Pinkberry Franchise Cost, Revenue & Review 2026
Data from FDD filing + SBA 7(a) records
Analysis by FranchiseVerdict Research · Methodology
Pinkberry is a frozen yogurt franchise known for tart swirled yogurt and fresh fruit toppings. Franchisees run the shops, managing product prep, staffing, and counter service in high-traffic retail spots.
FranchiseVerdict summary · 2026
A Pinkberry franchise requires a total initial investment of $306K – $663K, including a $35K franchise fee and an ongoing 6.0% royalty[2]. Per the 2025 FDD, average unit revenue was $648K[2]. SBA 7(a) loans show a 0.0% charge-off rate across 21 loans[1]. FranchiseVerdict grade: B (Above average), an editorial assessment, not investment advice. Run a live ROI scan →
Data last verified · figures per the 2025 FDD issuance
Overview
- Investment
- $306K – $663K
- 50th pct Service Resta…
- Avg gross sales
- $648K
- 6th pct Service Resta…
- Royalty
- 6.0%
- 46th pct Service Resta…
- Units
- 59
- 68th pct Service Resta…
- SBA charge-off
- 0.0%
- % 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 avg · 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 $306K – $663K including a $35K franchise fee, 6.0% ongoing royalty.
- RETURNSAverage unit revenue of $648K/year (median $664K).
- RISKVerdict B (Above average), verdict score 56/100 (higher is better). SBA loan charge-off rate of 0.0% across 21 loans (well below the franchise average, based on all SBA 7(a) franchise lending, 2010–2025).
- LEGAL14 litigation matters disclosed in Item 3, higher than typical. Review the summary for patterns (franchisor-initiated vs. franchisee-initiated).
Item 1 · who you're contracting with
The Franchisor
Corporate structure & franchisor financials
- Legal entity
- Kahala Franchising, L.L.C.
- Parent company
- Kahala Brands, Inc.
- Ultimate parent
- MTY Food Group, Inc.
- Predecessor
- Pinkberry Ventures, Inc. (PVI); Pinkberry Franchising Company (PFC)
- Prior franchisor entity
- CEO title
- Chief Executive Officer
- Eric Lefebvre
- CEO experience
- 2018 yrs
- Years in role or industry
- Incorporated in
- AZ
- HQ
- 9311 E. Via De Ventura, Scottsdale, Arizona 85258
- Auditor
- PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC)
- Audited financials
- Franchisor revenue
- $580.3M
- vs $263.7M prior year
- Management churn noted
- Frequent turnover
- Item 2 disclosed frequent executive changes
Overview
About
- CEO
- Eric Lefebvre
- Headquarters
- AZ
- Founded
- 2006
- FDD year
- 2025
- States available
- 11
Can you afford it, and what does the money buy?
Entry cost runs 26% below the typical quick-service restaurants franchise.
Source: FDD 2025 · Items 5–7
Full Item 7 breakdown31 line items
Initial investment breakdown
| Line item | Low | High | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Initial Franchise Feenot refundable | $14K | $35K | |
| Lease Review Feenot refundable | $0 | $3K | |
| Architect, engineer and other design professionalsnot refundable | $10K | $21K | |
| Expenses While Trainingnot refundable | $3K | $8K | |
| Acquisition of Real Estate / Deposits and Initial Rentnot refundable | $9K | $23K | |
| Constructionnot refundable | $82K | $215K | |
| Furnishingsnot refundable | $11K | $28K | |
| Equipmentnot refundable | $92K | $235K | |
| Inventorynot refundable | $10K | $15K | |
| Utility Deposits and Feesnot refundable | $0 | $3K | |
| Business Licensenot refundable | $300 | $600 | |
| Insurancenot refundable | $2K | $3K | |
| PCI Compliance Costsnot refundable | $150 | $1K | |
| Catering/Delivery Servicenot refundable | $0 | $8K | |
| Information Systemsnot refundable | $3K | $5K | |
| Telephonenot refundable | $150 | $300 | |
| Signagenot refundable | $8K | $17K | |
| Legal and Accountingnot refundable | $3K | $5K | |
| Additional Funds - 3 monthsnot refundable | $25K | $25K | |
| Grand Opening Marketingnot refundable | $10K | $10K | |
| Total initial investment | $316K | $784K |
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
- $306K – $663K
- Middle of category vs category
- Liquid capital req'd
- $25K – $25K
- Middle of category vs category
- Franchise fee
- $35K – $35K
- Middle of category vs category
- Royalty
- 6.0%
- percentage · typical 6–8%
- Ad fund
- 2.0%
- typical 3–5%
- Total fee load
- 8.0%
- vs 9–13% typical
Ongoing fees · Item 6
| Fee | Amount |
|---|---|
| Royalty | 6.0% of gross sales |
| Marketing / ad fund | 2.0% of gross sales |
| Technology fee | $115 |
| Training fee | $750 |
| Transfer fee | $8K |
| Renewal fee | $18K |
| Inventory (initial) | $10K – $15K |
| Total fee load | 8.0% of rev |
What do units actually make?
Average unit sales run 46% below the quick-service restaurants norm.
Source: FDD 2025 · Item 19
Single-unit · estimated
Returns at a glance
Indicative numbers using FDD Item 7 / Item 19 inputs and category-benchmarked cost ratios. Full single-unit, 25-unit portfolio, and LBO models (with every input editable to stress-test your own scenario) live on the financials page.
Store EBITDA · annual
$91K
14.0% margin
Unlevered ROIC
18%
EBITDA / total invested capital
Payback
5.6 yrs
cash-on-cash, unlevered
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. The target band for an attractive franchise is 30–60% ROIC. Below that and a passive index fund likely outperforms; above that and the franchisor has pricing power you're subsidizing.
Note: Item 19 revenue is what the franchisor discloses. It's the top line only. Operating costs below are category estimates. Override them to match your real lease quote, labor market, and build-out budget.
Returns model · single-unit ROIC
What would one Pinkberry unit return on the cash you put in?
Unlevered ROIC · per unit
Estimated return on your total franchise investment, before any debt financing.
18%
Below the 30–60% attractive-franchise band
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%.
Levered LBO scenario · Yale Crease Capital framing
What would 25 Pinkberry units return on equity?
Equity IRR · 5-yr
49.9%
7.57× MOIC
Year-1 DSCR
1.88×
EBITDA ÷ debt service
Equity required
$908K
on $4.5M purchase
Total debt
$3.6M
SBA $2.3M + senior + seller note
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
- $648K
- Per unit, per year
- Median gross sales
- $664K
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
- 55 outlets
- vs category median 20 · large
- Reporting year
- 2024
- Fiscal year the figures cover
- Source filing
- FDD 2025
- Disclosed in the 2025 filing, covering 2024
- Transparency
- 4 / 10
- vs category median 4 / 10 · typical
Compared against 782 Quick-Service Restaurants brands
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 $648K/year in gross sales. Revenue-to-investment ratio: 1.3x.
Fee burden
Total ongoing fee load of 8.0% (near the Quick-Service Restaurants average).
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 -7.8% 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 averages
How Pinkberry Compares
Is the system healthy?
Source: FDD 2025 · Item 20
Unit growth
Item 20 · unit dynamics
The Growth Chart
- Total units
- 59
- Opened
- 4
- Last reporting year
- Closed
- 8
- Terminated
- 0
- Franchisor ended the franchise (per Item 20)
- Non-renewed
- 1
- Term expired, not renewed (per Item 20)
- Turnover rate
- 30.5%
- Company-owned
- 0
- Corporate units in the system
- % franchised
- 100%
- vs corporate-owned
- Net growth (3-yr)
- -7.8%
- Net unit change over 3 years
- 3-yr CAGR
- -7.8%
- Compounded over last 3 years
3-year detail · Item 20
- Opened (3yr)
- 5
- Closed (3yr)
- 10
- Terminated (3yr)
- 3
- Non-renewed (3yr)
- 5
- Transfers (3yr)
- 1
- Reacquired (3yr)
- 0
- Franchisor bought back
- Projected new
- 7
- Franchisor's next-year forecast
- Transfer rate
- 1.7%
- Owners selling to other franchisees
- Termination rate
- 1.7%
- Franchisor-initiated terminations
- Ceased ops
- 11.9%
- Units that stopped operating
Last reporting year only, multi-year history not disclosed in this brand's FDD.
Item 20 · 7 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.
SBA loan performance
Government records
SBA Loan Data
Aggregated from SBA 7(a) and 504 loan disclosures, public data unique to FranchiseVerdict.
- Total loans
- 21
- Loan volume
- $7.7M
- Median loan
- $350K
- 50th percentile
- Charge-off rate
- 0.0%
- 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
- 14
- Defaults
- 0
- Typical loan rate
- 6.8%
- avg rate to borrowers
- Franchised industry avg
- 10.6%
- brand beats franchise avg ↓
- Jobs supported
- 757
- 10.2 per loan
- Lender concentration
- 20%
- top lender's share
Borrower mix: 43% went to startups / new businesses, 57% to established operators
Franchise vs independent — in snack and nonalcoholic beverage bars, franchised businesses charge off at 10.6% vs 8.9% for independents — franchising is associated with 19% higher SBA default risk in this category.
Top lenders financing Pinkberry franchisees
Showing 3 of 14 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.
Premium insight
SBA Lending Report
Deep-dive into Pinkberry's SBA lending history: lender network, geographic footprint, interest rates, and more.
SBA Lending Report
- Principal loss rate and NAICS industry benchmark
- 10 lenders with concentration factor
- Per-state charge-off rates across 8 states
- Startup risk premium and job creation velocity
- 11-year lending trend
Instant access. No subscription.
With a 0.0% charge-off rate across 21 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
Pinkberry presents high risk due to a contracting franchise system (-6.3% YoY), undisclosed net profitability, significant litigation history including franchise law violations, and unprotected territory—creating substantial financial exposure for new franchisees in a declining brand.
Litigation (Item 3)
Case 1: Purav Enterprises, L.L.C., Balwant Bahia, and Paramjit Samra v. The Extreme Pita Franchising USA, Inc., EP Development, Inc., and Feisal Ramjee (Washington Superior Court, King County, Case No. 15-2-15120-7). Filed June 22, 2015. Allegations: FIPA violations, misrepresentation of financial performance by Area Developer, omission of mandatory material information, unregistered broker. Sought: rescission, treble damages, attorney's fees. Settled March 11, 2016 for $20,000. Dismissed March 16, 2016. Case 2: KOHO, Inc. v. Kahala Franchising, L.L.C. (California Superior Court, Los Angeles County, Case No. BC572565). Filed February 17, 2015. Allegations: breach of contract, unjust enrichment, declaratory relief. Sought: $540,000+ damages. Kahala filed cross-complaint alleging breach, unjust enrichment, fraud, negligent misrepresentation, conversion, negligence. Mediation failed May 3, 2016. Bench trial June 15-16, 2016. Court granted judgment for Kahala; Koho failed to establish breach and damages. Attorney's fees awarded to Kahala ($205,000) and Hannah Kim ($10,233). Koho appealed but failed to post bond. Settled June 19, 2017 with Kahala repurchasing Area Developer territory for $75,000 and forgiving $130,000 in damages.
Largest disclosed settlement: $585,000
Bankruptcy (Item 4)
None disclosed
Audited financials (Item 21)
Yes · PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC)
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: 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 56 / 100 verdict
- 01MEDUnit count declined 6.3% YoY (59 units) indicating system contraction and potential market saturation or operational challenges
- 02HIGHHistory of litigation involving breach of contract, misrepresentation, and franchise law violations suggests franchisor-franchisee relationship issues and legal risk exposure
- 03MINORNo average net income disclosure despite $648K average revenue — inability or unwillingness to show profitability is a major red flag
- 04MINORUnprotected territory creates direct competition risk; franchisor can place additional units nearby, cannibalizing sales
- 05HIGHFranchisor litigation history including lawsuits filed against franchisees suggests enforcement-heavy approach and potential relationship deterioration
Severity inferred from the FDD text · not a regulatory classification
What are you signing up for?
Ongoing fees run about 8.0% 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 | 1 |
| Territory type | none |
| Protected territory | No |
| Exclusive territoryℹ | No |
| 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 | 10 mi |
| Right of first refusalℹ | No |
| Transfer requires consent | Yes |
| Termination notice | 14 days |
| Mandatory arbitration | Yes |
| Arbitration location | franchisee_state |
| Jury trial waiver | Yes |
| Governing law | State where franchised business is located |
| Litigation count | 14 |
View Item 3 litigation summary
Case 1: Purav Enterprises, L.L.C., Balwant Bahia, and Paramjit Samra v. The Extreme Pita Franchising USA, Inc., EP Development, Inc., and Feisal Ramjee (Washington Superior Court, King County, Case No. 15-2-15120-7). Filed June 22, 2015. Allegations: FIPA violations, misrepresentation of financial performance by Area Developer, omission of mandatory material information, unregistered broker. Sought: rescission, treble damages, attorney's fees. Settled March 11, 2016 for $20,000. Dismissed March 16, 2016. Case 2: KOHO, Inc. v. Kahala Franchising, L.L.C. (California Superior Court, Los Angeles County, Case No. BC572565). Filed February 17, 2015. Allegations: breach of contract, unjust enrichment, declaratory relief. Sought: $540,000+ damages. Kahala filed cross-complaint alleging breach, unjust enrichment, fraud, negligent misrepresentation, conversion, negligence. Mediation failed May 3, 2016. Bench trial June 15-16, 2016. Court granted judgment for Kahala; Koho failed to establish breach and damages. Attorney's fees awarded to Kahala ($205,000) and Hannah Kim ($10,233). Koho appealed but failed to post bond. Settled June 19, 2017 with Kahala repurchasing Area Developer territory for $75,000 and forgiving $130,000 in damages.
Items 10, 11
Training & Operations
- Classroom training
- 40 hrs
- On-the-job training
- 80 hrs
- Training location
- Online/KTEC in Scottsdale, AZ; in-store at franchisee's location
- Ongoing training
- Required
- Time to open
- 9 mo
- From signing to launch
- Site selection
- Franchisee with franchisor approval
- Franchisor financing
- Offered
- Item 10
Items 5 & 11
Franchisor Support
Item 20 · call current owners
Franchisee Contacts
29 owners to call
Name · phone · city · state. Extracted from FDD Item 20
FDD download
Pinkberry · FDD (2025) PDF
Frequently asked questions
Frequently Asked Questions
How much does it cost to open a Pinkberry franchise?
The total investment to open a Pinkberry franchise ranges from $306K – $663K, 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 Pinkberry franchise owners earn?
According to Item 19 of the Pinkberry FDD, the average gross sales per unit is $648K. The median is $664K. Note: this is gross revenue, not profit. Actual owner earnings vary based on location, operating costs, and management.
What is Item 19 in the Pinkberry 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 Pinkberry FDD and qualifies whose outlets they describe.
What is Pinkberry's franchise failure rate?
Based on SBA 7(a) loan data, Pinkberry has a charge-off rate of 0.0% across 21 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 Pinkberry franchise locations are there?
As of their most recent FDD filing, Pinkberry has 59 total units in the United States, including 59 franchised units and 0 company-owned units. 4 new units were opened in the latest reporting year.
Is Pinkberry a good franchise to buy?
FranchiseVerdict rates Pinkberry as a B-grade franchise with a verdict score of 56 out of 100 (higher is better), based on our analysis of investment costs, revenue data, SBA loan performance, and growth trends. 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 Pinkberry, 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.