Independent roofers keep more of every dollar, but a franchise can help a new owner reach revenue faster and fail less often. Across 2023 to 2026 Franchise Disclosure Documents (FDDs), named roofing franchises charge 7% to 15% of gross revenue in ongoing fees (royalty plus brand fund). At $2 million in annual sales, that is roughly $140,000 to $300,000 handed to the franchisor every year, or about $700,000 to $1.5 million over five years. An independent keeps that money but pays for its own brand, lead generation, and systems. This report puts the real FDD numbers side by side and shows the break-even math that decides which model actually earns more.
Key findings
- Ongoing franchisor fees run 7% to 15% of gross revenue across the full-service roofing franchises reviewed here (royalty plus national brand fund), per their 2023 to 2026 FDDs.
- At $2 million in revenue, franchise fees cost about $140,000 to $300,000 per year, or roughly $700,000 to $1.5 million over a five-year term.
- Opening a full-service roofing franchise costs about $172,000 to $466,000 in total initial investment (FDD Item 7), including franchise fees of $35,000 to $70,000.
- Average unit revenue, where disclosed in Item 19, was about $4.18 million for Bumble Roofing (2023 FDD), $3.39 million for Honest Abe Roofing (2023 FDD), and $2.14 million average for Storm Guard.
- Independent roofers net 5% to 15% and keep the royalty, but self-fund brand and lead generation, where roofing customer acquisition cost runs near $228 per lead.
- Roofing specialty contractors failed at about 39% over five years (JCHS analysis of the 2007 to 2012 cohort), lower than general remodelers near 51%.
The short answer: who makes more, a franchise or an independent roofer?
On margin, the independent wins because it keeps the 7% to 15% that a franchisee pays to the brand. On speed and survival, the franchise often wins because national systems, financing, and a recognized name can lift close rates and shorten the ramp. The model that earns more depends on one question: does the brand add more revenue or margin than its fees subtract? Below that break-even, the independent keeps more; above it, the franchise does.
The comparison is not franchise owner pay versus independent owner pay in the abstract. Reported franchise owner profit often lands near $75,000 to $150,000, while established independent owners commonly report $100,000 to $300,000, and large commercial independents can exceed $1 million (industry compensation ranges, 2026). Those bands overlap heavily, so the deciding factor is fee load against brand value, not a single headline number.
What roofing franchises actually charge (FDD fee table)
Every US franchisor must file a Franchise Disclosure Document. Item 5 and Item 6 list the initial fee and ongoing fees, Item 7 lists total investment, and Item 19 lists financial performance where the franchisor chooses to disclose it. The table below ranks named roofing franchises from the lowest to the highest ongoing fee load, using their most recent public FDD summaries.
| Franchise | Initial franchise fee | Royalty | Brand / ad fund | Total ongoing fee load | Total initial investment (Item 7) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Honest Abe Roofing | $35,000 to $70,000 | 5% | 2% | ~7% | $185,000 to $466,000 |
| Storm Guard | $65,000 | 6.25% | 0.75% | ~7% | $200,400 to $236,600 |
| Bumble Roofing | $49,500 | 6.5% (tiered down to 4.5%) | 1% to 2% national* | ~8% | $171,998 to $313,834 |
| Mighty Dog Roofing | $59,500 | 8.5% | 5% to 8% | ~15% | $184,000 to $236,000 |
| Roof Maxx (rejuvenation)** | ~$25,000 to $45,000 | ~10% | varies | ~10% | $49,700 to $119,500 |
*Bumble Roofing also requires local advertising of 5% of gross revenue or $3,500 per month, whichever is higher. That is marketing spend an independent would also incur, so it is excluded from the franchisor-fee figure above. **Roof Maxx sells a roof-rejuvenation treatment, not full replacement, with a much smaller ticket (about $1,200 to $2,200), so it is shown for context but is not directly comparable to full-service replacement franchises. All figures from company FDD summaries and franchise-review databases, 2023 to 2026; verify against the current FDD before relying on any number.
The royalty drag: what franchise fees cost over five years
The clearest way to see the trade-off is to convert the fee percentage into dollars at real revenue levels. We call this the royalty drag: the cash a franchisee pays the franchisor that an independent keeps. It scales directly with revenue, so success makes the drag larger, not smaller.
| Franchise | Ongoing fee load | At $1M revenue | At $2M revenue | At $3M revenue | 5-year drag at $2M |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Honest Abe / Storm Guard | ~7% | $70,000 | $140,000 | $210,000 | ~$700,000 |
| Bumble Roofing | ~8% | $80,000 | $160,000 | $240,000 | ~$800,000 |
| Mighty Dog Roofing | ~15% | $150,000 | $300,000 | $450,000 | ~$1,500,000 |
The Roofing Brief calculation above multiplies each brand’s stated fee load by revenue; it is arithmetic, not an FDD figure. The gap between the lightest and heaviest fee structures is wide. A Mighty Dog franchisee at $2 million pays about $160,000 per year more than a Honest Abe franchisee at the same revenue, purely on fee structure. Over a typical multi-year term, that difference alone can exceed the entire initial investment.
What franchise revenue looks like (Item 19)
Where a franchisor discloses Item 19, average unit revenue for roofing brands sits in the low millions, well above a typical first-year independent. These are averages across reporting units and include strong performers, so they overstate what a new single-territory owner is likely to see in year one.
| Franchise | Average unit revenue | Source / note |
|---|---|---|
| Bumble Roofing | ~$4.18 million | 2023 FDD Item 19 (all reporting units) |
| Honest Abe Roofing | ~$3.39 million (top unit ~$10.6M) | 2023 FDD Item 19 |
| Storm Guard | ~$2.14 million average | Franchise-review summary of FDD |
| Mighty Dog Roofing | ~$1.9 million (estimate) | External estimate; FDD reportedly does not disclose AUV |
Item 19 is not a promise. Individual results vary widely by market, storm activity, and operator skill, and past averages do not predict a specific franchisee’s outcome. Read the full Item 19 table, including the share of units that met or beat the average, before weighting any single figure.
What independents keep, and what they pay for instead
An independent roofer keeps the full 7% to 15% a franchisee would surrender, but spends it, and more, building what a franchise supplies out of the box. Independent net margins run 5% to 15%, with well-run shops hitting 12% to 15% on 30% to 40% gross margins (roofing P&L benchmarks, 2026). On $2 million in revenue, that is roughly $100,000 to $300,000 in net profit before owner salary decisions.
The catch is what the royalty would have bought. An independent funds its own brand awareness, lead generation, sales training, estimating software, and financing relationships. Roofing customer acquisition is expensive: cost per lead has run near $228 in the roofing and gutters category, among the highest of any home service. A brand that reliably lowers that number, or lifts close rates, can be worth its fee. One that does not is pure drag.
Break-even: when does a roofing franchise pay for itself?
A roofing franchise pays for itself only when its brand and systems add more gross profit than the fee load removes. If the ongoing fee load is 7%, the brand has to lift revenue or margin by more than 7% versus what the same owner would achieve independently. The break-even test runs in four steps.
- Set the fee load. Take royalty plus national brand fund from Item 6. Call it F (for example, 7% or 15%).
- Estimate the brand lift. Judge how much the name, leads, and systems raise revenue or gross margin over your independent baseline. Close-rate gains matter most, since roofing leads are costly.
- Compare lift to fee. If brand lift exceeds F, the franchise nets more. If it falls short, the independent nets more. A 15% fee load needs a large, durable lift to clear.
- Add the ramp and survival value. Credit the franchise for faster year-one revenue and lower failure odds, then discount for the multi-year commitment and reduced flexibility.
This is why a 7% brand can be a reasonable trade while a 15% brand faces a steep bar. At 15%, the franchisor must add roughly one-sixth more gross profit than the owner could produce alone, every year, just to break even.
Survival: do franchise roofers fail less often?
Roofing is already one of the more durable trades. In the Joint Center for Housing Studies analysis of the 2007 to 2012 cohort, roofing specialty contractors failed at about 39% over five years, better than general remodelers near 51%, and specialty trades overall ranged from 33% (plumbing and HVAC) to 39% (roofing). Across all US businesses, roughly 49% fail within five years (BLS, 2024).
Franchising is often credited with higher survival, and industry sources cite franchise five-year success rates of 75% or more. Those figures come from franchise advocacy and older business literature rather than a clean BLS franchise-versus-independent construction study, so treat them as directional. The defensible read: a good franchise can reduce the operational mistakes that sink new roofers, but it does not remove market, weather, or cash-flow risk, and a weak franchise can add fee pressure that raises failure odds.
Which model fits which owner?
- Lean toward a franchise if you are new to roofing, want a proven sales and estimating system, value financing and supplier relationships, and would rather trade margin for a faster, lower-variance start.
- Lean toward independent if you already have roofing or trade experience, a local reputation or referral base, the appetite to build your own brand and lead engine, and the discipline to run tight margins without a franchisor’s guardrails.
- Run the numbers either way. Pull the actual FDD Item 6, 7, and 19, model the royalty drag at your target revenue, and compare it against what you would realistically spend building the same capabilities alone.
Methodology and sources
Fee, investment, and Item 19 figures are drawn from company Franchise Disclosure Document summaries and franchise-review databases published between 2023 and 2026 (Franchise Chatter, Franchise Payback, Sharpsheets, and franchisor materials). Ongoing fee load combines royalty and national brand or ad fund only; local advertising minimums are excluded because independents incur similar marketing costs. The royalty-drag figures are The Roofing Brief’s own arithmetic, multiplying each stated fee load by revenue, and are not FDD disclosures. Margin and owner-pay bands come from 2026 roofing profit benchmarks (Roofr, Profitability Partners, industry advisors). Survival figures come from the Joint Center for Housing Studies (2007 to 2012 remodeling cohort) and BLS business survival data (2024). FDD figures change annually and vary by territory; anyone evaluating a specific franchise should verify every number against the current FDD and consult a franchise attorney before signing.
For the wider market context behind these numbers, see The Roofing Brief’s US roofing industry concentration report and our ranking of the best states to start a roofing company. To weigh roofing against alternatives, compare our roofing versus other skilled trades analysis, and to size the lead-generation costs an independent must fund, see the roofing cost per lead benchmark.
Reviewed by The Roofing Brief Team. Last reviewed July 2026.