Skip to main content
FranchiseVerdict

Compare

2 brands side-by-side

Compare up to 4 brands side by side

indicates the clear winner per row. Ties and missing data are not highlighted.

How winners are chosen

Lower is better for investment, liquid capital, franchise fee, royalty and ad-fund rates, SBA charge-off rate, and owner turnover.

Higher is better for disclosed revenue and owner earnings, verdict score, total units, net unit growth, and franchisee contacts. For the letter grade, A ranks highest.

A row is highlighted only when one brand clearly leads. Ties are never highlighted, and missing data never counts as a win. Some rows (earnings-metric type, loan counts, contract terms) are informational and have no winner.

Download PDF

Focus by buyer type

Brand
Playa Bowls logoAStrongest tier
Playa Bowls
Quick-Service Restaurants
Remove
Sauce on the Side logoAStrongest tier
Sauce on the Side
Quick-Service Restaurants
Remove
Vitals
Investment range
$256K – $1.0M
$494K – $794K
Liquid capital
$25K – $60K
$30K – $50K
Franchise fee
$35K
$35K
Royalty rate
6.0%
5.0%
Ad fund rate
2.0%
1.0%
Performance
Avg gross sales
$1.3M
$985KIncl. company outlets
Median gross sales
$1.2M
$946KIncl. company outlets
Avg owner earnings
Metric varies by brand. Check type below
N/A
N/A
Earnings metric
Not classified
EBITDA
Risk
Rating
AStrongest tier
AStrongest tier
Verdict score
91 / 100
64 / 100
SBA charge-off rate
0.0%
N/A
SBA loans on record
57
N/A
Scale
Total units
290
12
Net change (latest yr)
N/A
N/A
Turnover rate
0.0%
0.0%
Contract
Initial term (years)
10
10
Renewal term (years)
10
10
Initial training (hrs)
91
200
Contacts
Franchisee phones
240
9

Looking for a detailed head-to-head breakdown?

Read the Playa Bowls vs Sauce on the Side editorial comparison →

Need franchisee contacts for these brands?

Save with a contact bundle →