Home Instead is the lighter bet on entry — $93K vs $125K (about $33K less). Home Instead runs the bigger network at 626 vs 541 outlets. Visiting Angels takes less off the top (3.5% royalty vs 5%).
Numbers that separate them on a 5-year horizon — not the franchise-development pitch.
Home Instead is expanding fastest here — 20 outlets per year since founding in 1995. High-velocity brands signal momentum but also mean new territory for individual franchisees gets handed out quickly; lock in your preferred area early.
On pure entry capital, Home Instead is 1.4× cheaper than Visiting Angels — $93K vs $125K. That gap compounds over a 5-year horizon because build-out, equipment, opening inventory and the additional funds in FDD Item 7 all scale with format size.
Home Instead (626 outlets) and Visiting Angels (541) operate at comparable scale — neither has a decisive network advantage, so your location-specific due diligence matters more than brand size here.
Primary format per brand, from FDD Item 7. A brand's smaller express or non-traditional formats can cost materially less.
Total initial investment, low end of each brand's FDD Item 7 range for its primary format. Several US brands also run smaller express, non-traditional or conversion formats at materially lower investment — check the brand page for the full Item 7 table.
Total US outlets from FDD Item 20. Bigger networks mean more brand recognition and supplier scale; smaller ones mean less intra-brand competition in your trade area.
Which brand's outlets are rated higher by customers, aggregated across locations. Exact star rating and review volume are in Brand Health.
Direction only — the underlying rating & review count are Pro data.
Straight from each brand’s FDD. Green badge marks the more favourable value for a typical first-time operator.
| Metric | Home Instead | Visiting Angels |
|---|---|---|
| Initial investment (Item 7) | $93K ↓ Lower | $125K |
| Royalty (Item 6) | 5% | 3.5% ↓ Lower |
| Gross margin | — | — |
| Min space (sq ft) | 500 | — |
| Total US outlets (Item 20) | 626 ↑ Bigger | 541 |
| Franchise fee (Item 5) | $54K | $52K ↓ Lower |
| Additional funds | — | — |
BrandFit asks 6 visual questions about your operator profile, capital, and location — then ranks all 182 brands by predicted success-fit for your situation. See where these brands really stand for someone like you.
FRANticc is independent — not the franchisor, and paid nothing by either brand. We send you straight to the brand's own franchise-development team, and we never collect or forward your contact details.
Same data plus the full FDD breakdown, fee load, contract fairness and SBA lending picture — free on every brand page.
Visitors researching this pair often look at these.
Wrapped in FAQPage JSON-LD for SERP rich-result eligibility.
Among these brands, the smallest footprint is Home Instead at 500+ sqft. Square footage is only half the site test — most US franchisors also specify traffic counts, co-tenancy, parking ratios and a trade-area population in the franchise agreement, and will reject a site that hits the minimum footprint but misses those.
FRANticc's database lists 2 brands matching this comparison with verified investment data, store counts, and format details. Several more are covered across our full directory. Every figure is traced to the brand's Franchise Disclosure Document.
The lowest-investment option here is Home Instead starting from $93K. Remember this is the LOW end of the brand's FDD Item 7 initial-investment range — Item 7's high end is the number to plan against, and it sits before the working capital you burn until the unit turns over.
Among the 2 brands FRANticc compares, the top options by network size are Home Instead, Visiting Angels (Home Instead: 626 stores, Visiting Angels: 541 stores). The lowest investment entry is Home Instead from $93K. "Best" depends on your capital, your market and how hands-on you plan to be — this page gives you the data for all three dimensions.