Madabolic Franchise Cost, Revenue & Review 2026
- Investment
- $381K – $583K
- Disclosed sales
- $477K
- gross sales, not profit
- SBA charge-off
- 0.0%
- on 19 loans
Data from FDD filing + SBA 7(a) records
Analysis by FranchiseVerdict Research · Methodology
MADABOLIC is a boutique strength-training franchise offering interval-based, athletic strength workouts. Franchisees run the gyms, managing coaches, class scheduling, and membership growth.
FranchiseVerdict summary · 2026
A MADABOLIC franchise requires a total initial investment of $381K – $583K, including a $50K franchise fee. Per the 2025 FDD, average unit revenue was $477K[2]. SBA 7(a) loans show a 0.0% charge-off rate across 19 loans[1]. FranchiseVerdict grade: A (Strongest tier), an editorial assessment, not investment advice. Run a live ROI scan →
Sources, dates and evidence
FDD issued: · Data extracted: · Last cited check: · Staleness risk: medium - issued 12 to 24 months ago; a newer filing is likely on file
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 scored7 of 7 headline figures on this page cite a page of the filing.
Overview
- Investment
- $381K – $583K
- 70th pct Health & Fitn…
- Avg gross sales
- $477K
- 18th pct Health & Fitn…
- Royalty
- Set by a formula
- Units
- 38
- 66th pct Health & Fitn…
- SBA charge-off
- 0.0%
- % of SBA 7(a) loans not repaid · median varies by category
Quick verdict · Health & Fitness · color = vs category peers
Green = favorable by >10% vs Health & Fitness 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 $381K – $583K including a $50K franchise fee.
- RETURNSAverage unit revenue of $477K/year (median $455K). Note: this is gross profit, not take-home income.
- RISKVerdict A (Strongest tier), verdict score 76/100 (higher is better). SBA loan charge-off rate of 0.0% across 19 loans (well below the franchise average, based on all SBA 7(a) franchise lending, 2010–2025).
- GROWTHNegative, pipeline stalled: 48 agreements signed but not yet open against 38 open outlets (Item 20).
- LEGAL12 litigation matters disclosed in Item 3, higher than typical. Of these, 1 names the franchisor itself, 11 an officer personally. Pending claims are allegations, not findings.
Item 1 · who you're contracting with
The Franchisor
Corporate structure & franchisor financials
- Legal entity
- Madabolic Franchise System, LLC
- Parent company
- Madabolic Holdings, LLC
- Ultimate parent
- ZGrowth Acquisitions 5, LLC
- Predecessor
- Madabolic, Inc.
- Prior franchisor entity
- CEO title
- Chief Executive Officer
- Rick Del Sontro
- Incorporated in
- DE
- HQ
- 2610 South Blvd., Charlotte, North Carolina 28209
- Auditor
- Schild & Co., Inc.
- Audited financials
- Franchisor revenue
- $1.8M
- vs $1.4M prior year
Overview
About
- CEO
- Rick Del Sontro
- Headquarters
- NC
- Founded
- 2019
- FDD year
- 2025
- States available
- 13
Can you afford it, and what does the money buy?
Entry cost runs 23% above the typical health & fitness franchise.
Source: FDD 2025 · Items 5–7
FDD Item 7 · 2025 filing
Initial investment breakdown
| Cost component | Low | High |
|---|---|---|
| Initial franchise fee | $50K | $50K |
| Working capital (3–6 mo) | $15K | $42K |
| Equipment, build-out, other | $316K | $491K |
| Total initial investment | $381K | $583K |
Source: MADABOLIC 2025 FDD, Items 5 and 7[2]. “Equipment, build-out, other” is computed as total minus disclosed line items above.
Item 7 · what it costs to open + operate
The Vitals
- Total investment
- $381K – $583K
- Bottom third — review vs category
- Liquid capital req'd
- $15K – $42K
- Top 40% of category vs category
- Franchise fee
- $50K – $50K
- Middle of category vs category
- Royalty
- Prior to 13th month after opening: 6% of monthly Gross Sa…
- Ad fund
- 1.5%
- typical 3–5%
- Total fee load
- 7.5%
- vs 9–13% typical
Ongoing fees · Item 6
| Fee | Amount |
|---|---|
| Marketing / ad fund | 1.5% of gross sales |
| Technology fee | $700 |
| Training fee | $5K |
| Transfer fee | $10K |
| Renewal fee | $13K |
| Inventory (initial) | $5K – $6K |
| Total fee load | 7.5% of rev |
What do units actually make?
Average unit sales land near the health & fitness norm.
Source: FDD 2025 · 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 MADABOLIC 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 royalty rate, 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
$511K
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 MADABOLIC 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 royalty rate, 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 royalty rate, 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: 2025 FDD
Financial Performance
- Avg gross sales
- $477K
- Per unit, per year
- Median gross sales
- $455K
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
- 28 outlets
- vs category median 11 · large
- Range (low → high)
- $200K→$851KCited, not corroborated — printed on page 44 of the 2025 FDD. Nothing else in our record independently restates or re-derives it.
- Cohort dispersion (min → max)
- Quartile band
- $254K→$745K
- Bottom 25% → top 25%
- Reporting year
- 2024
- Fiscal year the figures cover
- Source filing
- FDD 2025
- Disclosed in the 2025 filing, covering 2024
- Transparency
- 10 / 10
- vs category median 4 / 10 · above
Compared against 173 Health & Fitness brands
Revenue is only 1.0x 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 $477K/year in gross sales. Revenue-to-investment ratio: 1.0x.
Fee burden
Total ongoing fee load of 7.5% — below the Health & Fitness median of 9.0%.
Disclosure
Transparency score 10/10 — this franchisor discloses detailed breakdowns (quartiles, segments, or cohort data). Buyers can model unit economics with higher confidence.
Operator retention
System expanding at 52.0% CAGR over 3 years across 38 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 Health & Fitness medians
How Madabolic Compares
Category median of published Health & Fitness 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
- 38
- Opened
- 9
- Last reporting year
- Closed
- 1
- Terminated
- 1
- Franchisor ended the franchise (per Item 20)
- Non-renewed
- 0
- Term expired, not renewed (per Item 20)
- Turnover rate
- 2.6%
- Company-owned
- 0
- Corporate units in the system
- % franchised
- 100%
- vs corporate-owned
- Net growth (3-yr)
- +52.0%
- Net unit change over 3 years
- 3-yr CAGR
- +52.0%
- Compounded over last 3 years
Last fiscal year · Item 20 exits and transfers
- Terminated
- 1
- Not renewed
- 0
- Transferred
- 1
- Reacquired
- 0
- Franchisor bought back
- Signed, not yet open
- 48
- 1.26 per open outlet · Item 20 Table 5
- Projected new
- 22
- Franchisor's next-year forecast
Year-over-year franchised unit counts and net change. Source: FDD Item 20.
Item 20 · 9 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
41 current owners across 16 states.
- TE 8
- FL 6
- CO 5
- VI 4
- NO 3
- CA 2
- GE 2
- NE 2
- PE 2
- IN 1
- KA 1
- MA 1
- +4 more states
Counts only, from the list the franchisor prints in Item 20; 19 entries carry no state. Names and phone numbers are for your own due diligence and are not shown here.
Fast growth in a small system. Newer franchisors expanding quickly may not yet have the support infrastructure of larger systems.
SBA loan performance
Government records
SBA Loan Data
Aggregated from SBA 7(a) and 504 loan disclosures, public data unique to FranchiseVerdict.
- Total loans
- 19
- Loan volume
- $8.8M
- Median loan
- $402K
- 50th percentile
- Charge-off rate
- 0.0%
- on 19 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)
- 100.0%
- 5-yr charge-off
- 0.0%
- Loans approved 2021+
- Active lenders
- 11
- Defaults
- 0
- Typical loan rate
- 8.9%
- avg rate to borrowers
- Franchised industry avg
- 15.8%
- brand beats franchise avg ↓
- Jobs supported
- 138
- 1.6 per loan
- Lender concentration
- 16%
- top lender's share
Borrower mix: 89% went to startups / new businesses, 11% to established operators
Franchise vs independent — in fitness and recreational sports centers, franchised businesses charge off at 15.8% vs 18.2% for independents — franchising is associated with 13% lower SBA default risk in this category.
Top lenders financing Madabolic franchisees
Showing 3 of 11 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 Madabolic from SBA 7(a) FOIA data.
- Principal loss rate
- 0.0%
- Avg SBA guarantee
- 77%
- Avg interest rate
- 8.91%
- Lender concentration
- 15.8%
- Job velocity
- 1.6 per $100K
- NAICS benchmark
- 12.5%
- NAICS 713940
- Jobs supported
- 138
Top SBA lendersTop lender holds 16% of loans
| # | Lender | Loans | Volume | Default % |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Citizens Bank | 3 | $1.1M | 0.0% |
| 2 | Craft Bank | 3 | $1.0M | N/A |
| 3 | Frost Bank | 2 | $657K | N/A |
| 4 | Gulf Coast Bank and Trust Company | 2 | $1.0M | 0.0% |
| 5 | b1BANK | 2 | $1.4M | N/A |
| 6 | First Bank of the Lake | 2 | $1.0M | N/A |
| 7 | Bank of America, National Association | 1 | $1.3M | N/A |
| 8 | The Huntington National Bank | 1 | $350K | N/A |
| 9 | BancFirst | 1 | $402K | N/A |
| 10 | Valley National Bank | 1 | $511K | N/A |
Geographic failure vector
| State | Loans | Defaults | Rate |
|---|---|---|---|
| TXTexas | 6 | 0 | 0.0% |
| FLFlorida | 4 | 0 | -- |
| PAPennsylvania | 2 | 0 | -- |
| COColorado | 1 | 0 | -- |
| CTConnecticut | 1 | 0 | 0.0% |
| GAGeorgia | 1 | 0 | -- |
| NCNorth Carolina | 1 | 0 | -- |
| NYNew York | 1 | 0 | -- |
| OKOklahoma | 1 | 0 | -- |
| TNTennessee | 1 | 0 | 0.0% |
SBA 7(a) lending trend
Borrower profile
Source: SBA 7(a) + 504 FOIA loan-level data, matched by FranchiseVerdict
With a 0.0% charge-off rate across 19 loans, banks have historically viewed this brand favorably for lending.
What could kill this investment?
SBA loans charge off at 0.0% — 100% below the 16.0% national norm, i.e. lower 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
Litigation (Item 3)
Subject: the franchisor is a named party (defendant).
CEO Rick Del Sontro named in federal mortgage fraud civil action (settled 2018, $150K payment). Del Sontro also named defendant in 8 Zippy Shell franchisee arbitrations over territorial exclusivity violations; 7 settled in 2022 totaling ~$15.15M, 1 resulted in $1.46M award against Del Sontro and others. Washington State issued 3 consent orders against Madabolic, ZGrowth, Del Sontro and Mendoza for offering franchises prior to registration and using unregistered brokers; $6,000 investigative costs paid.
Largest disclosed settlement: $7,375,000
Bankruptcy (Item 4)
None disclosed
Audited financials (Item 21)
Yes · Schild & Co., Inc.
Franchisor revenue (Item 21)
Franchisor entity revenue (not unit-level)
Total revenue of $1,762,503 for fiscal year ended December 31, 2024 is disclosed in Item 6 (supplier-rebate disclosure: rebates from required/approved suppliers represented 49.6% of total revenue); the audited financial statements in Exhibit F are scanned image pages that did not extract as text, so balance-sheet and income-statement line items (net worth, assets, liabilities, net income) are not recoverable. Franchisor is Madabolic Franchise System, LLC; fiscal year ends Dec 31.
ⓘ 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
- Can negotiate own supplier terms: No
Score breakdown · what drove the 76 / 100 verdict
- 01HIGHCEO has pattern of litigation across multiple ventures (2015 mortgage crisis civil action, 2020 Zippy Shell arbitration for fraudulent induction and territory breach, 2023 Washington State unregistered broker consent orders)
- 02MINORSmall system size (30 units) with modest YoY growth (22.7%) limits brand recognition, supplier leverage, and franchisee support infrastructure
- 03MINORProfitability concern: average net income of $56,272 on $415,149 revenue (13.5% net margin) barely exceeds $18,000 annual royalty obligation, leaving minimal buffer for operational variability
- 04MINORZippy Shell arbitration pattern suggests CEO may repeat territorial/inducement issues in current franchise system
Severity inferred from the FDD text · not a regulatory classification
Litigation case detail12 matters · Item 3
Litigation cases
The franchisor
Concluded (1)
Consent Order, State of Washington Department of Financial Institutions, Securities Division (Division). In the matter of determining whether there has been a violation of the Franchise Investment Protection Act by Madabolic Franchise System, LLC, Respondent.
concludedGovernment or regulatory action · filed 2023-09-29 · State of Washington Department of Financial Institutions, Securities Division · S-23-3612-23-CO02
“Consent Order, State of Washington Department of Financial Institutions, Securities Division (Division). In the matter of determining whether there has been a violation of the Franchise Investment Protection Act by Madabolic Franchise System, LLC, Respondent. Order Number: S-23-3612-23-CO02, September 29, 2023;”Page 13 of the 2025 FDD, Item 3
Outcome:“The Consent Orders: (1) require payment of a total of $6,000 for investigative costs; (2) deny the franchise broker registration applications for Del Sontro and ZGrowth;”
Officers and directors (individuals, not the company)
Concluded (11)
Consent Order, State of Washington Department of Financial Institutions, Securities Division (Division). In the matter of determining whether there has been a violation of the Franchise Investment Protection Act by Albert V. Mendoza, Respondent.
concludedGovernment or regulatory action · Albert V. Mendoza (Executive Vice President of ZGrowth Partners, LLC, which assists the franchisor with sales; not listed in Item 2) · filed 2023-09-29 · State of Washington Department of Financial Institutions, Securities Division · S-23-3612-23-CO03
“Consent Order, State of Washington Department of Financial Institutions, Securities Division (Division). In the matter of determining whether there has been a violation of the Franchise Investment Protection Act by Albert V. Mendoza, Respondent. Order Number: S-23-3612-23-CO03, September 29, 2023.”Page 13 of the 2025 FDD, Item 3
Outcome:“The Consent Orders: (1) require payment of a total of $6,000 for investigative costs; (2) deny the franchise broker registration applications for Del Sontro and ZGrowth;”
Consent Order, State of Washington Department of Financial Institutions, Securities Division (Division). In the matter of determining whether there has been a violation of the Franchise Investment Protection Act by ZGrowth Partners, LLC and Rick Del Sontro, Respondents.
concludedGovernment or regulatory action · Rick Del Sontro (our CEO) and ZGrowth Partners, LLC (affiliate of our parent ZGrowth Acquisitions 5, LLC) · filed 2023-09-29 · State of Washington Department of Financial Institutions, Securities Division · S-23-3612-23-CO01
“Consent Order, State of Washington Department of Financial Institutions, Securities Division (Division). In the matter of determining whether there has been a violation of the Franchise Investment Protection Act by ZGrowth Partners, LLC and Rick Del Sontro, Respondents. Order Number: S-23-3612-23-CO01, September 29, 2023;”Page 13 of the 2025 FDD, Item 3
Outcome:“The Consent Orders: (1) require payment of a total of $6,000 for investigative costs; (2) deny the franchise broker registration applications for Del Sontro and ZGrowth;”
David Thurston, Rosemarie Thurston and Tilden Greater Atlanta, LLC n/k/a Tilden Storage and Moving LLC v. Zippy Shell Incorporated et. al.
settledBrought by a franchisee · Rick Del Sontro (our CEO), a named defendant with Zippy Shell Incorporated et al. · filed 2022-06-01 · American Arbitration Association (Washington, DC) · 01-22-0002-3087
“David Thurston, Rosemarie Thurston and Tilden Greater Atlanta, LLC n/k/a Tilden Storage and Moving LLC v. Zippy Shell Incorporated et. al., Case No: 01-22-0002-3087 (Washington, DC)”Page 11 of the 2025 FDD, Item 3
Outcome:“David Thurston, Rosemarie Thurston and Tilden Greater Atlanta, LLC n/k/a Tilden Storage and Moving LLC: $1,325,000;” (page 12)
Scott Sheffield and Bryma, Inc. v. Zippy Shell Incorporated et. al.
settledBrought by a franchisee · Rick Del Sontro (our CEO), a named defendant with Zippy Shell Incorporated et al. · filed 2022-06-01 · American Arbitration Association (Washington, DC) · 01-22-0002-3073
“Scott Sheffield and Bryma, Inc. v. Zippy Shell Incorporated et. al., Case No: 01-22-0002-3073 (Washington, DC)”Page 11 of the 2025 FDD, Item 3
Outcome:“Scott Sheffield and Bryma, Inc.: $1,050,000;” (page 12)
Stephen Feil and Maroon Spider, LLC v. Zippy Shell Incorporated et. al.
settledBrought by a franchisee · Rick Del Sontro (our CEO), a named defendant with Zippy Shell Incorporated et al. · filed 2022-06-01 · American Arbitration Association (Washington, DC) · 01-22-0002-3071
“Stephen Feil and Maroon Spider, LLC v. Zippy Shell Incorporated et. al., Case No: 01-22-0002-3071 (Washington, DC)”Page 11 of the 2025 FDD, Item 3
Outcome:“Stephen Feil and Maroon Spider, LLC: $1,050,000;” (page 12)
Thomas Elrod, Maureen Elrod and Sunrise Ventures TBAE, LLC v. Zippy Shell Incorporated et. al.
settledBrought by a franchisee · Rick Del Sontro (our CEO), a named defendant with Zippy Shell Incorporated et al. · filed 2022-06-01 · American Arbitration Association (Washington, DC) · 01-22-0002-3082
“Thomas Elrod, Maureen Elrod and Sunrise Ventures TBAE, LLC v. Zippy Shell Incorporated et. al., Case No: 01-22-0002-3082 (Washington, DC).”Page 11 of the 2025 FDD, Item 3
Outcome:“Thomas Elrod, Maureen Elrod and Sunrise Ventures TBAE, LLC: $1,350,000.” (page 12)
Brian Poggi v. Zippy Shell Incorporated et. al.
settledBrought by a franchisee · Rick Del Sontro (our CEO), a named defendant with Zippy Shell Incorporated et al.; the award runs against him personally · filed 2020-03-05 · American Arbitration Association (Washington, DC) · 01-20- 0001-7060
“Brian Poggi v. Zippy Shell Incorporated et. al., Case No: 01-20- 0001-7060 (Washington, DC)”Page 11 of the 2025 FDD, Item 3
Outcome:“Poggi and against Zippy Shell, Gareth Taylor and Rick Del Sontro, jointly and severally, in the sum of $1,464,048.” (page 13)
Del Basso and Tampa Bay Storage and Moving, LLC v. Zippy Shell Incorporated et. al.
settledBrought by a franchisee · Rick Del Sontro (our CEO), a named defendant with Zippy Shell Incorporated et al. · filed 2020-03-05 · American Arbitration Association (Washington, DC) · 01-20-0000-4022
“Del Basso and Tampa Bay Storage and Moving, LLC v. Zippy Shell Incorporated et. al., Case No: 01-20-0000-4022 (Washington, DC)”Page 11 of the 2025 FDD, Item 3
Outcome:“Del Basso and Tampa Bay Storage and Moving, LLC: $1,100,000;” (page 12)
Pearson and Tensaw Investment Group, LLC v. Zippy Shell Incorporated et. al.
settledBrought by a franchisee · Rick Del Sontro (our CEO), a named defendant with Zippy Shell Incorporated et al. · filed 2020-03-05 · American Arbitration Association (Washington, DC) · 01-20-0000-5245
“Pearson and Tensaw Investment Group, LLC v. Zippy Shell Incorporated et. al., Case No: 01-20-0000-5245 (Washington, DC)”Page 11 of the 2025 FDD, Item 3
Outcome:“Pearson and Tensaw Investment Group, LLC: $7,375,000;” (page 12)
Sean Avery, Erin Avery and Avery Row Portable Moving & Storage LP v. Zippy Shell Incorporated et. al.
settledBrought by a franchisee · Rick Del Sontro (our CEO), a named defendant with Zippy Shell Incorporated et al. · filed 2020 · American Arbitration Association (Washington, DC) · 01-20-0005-4487
“Sean Avery, Erin Avery and Avery Row Portable Moving & Storage LP v. Zippy Shell Incorporated et. al., Case No: 01-20-0005-4487 (Washington, DC)”Page 11 of the 2025 FDD, Item 3
Outcome:“Sean Avery, Erin Avery and Avery Row Portable Moving & Storage LP: $1,900,000;” (page 12)
United States of America Vs. Rainy Day Holdings, LLC et. al.
settledGovernment or regulatory action · Rick Del Sontro (our CEO; CEO of ZGrowth Partners, LLC) and his former charity The Rainy Day Foundation, Inc. · filed 2015-09-28 · E.D.N.Y · 15-5576
“United States of America Vs. Rainy Day Holdings, LLC et. al., Case No. 15-5576 (E.D.N.Y) On September 28, 2015, the United States Attorneys’ Office for the Eastern District of New York filed a civil action against 20 defendants arising out of the residential mortgage crisis (2008-2010)”Page 11 of the 2025 FDD, Item 3
Outcome:“On February 19, 2018, the parties entered into a Consent Decree and Order of Settlement (the “Settlement Agreement”). Under the terms of the Settlement Agreement, Rainy Day was required to pay the United States $116,000 and Mr. Del Sontro was required to pay the United States $150,000.”
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 |
| Allowed renewalsℹ | 2 |
| Territory type | Protected territory |
| Protected territory | Yes |
| Exclusive territoryℹ | No |
| Territory population | 20,000 |
| 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 | 25 mi |
| Right of first refusalℹ | Yes |
| Transfer requires consent | Yes |
| Termination notice | 10 days |
| Curable defaultsℹ | 2 |
| Mandatory arbitration | No |
| Arbitration location | Mecklenburg County, North Carolina |
| Jury trial waiver | No |
| Governing law | NC |
| Litigation count | 12 |
View Item 3 litigation summary
CEO Rick Del Sontro named in federal mortgage fraud civil action (settled 2018, $150K payment). Del Sontro also named defendant in 8 Zippy Shell franchisee arbitrations over territorial exclusivity violations; 7 settled in 2022 totaling ~$15.15M, 1 resulted in $1.46M award against Del Sontro and others. Washington State issued 3 consent orders against Madabolic, ZGrowth, Del Sontro and Mendoza for offering franchises prior to registration and using unregistered brokers; $6,000 investigative costs paid.
Items 10, 11
Training & Operations
- Classroom training
- 33 hrs
- On-the-job training
- 13 hrs
- Training location
- Remote/Online (16-week program), Charlotte, NC (Fitness Instructor Training), and onsite at franchisee's Facility
- Ongoing training
- Required
- Time to open
- 9 mo
- From signing to launch
- Site selection
- franchisee with franchisor approval
- Franchisor financing
- Not offered
- Item 10
- POS system
- Not specified
- Operating tech stack
Items 5 & 11
Franchisor Support
Technology: Not specified
Item 20 · call current owners
Franchisee Contacts
60 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 MADABOLIC franchise?
The total investment to open a MADABOLIC franchise ranges from $381K – $583K, with an initial franchise fee of $50K. This includes real estate, equipment, inventory, and working capital as disclosed in their Franchise Disclosure Document (FDD).
What do MADABOLIC franchise owners earn?
According to Item 19 of the MADABOLIC FDD, the average gross sales per unit is $477K. The median is $455K. Note: this is gross revenue, not profit. Actual owner earnings vary based on location, operating costs, and management.
Who owns MADABOLIC?
MADABOLIC is franchised by Madabolic Franchise System, LLC. Its parent company is Madabolic Holdings, LLC. The ultimate parent named in the FDD is ZGrowth Acquisitions 5, LLC. Source: FDD Item 1, 2025 filing.
What is Item 19 in the MADABOLIC 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 MADABOLIC FDD and qualifies whose outlets they describe.
What is MADABOLIC's franchise failure rate?
Based on SBA 7(a) loan data, MADABOLIC has a charge-off rate of 0.0% across 19 loans, meaning 0.0% 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 MADABOLIC franchise locations are there?
As of their most recent FDD filing, MADABOLIC has 38 total units in the United States, including 38 franchised units and 0 company-owned units. 9 new units were opened in the latest reporting year.
Is MADABOLIC a good franchise to buy?
FranchiseVerdict rates MADABOLIC as a A-grade franchise with a verdict score of 76 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 MADABOLIC, you can request corrections or provide updated information.
Other Health & Fitness franchises
Compare similar franchise opportunities in the Health & Fitness 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.