
- 3rd pct Service Resta…
- Units
- 1,485
- 93rd pct Service Resta…
- SBA charge-off
- 39.0%
- % of SBA 7(a) loans not repaid · median varies by category
Quick verdict · Quick-Service Restaurants · color = vs category peers
Green = favorable by >10% vs Quick-Service Restaurants 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 $1.4M – $2.6M including a $25K franchise fee, 4.0% ongoing royalty.
- RETURNSAverage unit revenue of $1.3M/year (median $1.3M).
- RISKVerdict C (Average), verdict score 40/100 (higher is better). SBA loan charge-off rate of 39.0% across 55 loans (well above the 16% franchise average, based on all SBA 7(a) franchise lending, 2010–2025).
- GROWTHNegative: net -82 franchised outlets in the latest year (8 opened, 17 closed) (Item 20).
- LEGAL12 litigation matters disclosed in Item 3, higher than typical. Of these, 4 name the franchisor itself, 7 its parent, affiliates or predecessor, 1 an officer personally. Pending claims are allegations, not findings.
Item 1 · who you're contracting with
The Franchisor
Corporate structure & franchisor financials
- Legal entity
- Hardee's Restaurants LLC
- Parent company
- Hardee's Funding LLC
- FDD Item 1, page 12 of the 2026 FDD
- Ultimate parent
- Roark Capital Management, LLC (affiliated private equity)
- FDD Item 1, page 13 of the 2026 FDD
- Predecessor
- Hardee's Food Systems, Inc.
- Prior franchisor entity
- CEO title
- Chief Executive Officer
- Joe Guith
- Incorporated in
- Delaware
- HQ
- 6700 Tower Circle, Suite 1000, Franklin, Tennessee 37067
- Auditor
- KPMG LLP
- Audited financials
- Franchisor revenue
- $849.6M
- vs $840.8M prior year
Same owner · FDD Item 1, page 13
1 other brand on this site name Roark Capital Management, LLC (affiliated private equity) as parent or ultimate parent in their own FDD.
Portfolio: Roark Capital (private-equity sponsor)
Grouped by the owner's name as each filing prints it (this page: the 2026 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
- Joe Guith
- Headquarters
- Tennessee
- Founded
- 2013
- FDD year
- 2026
- States available
- 31
Can you afford it, and what does the money buy?
Entry cost runs 314% above the typical quick-service restaurants franchise.
Source: FDD 2026 · Items 5–7
Full Item 7 breakdown12 line items
Initial investment breakdown
| Line item | Low | High | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Initial Franchise Fee | $25K | $25K | |
| Opening Training Support Team Fee | $32K | $72K | |
| Real Property | — | — | |
| Building | $525K | $735K | |
| Site Improvements | $100K | $550K | |
| Soft Costs | $50K | $215K | |
| Equipment | $350K | $540K | |
| Signage | $50K | $95K | |
| Point of Sale System | $55K | $72K | |
| Initial Training | $20K | $60K | |
| Pre-Opening Costs | $18K | $23K | |
| Additional Funds - 3 months | $160K | $250K | |
| Total initial investment | $1.4M | $2.6M |
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
- $1.4M – $2.6M
- Bottom third — review vs category
- Liquid capital req'd
- $160K – $250K
- Bottom third — review vs category
- Franchise fee
- $25K – $25K
- Top 40% of category vs category
- Royalty
- 4.0%
- Tiered by sales volume · typical 6–8%
- Ad fund
- 4.3%
- typical 3–5%
- Total fee load
- 9.5%
- vs 9–13% typical
Ongoing fees · Item 6
| Fee | Amount |
|---|---|
| Royalty | 4.0% of gross sales |
| Marketing / ad fund | 4.3% of gross sales |
| Technology fee | $160 |
| Training fee | $500 |
| Transfer fee | $3K |
| Renewal fee | $5K |
| Inventory (initial) | $18K – $21K |
| Total fee load | 9.5% of rev |
What do units actually make?
Average unit sales run 38% above the quick-service restaurants norm.
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 Hardee's 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
$2.2M
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 Hardee's 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
- Avg gross sales
- $1.3M
- Per unit, per year
- Median gross sales
- $1.3M
Gross sales are revenue before expenses — not profit. Actual owner earnings depend on rent, labor, royalties, marketing fees, and debt service.
- Item 19 type
- gross sales
- Sample size
- 940 outlets
- vs category median 19 · large
- Range (low → high)
- $413K→$3.6MCited, not corroborated — printed on page 75 of the 2026 FDD. Nothing else in our record independently restates or re-derives it.
- Cohort dispersion (min → max)
- Reporting year
- 2025
- Fiscal year the figures cover
- Source filing
- FDD 2026
- Disclosed in the 2026 filing, covering 2025
- Transparency
- 4 / 10
- vs category median 4 / 10 · typical
Compared against 781 Quick-Service Restaurants 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 $1.3M/year in gross sales. Revenue-to-investment ratio: 0.7x.
Fee burden
Total ongoing fee load of 9.5% — above the Quick-Service Restaurants median of 7.5%.
Disclosure
Transparency score 4/10 — this franchisor discloses detailed breakdowns (quartiles, segments, or cohort data). Buyers can model unit economics with higher confidence.
Operator retention
System contracting at -9.5% CAGR over 3 years. Investigate whether closures are franchisor-driven consolidation or franchisee exits.
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 Quick-Service Restaurants medians
How Hardee's Compares
Category median of published Quick-Service Restaurants 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
- 1,485
- Opened
- 8
- Last reporting year
- Closed
- 17
- Terminated
- 7
- Franchisor ended the franchise (per Item 20)
- Non-renewed
- 9
- Term expired, not renewed (per Item 20)
- Turnover rate
- 2.4%
- Company-owned
- 198
- Corporate units in the system
- % franchised
- 87%
- vs corporate-owned
- Net growth (3-yr)
- -9.5%
- Net unit change over 3 years
- 3-yr CAGR
- -9.5%
- Compounded over last 3 years
Last fiscal year · Item 20 exits and transfers
- Terminated
- 7
- Not renewed
- 9
- Transferred
- 10
- Reacquired
- 0
- Franchisor bought back
- Transfer rate
- 0.6%
- Owners selling to other franchisees
- Termination rate
- 0.6%
- Franchisor-initiated terminations
- Ceased ops
- 0.9%
- Units that stopped operating
Year-over-year franchised unit counts and net change. Source: FDD Item 20.
Item 20 · 4 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
83 current owners across 4 states.
- AL 80
- AR 1
- KS 1
- NY 1
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
- 55
- Loan volume
- $44.9M
- Median loan
- $1.3M
- 50th percentile
- Charge-off rate
- 39.0%
- on 55 loans · rates vary by category · see methodology
Historical SBA 7(a) lending data, not predictive of future performance. How SBA charge-off rates are calculated
- Repayment rate (PIF)
- 61.0%
- 5-yr charge-off
- N/A
- Loans approved 2021+
- Active lenders
- 6
- Defaults
- 16
- Typical loan rate
- 7.3%
- avg rate to borrowers
- Franchised industry avg
- 10.8%
- brand above franchise avg ↑
- Jobs supported
- 294
- 2.7 per loan
- Lender concentration
- 17%
- top lender's share
Borrower mix: 0% went to startups / new businesses, 100% to established operators
Franchise vs independent — in limited-service restaurants, franchised businesses charge off at 10.8% vs 10.0% for independents — franchising is associated with 8% higher SBA default risk in this category.
Top lenders financing Hardee's franchisees
Showing 3 of 6 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 Hardee's from SBA 7(a) FOIA data.
- Principal loss rate
- 7.3%
- Avg SBA guarantee
- 75%
- Avg interest rate
- 7.25%
- Avg chargeoff amount
- $803K
- Lender concentration
- 16.7%
- Job velocity
- 2.7 per $100K
- NAICS benchmark
- 8.7%
- NAICS 722513
- Jobs supported
- 294
Top SBA lendersTop lender holds 17% of loans
| # | Lender | Loans | Volume | Default % |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Capital Bank, National Association | 1 | $2.4M | 0.0% |
| 2 | Renasant Bank | 1 | $1.2M | 0.0% |
| 3 | First Commonwealth Bank | 1 | $864K | 100.0% |
| 4 | North State Bank | 1 | $4.5M | N/A |
| 5 | United FCU | 1 | $690K | N/A |
| 6 | Columbia Bank | 1 | $1.4M | N/A |
Geographic failure vector
| State | Loans | Defaults | Rate |
|---|---|---|---|
| CACalifornia | 1 | 0 | -- |
| GAGeorgia | 1 | 0 | 0.0% |
| MIMichigan | 1 | 0 | -- |
| NCNorth Carolina | 1 | 0 | -- |
| NJNew Jersey | 1 | 1 | 100.0% |
| OHOhio | 1 | 0 | 0.0% |
SBA 7(a) lending trend
Borrower profile
Source: SBA 7(a) + 504 FOIA loan-level data, matched by FranchiseVerdict
A 39.0% charge-off rate means roughly 1 in 3 franchisees failed to repay their SBA loan. Investigate what changed.
What could kill this investment?
SBA loans charge off at 39.0% — 143% above the 16.0% national norm, i.e. higher lender-observed risk.
Source: SBA 7(a) FOIA · FDD Items 3, 21
Risk analysis
FranchiseVerdict rating + FDD Items 3, 4, 8, 16, 21
Risk & Legal
Hardee's presents high investment risk due to declining unit count, undisclosed profitability, multiple litigation matters, unprotected territory, and royalty structure that may not align with actual franchisee earnings.
Litigation (Item 3)
Subject: the franchisor is a named party (defendant).
HR is defendant in one pending case (Paradigm Investment Group v. HR, TRO/breach of contract dispute over franchise termination) and plaintiff in three pending cases against former/current franchisees (Arbor Capital Partners x2, and ARC Burger LLC) for breach of franchise/sublease/promissory note obligations; ARC Burger filed Chapter 7 bankruptcy during litigation. Concluded affiliate (CJR) litigation includes a $5.5M settlement with a Canadian Carl's Jr. developer (6Points) and smaller wage/hour class settlements.
Largest disclosed settlement: $5,500,000
Bankruptcy (Item 4)
None disclosed
Audited financials (Item 21)
Yes · KPMG LLP
Franchisor revenue (Item 21)
Franchisor entity revenue (not unit-level)
ⓘ 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: No
- Kickbacks from required suppliers: Yes
- Must buy proprietary products: Yes
- Restricted to system-approved products: Yes
- Can negotiate own supplier terms: No
Score breakdown · what drove the 40 / 100 verdict
- 01MINORDeclining unit count (-1.8% YoY) indicates system contraction and shrinking market opportunity
- 02HIGHNine active/pending litigation cases including contract breaches, conversion claims, and data privacy breaches signal franchisor governance and operational issues
- 03MINORUnprotected territory creates direct competition risk from other Hardee's franchisees in same market
- 04MINORHigh royalty burden (4-5% of gross sales) on average revenue of $1.47M means $58.8k-$73.6k annual royalties with unknown net profitability
- 05MED20-year term locks franchisee into declining brand with limited flexibility
- 06HIGHPending litigation by franchisor against Arbor Capital Partners for breach and conversion suggests operational disputes with other franchise partners
Severity inferred from the FDD text · not a regulatory classification
Litigation case detail12 matters · Item 3
Litigation cases
The franchisor
Pending (4)
Hardee’s Restaurants LLC v. ARC Burger, LLC, et al.
pendingBrought against a franchisee · filed 2025-11-21 · Middle District of Tennessee · 3:25-cv-01359
“Hardee’s Restaurants LLC v. ARC Burger, LLC, et al., Case No.: 3:25-cv-01359 (Middle District of Tennessee, filed November 21, 2025). On November 21, 2025, HR commenced an action against ARC Burger, LLC (“ARC Burger”) relating to ARC Burger’s monetary breaches of its Franchise Agreements, Lease and Sublease Agreements and Promissory Note with HR.”Page 24 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Hardee’s Restaurants LLC v. Arbor Capital Partners, LLC, et al.
pendingBrought against a franchisee · filed 2025-10-01 · Middle District of Tennessee · 3:25-cv-01135
“Hardee’s Restaurants LLC v. Arbor Capital Partners, LLC, et al., Case No.: 3:25-cv- 01135 (Middle District of Tennessee, filed October 1, 2025). On October 1, 2025, HR commenced an action against Arbor Capital Partners LLC, Aihab Gerges, Edward Gerges and Gerges Gerges (collectively, “Arbor Capital”) relating to Arbor Capital’s monetary breaches of the Franchise Agreement and Sublease Agreement”Page 23 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Paradigm Investment Group, LLC v. Hardee’s Restaurants, LLC
pendingBrought by a franchisee · filed 2025-04-15 · United States District Court, Middle District of Tennessee · 3:25-cv-00419
“Paradigm Investment Group, LLC v. Hardee’s Restaurants, LLC (United States District Court, Middle District of Tennessee Case No.: 3:25-cv-00419, filed April 15, 2025). On April 14, 2025, Paradigm Investment Group, LLC (“Paradigm”) filed an Application for Temporary Restraining Order to prevent HR from terminating its franchise agreements.”Page 22 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Hardee’s Restaurants LLC v. Arbor Capital Partners, LLC, et al.
pendingBrought against a franchisee · filed 2024-07-12 · Circuit Court of the Seventh Judicial Circuit for Volusia County, Florida Circuit Civil Division · 2024 12342 CICI
“Hardee’s Restaurants LLC v. Arbor Capital Partners, LLC, et al., Case No.: 2024 12342 CICI (Circuit Court of the Seventh Judicial Circuit for Volusia County, Florida Circuit Civil Division, filed July 12, 2024). On July 12, 2024, HR commenced an action against Arbor Capital Partners LLC, Aihab Gerges, Edward Gerges and Gerges Gerges (collectively, “Arbor Capital”).”Page 23 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Parent, affiliates and predecessor
Concluded (7)
Larry Rice v. By The Rio, LLC, Carl’s Jr. Restaurants LLC, and DOES 1-10
settledThird-party plaintiff · Carl’s Jr. Restaurants LLC (CJR) · filed 2019-01-15 · United States District Court, District of Colorado · 1:19-cv-00129-STV
“Larry Rice v. By The Rio, LLC, Carl’s Jr. Restaurants LLC, and DOES 1-10, (United States District Court, District of Colorado, Case No 1:19-cv-00129-STV, filed January 15, 2019). On January 15, 2019, Larry Rice, a former employee of a Carl’s Jr. franchisee, filed a lawsuit in the federal district court for the District of Colorado.”Page 25 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Outcome:“On or about April 1, 2019, the parties reached an agreement to settle the litigation with the following terms: (a) Defendants will pay Rice $2,500 and attorneys’ fees in the aggregate amount of $7,500, (b) CJR will amend its franchise agreements with the Colorado franchisee named in the lawsuit to remove non-solicitation/no-hire provisions, and (c) CJR agreed not to enforce the disputed provision in existing ...”
New York v. Dunkin’ Brands, Inc.
concludedGovernment or regulatory action · Dunkin Brands, Inc. (DBI), an Affiliated Program · filed 2019-09-26 · N.Y. Supreme Court for New York County · 451787/2019
“New York v. Dunkin’ Brands, Inc. (N.Y. Supreme Court for New York County, Case No. 451787/2019, filed September 26, 2019). In this matter, the N.Y. Attorney General (“NYAG”) filed a lawsuit against our affiliate, DBI, related to credential-stuffing cyberattacks during 2015 and 2018.”Page 27 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Outcome:“Under the consent order, DBI agreed to pay $650,000 in penalties and costs, issue certain notices and other types of communications to New York customers, and maintain a comprehensive information security program through September 2026, including precautions and response measures for credential-stuffing attacks.”
The People of the State of California v. Arby’s Restaurant Group, Inc.
settledGovernment or regulatory action · Arby’s Restaurant Group, Inc. (ARG), an Affiliated Program under common Roark control · filed 2019-03-19 · California Superior Court, Los Angeles County · 19STCV09397
“The People of the State of California v. Arby’s Restaurant Group, Inc. (California Superior Court, Los Angeles County, Case No. 19STCV09397, filed March 19, 2019). On March 11, 2019, our affiliate, Arby’s Restaurant Group, Inc. (“ARG”), entered into a settlement agreement with the states of California, Illinois, Iowa, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina,”Page 26 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
The People of the State of California v. Dunkin’ Brands, Inc.
settledGovernment or regulatory action · Dunkin Brands, Inc. (DBI), an Affiliated Program · filed 2019-03-19 · California Superior Court, Los Angeles County · 19STCV09597
“The People of the State of California v. Dunkin’ Brands, Inc., (California Superior Court, Los Angeles County, Case No. 19STCV09597, filed on March 19, 2019.) On March 14, 2019, our affiliate, Dunkin Brands, Inc. (“DBI”), entered into a settlement agreement with the Attorneys General of 13 states and jurisdictions concerning the inclusion of “no-poaching” provisions in Dunkin’ restaurant”Page 26 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Ashlie Harris v. CJ Star, LLC, Carl’s Jr. Restaurants LLC, and DOES 1-10
settledThird-party plaintiff · Carl’s Jr. Restaurants LLC (CJR) · filed 2018-08-03 · United States District Court, Eastern District of Washington, Spokane Division · 2:18-cv-00247
“Ashlie Harris v. CJ Star, LLC, Carl’s Jr. Restaurants LLC, and DOES 1-10, (United States District Court, Eastern District of Washington, Spokane Division, Case No 2:18-cv-00247, filed August 3, 2018). On August 3, 2018, Ashlie Harris, a former employee of a Carl’s Jr. franchisee, filed a lawsuit in the federal district court for the Eastern District of Washington.”Page 25 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Outcome:“On or about April 1, 2019, the parties reached an agreement to settle the litigation with the following terms: (a) Defendants will pay Harris $5,000 and attorneys’ fees in the aggregate amount of $20,000, (b) CJR has obtained amendments of the existing franchise agreements with Washington franchisees to remove non-solicitation/no-hire provisions, to the extent such provisions existed in the first place, and (c) CJR ...”
6Points Food Services Ltd. v. Carl’s Jr. Restaurants LLC, et al.
settledBrought by a franchisee · Carl’s Jr. Restaurants LLC (CJR) · filed 2015-12-23 · Sup. Ct. of Justice, Ontario · 15-543370 (consolidating 15-543370 and 16-546487)
“6Points Food Services Ltd. v. Carl’s Jr. Restaurants LLC, et al., No. 15-543370 (Sup. Ct. of Justice, Ontario). This proceeding was a consolidation of two actions commenced by 6Points Food Services Ltd. (“6Points”), a Canadian Carl’s Jr. developer and franchisee, in the Sup. Ct. of Justice, Ontario (No. 15-453370 and No. 16-546487).”Page 24 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Outcome:“On or about October 12, 2022, the parties reached an agreement to settle the litigation with the following terms: (a) defendants agreed to pay Franchisee Parties $5,500,000 US dollars, (b) the parties agreed to mutual releases of any and all claims, including claims arising from this litigation, all without any admission of liability on any party.” (page 25)
In the Matter of Jimmy John’s Franchisor SPV LLC
concludedGovernment or regulatory action · Jimmy John’s Franchisor SPV LLC (JJF), an Affiliated Program · Securities Commissioner of Maryland · 2025-0122
“In the Matter of Jimmy John’s Franchisor SPV LLC (Securities Commissioner of Maryland, Case No. 2025-0122). On March 28, 2022, JJF filed a Franchise Disclosure Document (FDD) with the Maryland Securities Division as part of a notice of exemption from franchise registration. In this filing, JJF listed the former franchisees but omitted the required contact information for the majority of those”Page 27 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Outcome:“Under the terms of the Consent Order, JJF agreed to pay a $30,000 civil monetary penalty, to permanently cease and desist from the offer or sale of franchises in violation of the Maryland Franchise Law, and to disclose the existence of the Consent Order in future franchise disclosure documents. * * * Other than these twelve (12) actions, no litigation is required to be disclosed in this Item.”
Officers and directors (individuals, not the company)
Pending (1)
EYM Pizza of Georgia, LLC et al. v. Pizza Hut, LLC
pendingBrought by a franchisee · Diane Simrall (Item 2: Vice President - Finance), named personally for her prior role at Pizza Hut, LLC · filed 2024-07-01 · United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas · 3:24-cv-16770
“EYM Pizza of Georgia, LLC et al. v. Pizza Hut, LLC (United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas as Civil Action No. 3:24-cv-16770). On July 1, 2024, plaintiffs EYM Pizza of Georgia, LLC, EYM Pizza of Illinois, LLC, EYM Pizza of SC, LLC, and EYM Pizza of Wisconsin, LLC (collectively, “EYM”), former franchisees of Pizza Hut LLC (“PHLLC”) filed a second Petition and Emergency”Page 26 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
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 9.5% 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 | 20 years |
|---|---|
| Renewal term | 10 years |
| Allowed renewalsℹ | 2 |
| Territory type | Protected territory |
| Protected territory | Yes |
| Exclusive territoryℹ | No |
| Territory radius | 1 mi |
| 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 | 2 mi |
| Right of first refusalℹ | Yes |
| Transfer requires consent | Yes |
| Termination notice | 30 days |
| Termination groundsℹ | 2 |
| Curable defaultsℹ | 4 |
| Mandatory arbitration | Yes |
| Arbitration location | AAA office nearest HR's principal office (Franklin, Tennessee), subject to applicable state law |
| Jury trial waiver | No |
| Governing law | Tennessee |
| Litigation count | 12 |
View Item 3 litigation summary
HR is defendant in one pending case (Paradigm Investment Group v. HR, TRO/breach of contract dispute over franchise termination) and plaintiff in three pending cases against former/current franchisees (Arbor Capital Partners x2, and ARC Burger LLC) for breach of franchise/sublease/promissory note obligations; ARC Burger filed Chapter 7 bankruptcy during litigation. Concluded affiliate (CJR) litigation includes a $5.5M settlement with a Canadian Carl's Jr. developer (6Points) and smaller wage/hour class settlements.
Items 10, 11
Training & Operations
- Classroom training
- 40 hrs
- On-the-job training
- 155 hrs
- Training location
- Designated Training Facility / Hardee's Restaurant designated by HR
- Ongoing training
- Required
- Time to open
- 18 mo
- From signing to launch
- Site selection
- franchisor provides guidelines/consultation and site acceptance; franchisee locates and proposes site
- Franchisor financing
- Not offered
- Item 10
- POS system
- Genius POS
- Operating tech stack
Items 5 & 11
Franchisor Support
Technology: Genius POS
Item 20 · call current owners
Franchisee Contacts
83 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 Hardee's franchise?
The total investment to open a Hardee's franchise ranges from $1.4M – $2.6M, with an initial franchise fee of $25K. This includes real estate, equipment, inventory, and working capital as disclosed in their Franchise Disclosure Document (FDD).
What do Hardee's franchise owners earn?
According to Item 19 of the Hardee's FDD, the average gross sales per unit is $1.3M. The median is $1.3M. Note: this is gross revenue, not profit. Actual owner earnings vary based on location, operating costs, and management.
Who owns Hardee's?
Hardee's is franchised by Hardee's Restaurants LLC. Its parent company is Hardee's Funding LLC. The ultimate parent named in the FDD is Roark Capital Management, LLC (affiliated private equity). Source: FDD Item 1, 2026 filing.
What is Item 19 in the Hardee's 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 Hardee's FDD and qualifies whose outlets they describe.
What is Hardee's's franchise failure rate?
Based on SBA 7(a) loan data, Hardee's has a charge-off rate of 39.0% across 55 loans, meaning 39.0% of franchise loans were charged off. Charge-off rates are one proxy for franchise risk, though they do not capture all closures. This data comes from FOIA-sourced SBA lending records.
How many Hardee's franchise locations are there?
As of their most recent FDD filing, Hardee's has 1,485 total units in the United States, including 1,287 franchised units and 198 company-owned units. 8 new units were opened in the latest reporting year.
Is Hardee's a good franchise to buy?
FranchiseVerdict rates Hardee's as a C-grade franchise with a verdict score of 40 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 Hardee's, you can request corrections or provide updated information.
Other Quick-Service Restaurants franchises
Compare similar franchise opportunities in the Quick-Service Restaurants 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.