Batteries Plus vs Aaron's and Aaron's Sales & Lease Ownership

Two franchise systems, side by side. For a software vendor, they are not the same opportunity.

More open target
Aaron's and Aaron's Sales & Lease Ownership
wins 2 of 12 vendor rows

Aaron’s gives us a bigger total unit footprint and flat unit growth, which means a stable installed base with no churn-driven urgency but also no expansion tailwind. The real prize is budget depth: with an investment range topping out near $838K and a combined 11% royalty-plus-ad load, these operators are already writing large checks to the franchisor and have proven tolerance for operational overhead. That’s a green light for a multi-module software pitch—POS, back-office, and marketing automation can be bundled into a meaningful per-unit ACV without breaking their cost model. The tradeoff is a thin franchised slice (only 224 units), so we’d be selling into a heavily corporate-controlled environment where procurement cycles are longer and the approved-supplier gatekeeper is more rigid.

Batteries Plus flips the script: 601 franchised units out of 734 total means the real decision-makers are owner-operators, not a corporate procurement desk. That’s a faster sales cycle and a terrain where a vendor can win on relationship and immediate pain relief. The negative unit growth (-0.5% YoY) is a warning sign, not a dealbreaker—shrinking systems create desperation to cut costs and streamline, which our automation and scheduling tools directly address. The lower investment ceiling (~$537K) and lighter ad fund (1%) suggest tighter per-store budgets, so we’d need a leaner, high-ROI package, but the sheer number of franchised doors gives us a larger addressable market of independent buyers who can say yes without layers of corporate approval.

The choice hinges on whether we optimize for deal size or deal velocity. Aaron’s promises higher ACV and a stickier, multi-location corporate rollout if we can crack procurement. Batteries Plus offers a wider, hungrier franchised base that can close faster and adopt quickly, even if per-unit revenue is lower. Right now, with a product built for multi-module value, the franchised density and decision-maker access at Batteries Plus outweigh the corporate budget advantage at Aaron’s.

Verdict: Batteries Plus is the stronger near-term software-sales opportunity due to franchised-unit density and owner-operator access, despite negative unit growth and a tighter per-store budget.

retail_non_food
Batteries Plus
retail_non_food
Aaron's and Aaron's Sales & Lease Ownership
Total units
734
1,162
Franchised units
601
224
Unit growth YoY
-0.497%
0%
Average unit revenue (AUV)
Royalty
5%
6%
Ad fund
1%
5%
Initial franchise fee
$50K
$35K
Investment range (low)
$285K
$307K
Investment range (high)
$537K
$838K
Procurement model
Approved supplier
Approved supplier
FDD fiscal year
2026
2026
Filing freshness
CURRENT
CURRENT

Go deeper

Common questions

Batteries Plus vs Aaron's and Aaron's Sales & Lease Ownership, answered

Batteries Plus has 734 total units and Aaron's and Aaron's Sales & Lease Ownership has 1,162, so Aaron's and Aaron's Sales & Lease Ownership is the larger system.
Batteries Plus grew units -0.497% year over year vs 0% for Aaron's and Aaron's Sales & Lease Ownership, so Aaron's and Aaron's Sales & Lease Ownership is growing faster.
Batteries Plus charges a 5% royalty and Aaron's and Aaron's Sales & Lease Ownership charges 6%, so Batteries Plus has the lower royalty.
Batteries Plus's initial franchise fee is $50K and Aaron's and Aaron's Sales & Lease Ownership's is $35K, so Aaron's and Aaron's Sales & Lease Ownership has the lower fee.
Batteries Plus's initial investment runs $285K–$537K and Aaron's and Aaron's Sales & Lease Ownership's runs $307K–$838K, so Aaron's and Aaron's Sales & Lease Ownership requires the larger investment.

See this comparison scored to your product.

The vendor edge changes depending on what you sell. Run your site and we’ll re-weight it.