Skip to main content
FranchiseVerdict
OsteoStrong logo

OsteoStrong Franchise Cost, Revenue & Review 2026

Health & FitnessTXFranchising since 2012
BAbove averageAbove average53/100Editorial grade from public filings; not investment advice.
Investment
$276K – $616K
Disclosed sales
not disclosed
SBA charge-off
8.7%
on 55 loans

Investment, fees, disclosed sales, units, SBA record and risk, as one PDF. Free; no spam; one click to unsubscribe.

FV-01849FDD 2025Data QualityExcellent86%
Manager-run OKYes: Protected territory

Data from FDD filing + SBA 7(a) records

Analysis by FranchiseVerdict Research · Methodology

OsteoStrong is a wellness franchise offering a quick, weekly bone- and muscle-strengthening session on specialized resistance equipment. Franchisees run compact studios on a membership model, coaching members through sessions.

FranchiseVerdict summary · 2026

A OsteoStrong franchise requires a total initial investment of $276K – $616K, including a $35K franchise fee and an ongoing 7.0% 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. SBA 7(a) loans show a 8.7% charge-off rate across 55 loans[1]. 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: 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 scored5 of 5 headline figures on this page cite a page of the filing.

Overview

Investment
$276K – $616K
55th pct Health & Fitn…
Avg gross sales
N/A
Royalty
7.0%
37th pct Health & Fitn…
Units
153
83rd pct Health & Fitn…
SBA charge-off
8.7%
% of SBA 7(a) loans not repaid · median varies by category

Quick verdict · Health & Fitness · color = vs category peers

Total Investment
$276K – $616K
Median $392K
above median ↑, worse than category
Franchise Fee
$35K – $35K
Median $50K
below median ↓, better than category
Liquid Capital Req'd
$34K – $54K
Median $35K
above median ↑, worse than category
Avg Revenue
Not disclosed
Franchisor makes none
Royalty Rate
7.0%
Median 7.0%
near median
Ongoing Fees
0.1% of rev
Median 9.0%
below median ↓, better than category
SBA Charge-Off Rate
8.7%
55 loans · Median 10.5%
below median ↓, better than category
System Size
153 units
Median 17 units
above median ↑, better than category
Turnover Rate
2.0%
Median 0.0%
Territory
Protected, not exclusive
Limits on the franchisor opening nearby; not an exclusive zone
Owner-Operator
Optional
Can hire a manager
Litigation
6 cases
Review carefully

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 $276K – $616K including a $35K franchise fee, 7.0% 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 53/100 (higher is better). SBA loan charge-off rate of 8.7% across 55 loans (near or below the 16% franchise average, based on all SBA 7(a) franchise lending, 2010–2025).
  • GROWTHPositive: net +10 franchised outlets in the latest year (13 opened, 3 closed) (Item 20).
  • GROWTHSystem growing at 15.9% CAGR over 3 years with 153 total units. Strong expansion trajectory.

Item 1 · who you're contracting with

The Franchisor

Corporate structure & franchisor financials
Legal entity
OsteoStrong Franchising, Inc.
Parent company
Blue Ocean International, Inc.
FDD Item 1, page 8 of the 2025 FDD
CEO title
Chief Executive Officer
Kyle Zagrodzky
Incorporated in
DE
HQ
8524 Highway 6 North, # 310, Houston, Texas 77095
Auditor
AG LLP (Richardson/Dallas, TX)
Audited financials
Franchisor revenue
$11.3M
vs $8.7M prior year

Overview

About

CEO
Kyle Zagrodzky
Headquarters
TX
Founded
2012
FDD year
2025
States available
36

Can you afford it, and what does the money buy?

Entry cost runs 14% above the typical health & fitness franchise.

Total investment (Item 7)$276K – $616KCited, not corroborated — printed on page 20 of the 2025 FDD (Item 7). Nothing else in our record independently restates or re-derives it.
Franchise fee$35,000Verified — printed on page 13 of the 2025 FDD (Item 5), and another item of the same filing prints the same figure on a labelled row, which is an independent restatement.
Royalty7.0%Cited, not corroborated — printed on page 15 of the 2025 FDD (Item 6). Nothing else in our record independently restates or re-derives it.
Ad fund1.0%Cited, not corroborated — printed on page 15 of the 2025 FDD (Item 6). Nothing else in our record independently restates or re-derives it.
Working capital$34K – $54K

Source: FDD 2025 · Items 5–7

FDD Item 7 · 2025 filing

Initial investment breakdown

OsteoStrong: Item 7 initial investment breakdown
Cost componentLowHigh
Initial franchise fee$35K$35K
Working capital (3–6 mo)$34K$54K
Equipment, build-out, other$207K$527K
Total initial investment$276K$616K

Source: OsteoStrong 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
$276K – $616K
Middle of category vs category
Liquid capital req'd
$34K – $54K
Bottom third — review vs category
Franchise fee
$35K – $35K
Top 40% of category vs category
Royalty
7.0%
Set by a formula · typical 6–8%
Ad fund
1.0%
typical 3–5%
Total fee load
0.1%
vs 9–13% typical

Ongoing fees · Item 6

OsteoStrong: Item 6 recurring fees
FeeAmount
Royalty7.0% of gross sales
Marketing / ad fund1.0% of gross sales
Technology fee$250
Training fee$6K
Transfer fee$21K
Renewal fee$5K
Total fee load0.1% of rev
ROI & LBO modelsSingle-unit · 25-unit portfolio · editable
Blue values = direct from FDD (Item 7 investment, Item 19 revenue, Item 6 fees)Not set = no filing supplies it and we will not substitute one. Enter your own

OsteoStrong 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 OsteoStrong unit return on the cash you put in?

From FDDNot set — you supply itYou overrode an FDD value
Revenue · per unit, per yearnot set
Item 19 not disclosed. Enter your own revenue assumption
Franchisor take · royalty + ad fundFDD
typ 6–8%
typ 3–5%
Operating costs · not in any FDDnot set

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.

Total invested capital · what you put in to openFDD
FDD Item 7: $276K–$616K (midpoint used)
FDD reports $34K–$54K

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.


Store EBITDA · annual
—
EBITDA margin
—
Total invested
$489K
Payback
—
Single-unit only. A multi-unit portfolio gives up roughly 5–15% of this to shared services (corporate G&A) before reaching the ~10-unit break-even point.

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.

Showing the headline figures — all 123 extracted fields are in the Full FDD Report · $19 →

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 0.1% — below the Health & Fitness median of 9.0%.

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 15.9% CAGR over 3 years across 153 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 OsteoStrong Compares

Metric
OsteoStrong
Category median
vs median
Investment
$446K
$392Kmiddle half $226K–$620K · n=172
Above median, worse than category
Revenue
N/A
$477Kmiddle half $316K–$739K · n=65
N/A
Unit Count
153
17middle half 5–70 · n=171
Above median, better than category

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?

Total units153Verified — printed on page 43 of the 2025 FDD (Item 20), and the table's own arithmetic closes on it three ways.
3-yr growth+15.9% (favorable vs category)
Turnover rate2.0% (favorable vs category)

Source: FDD 2025 · Item 20

Unit growth

Item 20 · unit dynamics

The Growth Chart

Total units
153
Opened
13
Last reporting year
Closed
3
Terminated
2
Franchisor ended the franchise (per Item 20)
Non-renewed
0
Term expired, not renewed (per Item 20)
Turnover rate
2.0%
Company-owned
0
Corporate units in the system
% franchised
100%
vs corporate-owned
Net growth (3-yr)
+15.9%
Net unit change over 3 years
3-yr CAGR
+15.9%
Compounded over last 3 years

Last fiscal year · Item 20 exits and transfers

Terminated
2
Not renewed
0
Transferred
8
Reacquired
0
Franchisor bought back
2022
132
Franchised units
2023
143+11
Franchised units
2024
153+10
Franchised units

Year-over-year franchised unit counts and net change. Source: FDD Item 20.

Item 20 · 37 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).

AK
ME
VT
NH
MA
RI
CT
NY
NJ
PA
DE
MD
DC
WA
OR
CA
NV
ID
MT
WY
UT
CO
AZ
NM
ND
SD
NE
KS
OK
TX
MN
IA
MO
AR
LA
WI
IL
MS
TN
MI
IN
KY
AL
OH
WV
GA
VA
NC
SC
FL
HI
Active operators · 37 states
No contacts on file

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

165 current owners across 37 states.

  • CA 26
  • FL 18
  • TX 12
  • NC 11
  • CO 8
  • MO 8
  • OH 8
  • NY 7
  • AL 6
  • AZ 5
  • NJ 4
  • NV 4
  • +25 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.

B
SBA Lending Health
Strong SBA lending record · 8.7% charge-off
Total loans
55
Loan volume
$12.5M
Median loan
$230K
50th percentile
Charge-off rate
8.7%
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)
91.3%
5-yr charge-off
N/A
Loans approved 2021+
Active lenders
28
Defaults
2
Typical loan rate
8.1%
avg rate to borrowers
Franchised industry avg
15.8%
brand beats franchise avg ↓
Jobs supported
299
2.4 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.

Vintage analysis

OsteoStrong charge-off rate by loan vintage

BrandNational avg
OsteoStrong charge-off rate by loan vintage. Showing 5 vintages from 2016 to 2020. Rates range from 0.0% to 33.3%.0%5%10%15%20%25%30%35%'16'17'18'19'20

Top lenders financing OsteoStrong franchisees

Stearns Bank National Association9 loans0.0%
JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Association6 loans16.7%
The Huntington National Bank6 loans—

Showing 3 of 28 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 OsteoStrong from SBA 7(a) FOIA data.

Principal loss rate
1.1%
Avg SBA guarantee
71%
Avg interest rate
8.12%
Avg chargeoff amount
$68K
Lender concentration
16.4%
Job velocity
2.4 per $100K
NAICS benchmark
12.5%
NAICS 713940
Jobs supported
299

Top SBA lendersTop lender holds 16% of loans

#LenderLoansVolumeDefault %
1Stearns Bank National Association9$1.7M0.0%
2JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Association6$405K16.7%
3The Huntington National Bank6$1.1MN/A
4First Bank4$1.0M0.0%
5UMB Bank, National Association2$145K0.0%
6Belgrade State Bank2$599KN/A
7Alerus Financial, National Association2$457K0.0%
8KeyBank National Association2$612KN/A
9Midwest Regional Bank2$504KN/A
10Old National Bank2$869KN/A

Geographic failure vector

StateLoansDefaultsRate
OHOhio10116.7%
CACalifornia900.0%
MOMissouri600.0%
FLFlorida400.0%
MNMinnesota400.0%
COColorado3150.0%
TXTexas30--
AZArizona200.0%
SDSouth Dakota20--
UTUtah20--

SBA 7(a) lending trend

2014
1
2015
2
2016
4
2017
4
2018
6
2019
14
2020
5
2022
3
2023
7
2024
6
2025
1
2026
2

Borrower profile

Startup36 (82%)
New (< 2 yr)3 (7%)
Unanswered2 (5%)
Existing (2+ yr)2 (5%)
Ownership change1 (2%)

Source: SBA 7(a) + 504 FOIA loan-level data, matched by FranchiseVerdict

What could kill this investment?

SBA loans charge off at 8.7% — 46% below the 16.0% national norm, i.e. lower lender-observed risk.

SBA charge-off8.7% · 55 loans
Verdict score53/100 (higher is better)
Litigation6 cases
Auditor going-concern doubtNo (favorable vs category)

Source: SBA 7(a) FOIA · FDD Items 3, 21

Risk analysis

FranchiseVerdict rating + FDD Items 3, 4, 8, 16, 21

Risk & Legal

BAbove average53Verdict score 53/100

OsteoStrong presents elevated investment risk due to active multi-party litigation, regulatory compliance issues, opaque financial performance data, and slow system growth in a niche market segment.

High confidence±4 pts
4957

Litigation (Item 3)

Subject: the franchisor is a named party (defendant).

One pending consolidated federal action in S.D. Tex. with former franchisees/regional developers (Simpson parties) alleging FDD misrepresentation/omission and breach of regional development agreements, with franchisor counterclaims for defamation/conspiracy (in discovery). Five past actions: a 2025 California DFPI consent order (franchisor paid $10,500 in penalties and agreed to refund affected investors over unregistered franchise broker agreements); Albrecht/JDG-OS (settled, $67,500 paid by insurer); Rhodes/OsteoFit international trademark/development disputes (settled, $125,000 paid by insurer); Partlow/Bio Strength (settled, $150,000 paid by insurer); and Baird/K&L Wellness (transferred and consolidated into the Simpson case).

Bankruptcy (Item 4)

None disclosed

Audited financials (Item 21)

Yes · AG LLP (Richardson/Dallas, TX)

Franchisor revenue (Item 21)

Yr 1: $11.3MYr 2: $8.7MNon-royalty: $0.6M

Franchisor entity revenue (not unit-level)

Supplier relationship · Items 8 & 16

  • Franchisor sells you products: Yes
  • Must buy proprietary products: Yes
  • Restricted to system-approved products: Yes

Score breakdown · what drove the 53 / 100 verdict

  1. 01HIGHMultiple active litigation cases involving misrepresentation and breach of contract allegations from former franchisees and regional developers
  2. 02MINORCalifornia regulatory consent order regarding failure to register franchise broker agreements, indicating compliance lapses
  3. 03MEDHigh initial investment ($275k–$615k) with no disclosed average revenue or net income data (Item 19) prevents ROI validation
  4. 04MEDSlow unit growth (7.0% YoY) on small base (153 units) suggests limited system momentum and market traction
  5. 05MINORRoyalty structure floor of $1,500/month ($18k annually) creates significant breakeven threshold for low-revenue locations
  6. 06MINOR10-year term locks franchisee into relationship with company facing active legal disputes

Severity inferred from the FDD text · not a regulatory classification

Showing the headline figures — all 123 extracted fields are in the Full FDD Report · $19 →

Full litigation history from the FDD (Items 3 and 4) →

What are you signing up for?

Ongoing fees run about 0.1% of sales (royalty + ad fund), before rent and labor.

Initial term10 yrs
Renewal term5 yrs
TerritoryProtected, not exclusive
Initial training74 hrs

Source: FDD 2025 · Items 11, 12, 17

FDD Items 12, 15, 17 · continued from Risk & Legal

Contract & Territory Detail

Initial term10 years
Renewal term5 years
Allowed renewalsℹ2
Territory typeProtected territory
Protected territoryYes
Exclusive territoryℹNo
Online sales rightsRestricted
Franchisor can competeYes
Hire a manager?Allowed
Owner-operatorOptional
Non-compete (years)ℹ2 years
Non-compete (miles)ℹ20 mi
Right of first refusalℹYes
Transfer requires consentYes
Termination notice30 days
Mandatory arbitrationYes
Arbitration locationHarris County, Texas
Jury trial waiverYes
Governing lawTX
Litigation count6
View Item 3 litigation summary

One pending consolidated federal action in S.D. Tex. with former franchisees/regional developers (Simpson parties) alleging FDD misrepresentation/omission and breach of regional development agreements, with franchisor counterclaims for defamation/conspiracy (in discovery). Five past actions: a 2025 California DFPI consent order (franchisor paid $10,500 in penalties and agreed to refund affected investors over unregistered franchise broker agreements); Albrecht/JDG-OS (settled, $67,500 paid by insurer); Rhodes/OsteoFit international trademark/development disputes (settled, $125,000 paid by insurer); Partlow/Bio Strength (settled, $150,000 paid by insurer); and Baird/K&L Wellness (transferred and consolidated into the Simpson case).

Items 10, 11

Training & Operations

Classroom training
48 hrs
On-the-job training
26 hrs
Training location
A designated training center determined by franchisor, or web-based courses
Ongoing training
Required
POS system
iGo Figure
Operating tech stack

Items 5 & 11

Franchisor Support

✓Site selection assistance
✓Grand opening support
✓Lease negotiation help

Technology: iGo Figure

Item 20 · call current owners

Franchisee Contacts

165 owners to call

Name · phone · city · state. Extracted from FDD Item 20

Unlock 165 contacts · $49
Free preview
(239) 989-••••FL
Unlock all 165 contacts
(928) 230-••••AZ
(941) 210-••••FL
(201) 264-••••SC
(949) 940-••••FL

Frequently asked questions

Frequently Asked Questions

How much does it cost to open a OsteoStrong franchise?

The total investment to open a OsteoStrong franchise ranges from $276K – $616K, with an initial franchise fee of $35K. This includes real estate, equipment, inventory, and working capital as disclosed in their Franchise Disclosure Document (FDD).

What do OsteoStrong franchise owners earn?

OsteoStrong 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 OsteoStrong?

OsteoStrong is franchised by OsteoStrong Franchising, Inc.. Its parent company is Blue Ocean International, Inc.. Source: FDD Item 1, 2025 filing.

What is Item 19 in the OsteoStrong 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 OsteoStrong FDD and qualifies whose outlets they describe.

What is OsteoStrong's franchise failure rate?

Based on SBA 7(a) loan data, OsteoStrong has a charge-off rate of 8.7% across 55 loans, meaning 8.7% 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 OsteoStrong franchise locations are there?

As of their most recent FDD filing, OsteoStrong has 153 total units in the United States, including 153 franchised units and 0 company-owned units. 13 new units were opened in the latest reporting year.

Is OsteoStrong a good franchise to buy?

FranchiseVerdict rates OsteoStrong 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 OsteoStrong, 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.