Moe's Southwest Grill Item 19: $1.17M median ($908K P25, $1.46M P75) across 485 franchised Traditional restaurants for fiscal 2024. Why the tight cohort spread and how Moe's compares to Qdoba and Chipotle.
Quick answer: Moe’s Southwest Grill’s Item 19 reports a $1.17M median across 485 franchised Traditional restaurants for fiscal 2024, with a notably tight cohort spread (P25 $908K, P75 $1.46M, ratio 1.61×). The tight spread signals operational consistency — Moe’s restaurants produce similar results across diverse trade areas, unlike brands with high site-dependency. The AUV-to-investment ratio is modest at the midpoint (~0.9×) but improves materially at the low end of the investment range. The brand sits in the lower-middle tier of fast-casual on absolute revenue.
Moe’s Southwest Grill’s most recent Item 19:
| Metric | Value |
|---|---|
| Sample size | 485 franchised Traditional restaurants |
| Sample criteria | Traditional Franchises |
| Reporting period | Fiscal year 2024 |
| Median annual revenue | $1,166,787 |
| P25 annual revenue | $907,995 |
| P75 annual revenue | $1,459,940 |
| P75/P25 ratio | 1.61 |
| Total system units | 591 |
| Total investment (Item 7) | $644,425 - $1,968,450 |
| Franchise fee | $35,500 |
| Royalty rate | 5% of gross sales |
| Ad fund | 3.0% to 4.0% |
The 485-restaurant Traditional-format sample is methodologically clean. The P75/P25 ratio of 1.61× is notably tighter than the McAlister’s Deli (9.3×) and Buffalo Wild Wings (2.06×) comparisons — and Moe’s is owned by the same parent company (Focus Brands / Atlanta-based) as McAlister’s. Same parent, dramatically different system-level distribution.
A 1.61× P75/P25 ratio across 485 restaurants is meaningfully tighter than the casual-dining and fast-casual peer set. It signals that the Moe’s operating model produces consistent results across trade areas rather than amplifying trade-area variance.
Three structural factors likely drive the consistency:
Menu universality. Moe’s menu — burritos, bowls, tacos, quesadillas with build-your-own customization — translates broadly across US trade areas. Mexican fast-casual has become a category default across geographies, ages, and income levels. The menu doesn’t require regional or cultural fit in the way McAlister’s Southern-leaning menu does.
Lunch-and-dinner balance. Moe’s captures both daypart layers (lunch office traffic, dinner family traffic) in most trade areas. The dual-daypart structure smooths revenue across the customer-occasion mix, reducing dependency on any single trade-area characteristic.
Customizable platform. The build-your-own model accommodates dietary preferences (vegetarian, vegan, gluten-free, keto-style) without menu engineering. Customer preference fit is broad rather than narrow.
Operating model is standardized. Fast-casual assembly-line operations (cook protein once, serve customized portions) produces tight per-transaction throughput and predictable labor productivity. Operating variance between restaurants is smaller than full-service formats.
For a buyer, the implication is that Moe’s outcomes are more predictable than peer brands. A weak trade area won’t produce P25 outcomes the way they would at McAlister’s or Buffalo Wild Wings; a strong trade area won’t produce P75 outcomes 5× the median. The deal works in a predictable band.
A $1.17M median against $1.31M of investment (Item 7 midpoint) produces a ratio of roughly 0.89×. That’s modest by any franchise standard and reflects the fast-casual category’s structural build-out:
There’s no obvious cost-reduction lever in the Moe’s format — the build is what produces the operating model. Conversion sites at the low end of the investment range ($700K-$900K) produce better ratios, but new-build sites at $1.5M+ produce more challenging unit economics.
| Brand | Sample | Median AUV | Investment | AUV/Investment | P75/P25 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Moe’s Southwest Grill | 485 | $1.17M | $644K-$1.97M | 0.9× | 1.61 |
| Qdoba | 464 | $1.60M | $885K-$1.6M | 1.3× | 2.4 |
| Chipotle (corporate) | n/a | $3M+ (corporate) | n/a | n/a | n/a |
| Pancheros | smaller | $900K-$1.2M (est.) | $400K-$800K | 1.5× | n/a |
| Salsarita’s | smaller | $700K-$900K (est.) | $400K-$700K | 1.5× | n/a |
| Cafe Rio | smaller | $1.2M-$1.5M (est.) | $700K-$1.2M | 1.4× | n/a |
Moe’s sits below Qdoba on absolute revenue and ratio. Qdoba is the closest direct comparable on format and positioning; the Qdoba advantage reflects somewhat stronger trade-area performance and a tighter operational playbook in recent years.
For deeper context, see our Qdoba Item 19 deep dive.
A new Moe’s Southwest Grill restaurant in months 1-12 typically generates:
That’s 84-94% of system median. Moe’s ramps faster than membership-model concepts because:
Year two typically reaches system median. The brand’s tight cohort means strong year-one execution + strong site selection produces predictable outcomes — the P75 path is operationally accessible to disciplined operators.
For broader category context, see our Panera vs McAlister’s fast-casual comparison and Item 19 average vs. median. For brand-specific cost detail, the live Moe’s franchise page.
Moe's Southwest Grill's most recent Item 19 reports a $1,166,787 median across 485 franchised Traditional restaurants for fiscal year 2024. P25 is $907,995 and P75 is $1,459,940 — a tight cohort spread.
Operating consistency. Moe's menu, format, and customer occasion (lunch-and-dinner fast-casual Mexican) produce more uniform unit-level results than brands with high site-dependency (McAlister's at 9.3× P75/P25) or trade-area-dependent demand (BWW at 2.1× P75/P25). The Mexican fast-casual format works similarly across most US trade areas — strong sites don't dominate the way they do in brands with structural demand variance.
Moe's sits below Qdoba ($1.60M median) and well below Chipotle's franchise-equivalent ($3M+ corporate AUV, not franchised). The category has consolidated around three main franchised players (Moe's, Qdoba, Pancheros at smaller scale) plus Chipotle's company-only operation. Moe's positions toward family-friendly fast-casual; Qdoba toward upscale fast-casual; Chipotle toward higher-ticket urban fast-casual.
At the midpoint, it's modest. $1.17M of median revenue against $1.31M of investment (Item 7 midpoint) produces a ratio of roughly 0.89×. That's below the 1.5× franchise threshold and reflects the heavy fast-casual build-out (kitchen depth, dining room, salsa bar, beverage infrastructure). The ratio improves at the low end of the investment range — $700K-$800K conversion sites against $1.17M of revenue produce 1.5-1.7× ratios.
Item 7 reports a total initial investment range of $644,425 to $1,968,450 for the Traditional format. The franchise fee is $35,500. Royalty is 5% of gross sales; ad fund contribution runs 3.0% to 4.0%. The investment range reflects significant build-out variation — in-line strip-center conversions at the low end, end-cap with drive-thru at the upper end.
This page is part of VetMyFranchise. View all pages: llms.txt · llms-full.txt