Executive Home Care vs ACASA Senior Care

The math here is brutal in favor of Executive Home Care, and it starts with TAM. With 79 franchised units versus ACASA’s 7, you’re looking at an 11x larger installed base to sell into—and because both brands run an approved-supplier procurement model, every one of those locations is a captive buyer that must purchase from a vetted vendor list. That means your total addressable opportunity isn’t just bigger; it’s structurally gated in a way that rewards a focused, relationship-driven sales motion. ACASA’s 40% unit growth looks nice on paper, but 40% of 7 units is still just a handful of new logos next year, whereas Executive Home Care’s 79-unit base gives you immediate, scalable pipeline without waiting for a growth curve to mature.

The budget dimension is a tradeoff, but it’s not the one that should scare you off. ACASA’s higher AUV ($6.9M vs. Executive Home Care’s unlisted AUV) suggests deeper per-location pockets, but that only matters if the unit count is high enough to matter—and here it isn’t. Executive Home Care’s slightly higher royalty (6%) and ad fund (2%) signal a brand that’s already extracting more system-wide value, which usually correlates with franchisee willingness to invest in operations technology. The real terrain advantage is the FDD timing: Executive Home Care’s 2026 filing is current, meaning their supplier list and compliance requirements are fresh and actionable right now, while ACASA’s filing is flagged as due, introducing a near-term risk of FDD changes that could disrupt your procurement positioning before you even get a foot in the door.

Verdict: Executive Home Care is the stronger opportunity by a wide margin—TAM and filing freshness outweigh ACASA’s AUV and growth rate decisively.