From the filed FDD — automated extraction, check the source
2026 FDD
SBA-eligible · directory code S1137 since 2017
MR. APPLIANCE
Appliance repair · parent company: not identified
Mr. Appliance is a residential appliance-repair franchise servicing refrigerators, washers, dryers, ovens, and other major appliances. A franchisee runs a dispatch-based service business, sending uniformed technicians in branded vans to scheduled in-home repair appointments for homeowners and property managers.
MR. APPLIANCE net unit count declined 4.3% over 2023–2025 per its FDD Item 20.
New to franchising? Start here
A franchise is a business where you (the franchisee) pay a company (the franchisor) for the right to open and run a location using their brand and system — think a local Anytime Fitness or Taco John's owned by a small-business owner, not the corporation.
Before you can buy in, U.S. law requires the franchisor to give you a Franchise Disclosure Document (FDD) — a long legal filing covering its fees, finances, and history. Most numbers on this page come from that document; others come from federal SBA loan records and labor and census data, each labelled with its source:
- Franchise fee — the one-time cost to buy in.
- Royalty — the ongoing cut of your sales you pay the franchisor.
- Item 20 — how many locations opened, transferred and left the system, the main basis for our verdict, which rates how strong the disclosed record is, or says when the system is too new, the filing too old, or the disclosure too thin to judge.
Our rating · opinion
Weaker disclosed record
SBA loans to its franchisees approved FY2005–2020 charged off far more often than franchise loans of the same years (20 vs about 6.4 expected, 3.1×). A charge-off is a lender's loss, not proof a business closed, but at 3.1× the same-year rate we cap the rating regardless of what Item 20 shows.
Exit rate · fiscal 2025
4.2%
vs 7.4% median across 82 comparable systems (home services)
Cost to open
$148K–$273K
Item 7 total investment range
SBA loan losses · vs same-year loans
3.1×
20 of 49 charged off vs ~6.4 expected
Market density · Texas
Thin market
51% thinner than the national average
Email me when this brand’s record changes
A weekly check for new filings, changes to disclosed costs or earnings, SBA loan totals, and verified public-record events. Only changes to these 1 selected brand. No email when nothing changes. Coverage depends on when source data reaches our database.
Unsubscribe in any alert. We never sell your email.
Data as of 2026-10-29. Figures come from MR. APPLIANCE's public FDD filings (latest: MN 2026, extracted 2026-07-30) and SBA FOIA loan records (through FY2026), extracted by us and possibly containing errors. The rating is our opinion, not investment, legal, or tax advice. Franchisor or owner and see something wrong? Report a correction — we review every request.
What each source says
FDD record · SBA loans · model · auditor
We lead with the loan record: franchisees' loans defaulted far more often than franchise loans made in the same years, which outweighs what the franchisor's own Item 20 shows.
FDD record · Item 20
Steady operating record
Units fell 4% (2023–2025: 325 → 311); exit rate 4.2% (fiscal 2025) vs 7.4% median.
SBA loans · vs same-year loans
Far more defaults than expected (3.1×)
20 charge-offs among 49 resolved loans approved FY2005–2020; about 6.4 expected.
Modeled risk
Higher modeled risk
Riskier than 91% of scored systems.
Auditor opinion · Item 21
Clean opinion
Unqualified audit, 2026 FDD. Says nothing about franchisee results.
Behind the verdict
the record, factor by factor · Item 20
latest consecutive years · Item 20 Table 1
terminations + ceased-ops vs. all exits · Table 3
transfers vs. base · Table 3
actual vs. projected openings · Table 5
Item 19 disclosure + completeness · shown, not counted in the verdict
Systemwide units
2023–2025
Survival record
FDD Item 20 · outlet status by year
In fiscal 2025, 13 of 310 franchised outlets left the system — an exit rate of 4.2% (fiscal 2025), vs a 7.4% median across 82 comparable systems (home services). An exit is not a failure: this counts terminations, non-renewals and "ceased — other reasons" as reported, and excludes transfers to new owners.
Show the outlet tables ↓Hide the evidence ↑
| Status (FTC) | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Outlets at start | 325 | 325 | 310 |
| Opened | 20 | 9 | 14 |
| Transfers | 21 | 19 | 21 |
| Terminations | 14 | 8 | 2 |
| Non-renewals | 1 | 1 | 2 |
| Reacquired by franchisor | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Ceased — other reasons | 5 | 15 | 9 |
| Outlets at end | 325 | 310 | 311 |
| Net change | 0 | -15 | +1 |
The franchisor's own finances
FDD ITEM 21 · AUDITED STATEMENTS · 2026 FDD
Ernst & Young LLP gave an unmodified (clean) opinion on the statements in the 2026 FDD; revenue rose 6% from FY2023 to FY2025.
This is the company selling the franchise, not any franchisee. A clean opinion means the statements are fairly presented — not that the business is healthy.
Revenue · FY2025
$480.8M
p. 173 · matched to statement
Net income · FY2025
$154.1M
p. 173 · matched to statement
Where FY2025 revenue came from
74% royalties
initial-fee share not extracted
Show the statement figures ↓Hide the evidence ↑
| Fiscal year | FY2023 | FY2024 | FY2025 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Total revenue | $451.9Mp. 197 · matched to statement | $461.7Mp. 173 · matched to statement | $480.8Mp. 173 · matched to statement |
| Royalty revenue | $169.8Mextracted · not cross-checked | $321.2Mextracted · not cross-checked | $353.9Mextracted · not cross-checked |
| Net income (loss) | $166.5Mp. 197 · matched to statement | $159.4Mp. 173 · matched to statement | $154.1Mp. 173 · matched to statement |
| Equity (deficit) at year end | not extracted | $3.03Bp. 172 | $2.95Bp. 172 |
| Cash at year end | not extracted | $2.5Mp. 172 | $4.2Mp. 172 |
The lender's view
SBA 7(a)/504 loan outcomes · compared with franchise loans of the same years
Banks have made 149 SBA-backed loans to MR. APPLIANCE franchisees since 2005. Of the 49 approved FY2005–2020 that have resolved, 20 charged off — where about 6.4 would be expected for franchise loans made in the same years. That is 3.1× the expected rate: these loans defaulted far more often than comparable franchise loans.
All-time, 28 of 67 resolved loans charged off (41.8%). That raw figure mixes every approval year since 2005 — loans made in 2006–08 failed at several times the rate of loans made in 2010–13 across all franchises — so it is shown as evidence, not as the score. 55% of the brand's loans have not resolved yet.
3.1×
20 of 49 resolved (FY2005–2020) vs ~6.4 expected
41.8%
28 of 67 resolved, every approval year
84.0%
charged-off $ ÷ approved $, defaulted loans
$223,489
what recent franchisees borrowed
36 mo
approval → charge-off, defaulted loans
16 vs 11
distinct banks still lending
Charge-off rate by loan approval year (%) · dashed line = all franchise loans that year
SOURCE: SBA 7(a)/504 FOIA LOAN DATA (DATA.SBA.GOV), FY1991–PRESENT · MATCHED TO MR. APPLIANCE BY SBA FRANCHISE NAME/CODE · RESOLVED = CHARGED-OFF + PAID-IN-FULL · EXPECTED = SAME-YEAR RATE ACROSS ALL SBA FRANCHISE LOANS, LOANS ≥ ~6 YEARS OLD
The owner's side of the deal
FDD × federal loan record
Who finances it
United Midwest Savings Bank National Association
62.4% of this brand's loans
That lender charges off 33.5% of its resolved SBA loans to other franchise brands in the FOIA file, vs 14.8% nationally — a read on that lender's portfolio mix, not a finding about the bank.
Who buys it
86.3%
borrowers with no other franchise SBA loan on record
The rest already owned at least one other franchise. Across the corpus, brands bought mostly by repeat operators have charged off less often than brands sold mostly to newcomers (see methodology).
Does experience help here?
Not enough resolved loans to split
Computed from 149 SBA 7(a)/504 loans matched to MR. APPLIANCE by SBA franchise code in the SBA FOIA file. Debt service assumes level amortization at the average disclosed term and rate. Owner-level splits rely on borrower-name matching and may misclassify. A lender's rate excludes its loans to this brand, so it reads the lender, not the brand.
What it costs — and what it drags
FDD Items 5–7 · fees, investment, royalty
Buying in means a $63,750 franchise fee (Item 5) and a total investment of $148K–$273K (Item 7). The franchisor publishes an earnings claim (Item 19) — read its methodology closely.
To open (Item 7)
$148K–$273K
all-in investment range
Franchise fee (Item 5)
$63,750
upfront, one-time
Royalty (Item 6)
7%
of sales, ongoing
Starts at a placeholder of $500K — a round figure for the sector, not from MR. APPLIANCE’s filings. Set your own figure and check it against this brand's Item 19 and what owners tell you.
Royalty you'd pay / yr
$35K
7% of sales, before profit
Over a 10-yr term
$350K
royalties alone, excl. ad fund
This estimate is computed by software from the brand's public filings and any inputs you enter. No CPA prepared it for you and no assurance is provided on it. Actual results will differ, and the differences may be material.
This is not profit. It covers what the FDD fixes: what you put in, and the royalty you owe on sales. Your take-home depends on labor, vehicles, supplies, insurance, and the months to breakeven, none of which the FDD fixes for your unit (some Item 19s include cost data — read it).
Build a real pro-forma for MR. APPLIANCE with a buyer-paid CPAHow the earnings claim is built
FDD ITEM 19 · BASIS · 2026 FDD
The headline figure is Average Gross Sales Per Job for Jan 1 - Dec 31, 2025, for 289 of 311 units, leaving out opened during 2025, transferred during 2025, closed during 2025. It is not an annual per-outlet figure, so we don't treat it as unit revenue. It shows no costs, so it says nothing about what an owner keeps.
Graded on three things the filing states: coverage (2 points if the figure covers at least 75% of the units it is compared with, 1 point for 50–75%), centre (2 points if it prints both a median and a mean, 1 for one of them), and costs (2 points for costs through a profit line or full cost detail, 1 for some cost items). 5–6 points = More complete, 3–4 = Partial, 0–2 = Limited. The grade describes the disclosure, not the business.
Show the basis ↓Hide the evidence ↑
| What is measured | Average Gross Sales Per Job (gross sales; not an annual per-outlet figure) |
| Period | Jan 1 - Dec 31, 2025 |
| Whose results | Franchised outlets |
| Units included | 289 of 311 Mr. Appliance businesses in operation in the US at Dec 31, 2025 (all franchised) |
| Left out |
|
| Average (mean) | printed, but not an annual per-outlet figure |
| Median | printed, but not an annual per-outlet figure |
| Met or beat the average | 125 / 43% |
| Costs shown | None — sales only |
| Where | p. 79 (Item 19 runs pp. 77–79) |
| The filing's words | “based on data reported to us from a total of 289 franchised businesses that were in operation and reported sales to us for all or any portion of the Reporting Period, including franchised businesses that opened or closed” |
Labor record
US Dept. of Labor enforcement · franchisee-level · FY2005–present
Federal investigators have concluded 3 wage cases against operators of this system, recovering $3K in back wages for 4 workers. These cases name franchisee-owned locations, not the franchisor itself.
Concluded cases
3
Back wages owed
$3K
Employees affected
4
Since 2020
0
Read this carefully. The employers in these cases are individual MR. APPLIANCE franchisees — separately owned businesses operating under the brand name — not MR. APPLIANCE itself. The franchisor is not the respondent and in most cases is not a party. What the record shows is how this system's operators run their payrolls, which is worth knowing before you become one of them. Counts rise with system size and with age: a 20-year-old, 10,000-unit system will out-count a young one regardless of conduct. Cases are matched to the brand by trade name and may include misattributed employers. Source: DOL Wage and Hour Division concluded compliance actions, FY2005–present, most recent finding 2020.
Modeled risk
FDD Risk Score · a prediction from disclosure and loan-file features
Modeled from the public record, this brand looks riskier than 91% of the systems we score (higher-risk band).
Observed · vs same-year loans
3.1×
20 of 49 seasoned loans charged off
Risk percentile
91st
Checkable · higher = riskier
Modeled · vs same-year loans
1.9×
≈ 30.3% at the all-loan vintage mix
Top drivers: Share financed by high-loss lenders (raises) · Item 20 exit rate (lowers) · System size (log units) (lowers) · Share of buyers who are first-time operators (lowers). The brand has 30+ seasoned resolved SBA loans, so the score can be checked against its own record. A linear scorecard trained on brands' vintage-adjusted SBA loss records; full spec and cross-validated accuracy on the methodology page. A score is context, not a verdict.
Public records
Bankruptcy, closure & federal court records · coverage is selective · dockets are not scored
We have no verified public-record signals published for MR. APPLIANCE. This is not evidence that no events exist. Check PACER, the FDD's Item 3 (litigation) and Item 4 (bankruptcy), and recent news yourself.
12 questions to ask a MR. APPLIANCE franchisee
Built from this brand's own disclosures · take it to your validation calls
The franchisor will give you a list of owners to call. Most buyers ask whether they like it. These questions come from what MR. APPLIANCE has disclosed. Each one carries the number it came from, so you can check the answer against the record.
- 01
MR. APPLIANCE’s own Item 20 shows 13 of 310 franchised outlets left the system in fiscal 2025 — about 4.2%. Do you know any of those owners, and do you know why they left?
A franchisor will call these “transitions.” An owner three doors down usually knows whether they sold at a profit or handed the keys back.
FDD Item 20 · FY2025
- 02
21 units transferred to new owners in fiscal 2025. When you look at those, were they people cashing out a good business — or getting out of a bad one?
Item 20 counts transfers as neutral, but a transfer can be a good sale or a reluctant exit — the filing does not say which.
FDD Item 20 · FY2025
- 03
The system went from 325 units to 311 over 3 disclosed years. What's the explanation you've been given, and do you believe it?
A shrinking system means fewer owners funding the ad fund and support staff you're paying for.
FDD Item 20 · FY2023–FY2025
- 04
SBA loans to MR. APPLIANCE franchisees approved 2005–2020 defaulted far more often than franchise loans made in the same years: 20 charge-offs among 49 resolved loans, where about 6.4 would be expected (3.1×). Did you finance with an SBA loan, and how close did your first two years come to trouble?
This is the lender's view of how these loans ended, from public federal records matched by SBA franchise code — independent of anything the franchisor discloses — compared with franchise loans made in the same years. A charge-off is a loan outcome, not proof the business closed.
SBA 7(a)/504 loan record, seasoned loans FY2005–FY2020 · 3.1× of same-vintage franchise loans
- 05
Item 7 says the low end to open is $148K; the average recent SBA loan to MR. APPLIANCE franchisees was $223K. What did you actually spend to open, all in — and did your loan cover anything beyond the build-out?
Lenders size loans to the project they finance. If owners say they spent near the loan figure rather than the Item 7 floor, budget from what they spent.
FDD Item 7 vs SBA approvals FY2020+
- 06
You pay 7.0% royalty on gross sales, plus the ad fund, before any of your own costs. On your actual revenue last year, what did you take home as the owner — not revenue, take-home?
Royalty is charged on sales, not profit. This is the number the brochure never shows and the one your life actually runs on.
FDD Item 6
- 07
MR. APPLIANCE makes an earnings claim in Item 19. Does your unit look like that number — and do you know which units they included to build it?
Item 19 is legal to build from a flattering subset. Ask whether they excluded new units, closed units, or company stores.
FDD Item 19 · 2026
- 08
How many months did it take to cover your own costs, and how much cash did you burn getting there?
Ramp-to-breakeven working capital is the most underestimated line in any franchise purchase, and the most common reason otherwise-good units fail.
Not disclosed in any FDD — ask an owner
- 09
Item 3 discloses 4 legal matters. Do you know what those were about, and were any brought by franchisees?
Franchisee-brought suits over territory, fees or support tell you how the franchisor behaves when there's a disagreement.
FDD Item 3 · 2026
- 10
What does the franchisor charge for that you didn't expect — required tech fees, mandatory remodels, approved-supplier pricing?
Required spending appears across Items 6, 8 and 11 rather than in one place, so buyers routinely miss the total.
FDD Items 6, 8, 11
- 11
If your agreement came up for renewal tomorrow at current terms, would you sign again?
The single most predictive question you can ask. A hesitation is the answer.
Ask every owner you speak to
- 12
Who else should I call — including someone who left?
The franchisor's list is curated by definition. Former franchisees are where the unflattering truth lives, and current owners usually know how to reach them.
Ask every owner you speak to
Want this as a checklist you can take to the calls?
I'll email you the printable version, and tell you if MR. APPLIANCE’s numbers move — a new filing, a rising exit rate, a distress signal. Unsubscribe in one click.
A broker is usually paid by the franchisor to place you. I'm paid only by you, never by a franchisor you're considering — and the job is pressure-testing MR. APPLIANCE’s numbers, including talking you out of a bad deal.
This page is what buyers see before they call you for validation. If the record above is wrong — or right in a way the numbers can't show — say so. Franchisors: send corrections with the page reference and we will review them against the filing and update or annotate the page. Corrections are checked against the filings; nothing you write is published with your name unless you agree to it.
MR. APPLIANCE franchise questions, answered from the filings
How many MR. APPLIANCE franchised outlets left the system last year?
In MR. APPLIANCE's latest FDD Item 20 (fiscal 2025), 13 of 310 franchised outlets left the system — an exit rate of 4.2% — compared with a 7.4% median across 82 comparable systems (home services) tracked here. That counts terminations, non-renewals, and "ceased operations — other reasons" as the franchisor reported them; it excludes transfers to new owners. The FDD does not say why each outlet left, and an exit is not the same as a failure.
How much does a MR. APPLIANCE franchise cost?
Per MR. APPLIANCE's 2026 FDD, buying in requires an initial franchise fee of $63,750 (Item 5) and a total initial investment of $148K–$273K (Item 7).
What royalty does MR. APPLIANCE charge?
MR. APPLIANCE charges an ongoing royalty of 7.0% of gross sales, per Item 6 of its 2026 FDD.
Does MR. APPLIANCE disclose earnings (Item 19)?
Yes — MR. APPLIANCE makes a financial performance representation in Item 19 of its 2026 FDD. Read it closely: franchisors choose which units and which metrics to include.
How often do SBA loans for MR. APPLIANCE franchises default?
SBA loans to MR. APPLIANCE franchisees approved 2005–2020 defaulted far more often than franchise loans made in the same years: 20 charge-offs among 49 resolved loans, where about 6.4 would be expected (3.1×). All-time, 28 of 67 resolved loans since 2005 charged off (41.8%); that raw figure mixes every approval year, so we compare with same-year loans instead. A charge-off is a loan loss, not proof the business closed. Source: public SBA 7(a)/504 FOIA data.