A&W Restaurants vs Huddle House

Compare FDD disclosures, investment range, royalty and ad fund burden, SBA lending outcomes, Item 20-style unit movement, Item 19 transparency, and data-confidence caveats with a permanent shareable URL.

Share this page
https://fddiq.com/compare/a-w-restaurants-vs-huddle-house
A&W Restaurants
Casual Dining
Investment
$470K to $2.2M
Franchise fee
$35,000
Item 19 status
Revenue Only
Confidence
High Confidence
Units
143
Huddle House
Casual Dining
Investment
$381K to $1.7M
Franchise fee
$35,000
Item 19 status
Limited Data
Confidence
High Confidence
Units
216
Lower entry cost
Leans right
Based on disclosed minimum initial investment only; buyer cash needs may be higher after working capital, lease, and financing assumptions.
Better disclosed economics
A&W Restaurants
Uses the same Item 19 transparency hierarchy shown on franchise pages and rankings.
Lower SBA default risk
Leans left
Treat low-loan brands carefully; sample size and SBA borrower mix matter.
MetricA&W RestaurantsHuddle House
Franchise Fee
From disclosed FDD fee data when available; excludes buyer-specific legal, diligence, and financing costs.
$35,000$35,000
Min Investment
Lower bound of disclosed initial investment range, not a recommended capital budget.
$470K$381K
Max Investment
Upper end of FDD range; still reconcile to site, lease, buildout, and working-capital assumptions.
$2.2M$1.7M
Royalty Rate
Ongoing royalty burden before local store economics and owner salary.
5.0%4.8%
Ad Fund Rate
National/brand fund rate when disclosed; local marketing may be additive.
4.5%3.5%
Total Ongoing Burden
Royalty plus ad fund when available.
9.5%8.3%
Median Revenue (Item 19)
Only meaningful when the franchisor provides an Item 19 financial-performance representation.
$961K$810K
Cash-on-Cash Return
Estimated when revenue and margin assumptions are available.
0.4%1.4%
Payback Period
273.6 yrs73.9 yrs
Revenue per Dollar Invested
0.73x0.77x
Franchised Units
Latest disclosed franchised-unit count in the corpus.
143216
1-Year Net Unit Change
Item 20-style system movement signal; investigate transfers, closures, and refranchising before assuming organic growth.
N/A-3
Net Unit Growth Rate
N/A-1.3%
Net Closure Rate
Net closure proxy based on disclosed unit change.
N/A1.4%
SBA Default Rate
Historical SBA performance for matched loans, not a prediction for a new buyer or location.
0.0%18.5%
SBA Loan Count
Use this to judge whether SBA default data is statistically meaningful.
235
Average SBA Loan Size
$223K$681K
Item 19 Status
Canonical transparency badge used across franchise, ranking, and compare surfaces.
Revenue OnlyLimited Data
Has Item 19
✓ Yes✓ Yes
Data Confidence
Derived from the same data-quality thresholds used on franchise pages.
High Confidence · 100/100High Confidence · 100/100

What stands out

  • A&W Restaurants discloses an initial investment range of $470K to $2.2M, while Huddle House discloses $381K to $1.7M. Treat these as FDD ranges, not a full purchase budget.
  • A&W Restaurants shows an Item 19 financial-performance disclosure; Huddle House shows an Item 19 financial-performance disclosure. Missing Item 19 data should narrow confidence, not automatically kill a brand.
  • A&W Restaurants has 143 franchised units versus 216 for Huddle House; use one-year net unit movement and closure proxies as early diligence signals, not final underwriting.

Turn this into a buy-side memo

Unlock full compare access, then order a deeper FDD report with franchise-agreement red flags, source-document caveats, buyer assumptions, and an investment thesis you can share with partners or lenders.

Last updated: May 2026