Dunkin’ FDD Item 19 is the section of the Franchise Disclosure Document that contains financial performance representations, commonly referred to as “earnings claims.” For prospective Dunkin’ franchisees, Item 19 is often the first section they turn to because it provides data on what existing Dunkin’ locations actually generate in gross sales. At Lopes Law LLC, we emphasize that Item 19 data is essential but incomplete: it tells you what locations earn in revenue, but it does not tell you what operators keep in profit. Understanding how to interpret this data correctly is the difference between a sound investment decision and a costly miscalculation.

This guide explains what Dunkin’ discloses in Item 19, how to interpret the data across different store formats, how the 5.9% royalty and 5% advertising contribution affect the profitability picture, and why Item 19 must be analyzed alongside Items 6, 7, and 8 to get a complete understanding of the franchise economics.

What Does Dunkin’ Disclose in FDD Item 19?

Item 19 of any Franchise Disclosure Document is titled “Financial Performance Representations.” Under the FTC Franchise Rule (16 C.F.R. Part 436), franchisors are not required to include Item 19 data. It is voluntary. However, if a franchisor does make financial performance representations, the data must be included in Item 19, must have a reasonable basis, and must include relevant assumptions and qualifications.

Dunkin’ does include Item 19 data in its FDD, which makes it one of the more transparent major franchise systems in this regard. The data typically includes gross sales figures for franchise locations, segmented by store format and other variables. Key categories in Dunkin’ Item 19 data commonly include:

• Traditional freestanding locations: Full-size Dunkin’ stores, often with drive-throughs, operating in standalone buildings or as end-cap tenants in strip centers.
• Non-traditional locations: Smaller-format units in gas stations, convenience stores, airports, universities, hospitals, and other captive-audience venues.
• Combo units: Locations that combine Dunkin’ with another brand (historically Baskin-Robbins, though this combination has become less common under Inspire Brands ownership).
• Drive-through vs. non-drive-through: Performance may be segmented by whether the location includes a drive-through window.
• Geographic segmentation: Data may be broken out by region, reflecting the significant performance differences between Dunkin’s core Northeast markets and its expansion markets elsewhere in the country.

The data disclosed in Item 19 is gross sales data. Dunkin’ does not disclose net profit, operating expenses, cost of goods sold, labor costs, rent, or owner income. This is standard practice across the franchise industry. The franchisee must build those cost layers into their own financial model using estimates, market research, and validation with existing franchisees.

What Are Average Dunkin’ Franchise Sales by Format?

Based on publicly available FDD data and industry reporting, traditional Dunkin’ locations generate average gross sales in the approximate range of $1 million to $1.2 million per year. This average varies significantly by format, geography, and specific location characteristics. Here is a general overview of how different formats compare:

Store Format	Typical Gross Sales Range	Key Drivers
Traditional with Drive-Through	$1,000,000 – $1,400,000+	Morning commuter traffic, convenience, speed of service
Traditional without Drive-Through	$800,000 – $1,100,000	Walk-in traffic, urban locations, foot traffic density
Non-Traditional (Gas Station/C-Store)	$400,000 – $700,000	Captive audience, lower investment, limited menu
Non-Traditional (Airport/University)	$500,000 – $900,000	High foot traffic, seasonal variation (university), limited hours

These ranges are approximations based on publicly available data and industry analysis. The actual figures in the current Dunkin’ FDD may differ. The critical point is that format matters enormously. A drive-through location in a high-traffic suburban area can generate 50% to 100% more revenue than a non-traditional unit in a gas station. The investment required to build each format also differs substantially, so the return on investment calculation must account for both revenue and capital requirements.

Northeast Markets vs. Expansion Markets

Dunkin’ performance varies significantly by geography. In the brand’s core Northeast markets (New England, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Maryland), Dunkin’ has deep brand loyalty and high consumer awareness. Locations in these markets often outperform the national average because the brand is the default morning beverage choice for a large share of the population.

In expansion markets (Southeast, Midwest, West), Dunkin’ is building brand awareness against established competitors like Starbucks and regional coffee chains. Locations in these markets may take longer to reach maturity and may generate lower average sales during the first several years of operation. The Item 19 data should be evaluated in the context of the specific market where you plan to operate, not as a national average that may not reflect your local conditions.

How Do Franchise Fees Affect Profitability After Item 19 Revenue?

Understanding gross sales is only the first step. The more important question is: how much of that revenue does the franchisee actually keep? This requires layering the Item 6 fee structure on top of the Item 19 revenue data.

For a traditional Dunkin’ location generating $1.1 million in annual gross sales, the fee burden looks like this:

Category	Percentage or Amount	Annual Impact
Gross Sales		$1,100,000
Royalty (5.9%)	5.9%	($64,900)
National Advertising (5%)	5%	($55,000)
Local Advertising (~1.5%)	~1.5%	($16,500)
Technology / DD Digital	Estimated	($18,000)
Revenue After Franchise Fees		$945,600
Cost of Goods (~27%)	~27%	($297,000)
Labor (~30%)	~30%	($330,000)
Rent (estimated)	Varies	($80,000 – $120,000)
Utilities, Insurance, Misc.	Estimated	($60,000 – $80,000)
Estimated Owner Cash Flow		$58,600 – $178,600

The wide range in estimated owner cash flow ($58,600 to $178,600) reflects the reality that profitability depends heavily on variables the Item 19 data does not address: your specific rent, local labor costs, how tightly you manage food waste, and your ability to drive sales beyond the average. A location performing 10% above average with tight cost controls could generate strong returns. A location performing 10% below average with above-market labor costs could barely break even.

This is why Item 19 must never be read in isolation. It must be modeled against your specific cost structure. For a detailed breakdown of the fee obligations, see our analysis of Dunkin’ FDD Item 6 fees.

How Should You Interpret Dunkin’ Item 19 Data?

When reviewing Dunkin’ Item 19, apply these analytical principles:

1. Compare Median to Average

If Dunkin’ discloses both average and median sales, focus on the median. The average can be inflated by a small number of exceptionally high-performing locations. The median tells you what the “typical” location generates. If the average is $1.1 million but the median is $950,000, the typical operator’s experience is closer to $950,000.

2. Segment by Format

Do not compare your projected performance to the overall system average if you are opening a non-traditional location. A gas station Dunkin’ generates fundamentally different revenue than a freestanding drive-through location. Use the data segment that matches your specific format and location type.

3. Check the Footnotes and Qualifications

Item 19 data comes with footnotes that describe the basis for the representations, the time period covered, the number of locations included, and any exclusions. If Dunkin’ excluded newly opened locations, locations that were closed during the reporting period, or other categories, those exclusions affect how representative the data is. Always read the footnotes.

4. Apply the Fee Structure

Take the revenue figure from Item 19 and subtract every fee disclosed in Item 6. This gives you revenue after franchise fees. Then model your operating expenses to estimate cash flow. Without this step, the Item 19 figure is just a top-line number with no connection to your actual financial outcome.

5. Validate with Current Operators

The FDD includes a list of current franchisees in Item 20. Contact operators in your target market and ask about their actual sales volume, cost structure, and profitability. This “franchise validation” process is the most important step in evaluating any franchise opportunity, and it provides real-world context that Item 19 data alone cannot. For more on this process, see our guide on what to expect from an FDD review.

A Client Scenario: When Item 19 Data Did Not Match the Reality

A prospective Dunkin’ franchisee approached our firm with a plan to develop three new Dunkin’ locations in a Southern expansion market. The buyer had reviewed the Item 19 data and projected revenue of approximately $1.1 million per location based on the system-wide average for traditional units with drive-throughs.

When we conducted a more detailed analysis, several issues became apparent. First, the $1.1 million average was heavily influenced by mature Northeast locations where Dunkin’ has dominant market share. Dunkin’ locations in expansion markets similar to the buyer’s target area were generating closer to $800,000 to $900,000 in their first two to three years of operation. Second, the buyer’s market had significant Starbucks presence and a local competitor that owned the morning coffee occasion in several neighborhoods.

We adjusted the financial model to use $850,000 as a more realistic first-year revenue projection for each location. At that revenue level, the combined franchise fees (5.9% royalty + 5% national advertising + 1.5% local advertising + technology fees) totaled approximately $118,000 per location rather than the $154,000 the buyer had budgeted based on $1.1 million in revenue. However, the fixed costs (rent, insurance, base staffing) remained the same regardless of volume. The lower revenue compressed the margin significantly: projected owner cash flow per location dropped from approximately $120,000 to approximately $45,000.

At Lopes Law LLC, we helped the buyer restructure the development plan. Instead of opening three locations simultaneously, the buyer opened one location first, invested heavily in local marketing during the first 12 months, and used the actual performance data from that location to calibrate the financial model before committing to the second and third units. This phased approach reduced the buyer’s risk and allowed data-driven decisions rather than reliance on system-wide averages that did not reflect the local market.

How Does Dunkin’ Item 19 Compare to Other QSR Brands?

Comparing Item 19 data across brands provides useful context. Here is how Dunkin’ stacks up against major QSR competitors:

• McDonald’s: Average unit volumes of approximately $3 million to $3.5 million, but with significantly higher total investment and fee burden (including rent to McDonald’s). The higher revenue does not necessarily translate to proportionally higher owner income.
• Subway: Average unit volumes have been lower, in the range of $400,000 to $500,000 for many locations. Subway’s higher royalty rate (8%) on lower revenue creates challenging unit economics for many operators.
• Chick-fil-A: Average unit volumes exceeding $6 million, but the franchise model is fundamentally different (Chick-fil-A provides the location and equipment; operators invest $10,000 and receive a smaller share of revenue).

Dunkin’s position in this landscape is that it offers moderate revenue with moderate investment. The coffee-focused concept has the advantage of lower food costs (coffee and beverages carry higher margins than burger or sandwich concepts), which can offset the relatively high royalty and advertising rates. However, the total fee burden of 10.9% or more of gross sales before local advertising means that profitability depends on maintaining strong volume and tight cost controls. For a broader understanding of how financial performance data works across franchise systems, see our guide on understanding Item 19 financial performance representations.

What Are the Coffee-Focused Margin Advantages for Dunkin’?

One of the key factors that makes Dunkin’ economics work despite the high fee burden is the margin profile of a coffee-focused concept. Coffee and beverage products typically carry food costs of 15% to 22%, significantly lower than the 30% to 35% food costs common in burger, pizza, or sandwich franchises.

For a Dunkin’ location where beverages represent 60% to 70% of sales (which is common), the blended food cost may run 25% to 28% of revenue. This is lower than most QSR concepts and provides additional margin to absorb the 10.9%+ franchise fee burden.

However, this margin advantage only holds if the location maintains a strong beverage mix. Locations that rely more heavily on food items (sandwiches, baked goods, snacks) will have higher food costs and tighter margins. The product mix at your specific location, which is influenced by the local market, time of day traffic patterns, and consumer preferences, directly affects your profitability. A franchise attorney reviewing the FDD alongside your business plan can help you model different product mix scenarios against the fee structure. For additional context on sourcing costs, see our analysis of Dunkin’ FDD Item 8 sourcing restrictions.

What Should Prospective Dunkin’ Franchisees Focus on in Item 19?

When reviewing Dunkin’ FDD Item 19, prioritize these areas:

• Format-specific data: Use only the data that corresponds to the store format you are considering. Do not apply traditional location averages to a non-traditional location or vice versa.
• Geographic relevance: If possible, focus on data from your specific region or market type. Northeast performance data is not predictive for a new expansion market.
• Distribution of results: Look for data on what percentage of locations achieved the stated average. If fewer than half of locations reach the average, adjust your expectations accordingly.
• Drive-through impact: If your location will have a drive-through, use drive-through-specific data. If not, adjust expectations downward.
• Year-over-year trends: If data from multiple years is available (or from previous FDD filings), look at whether average sales are trending up, flat, or down. A declining trend in your target market is a significant risk factor.
• Integration with Item 6: Always model the Item 6 fee structure against Item 19 revenue. The revenue figure is meaningless without understanding the fee obligations it must support.

Why Professional Analysis of Item 19 Is Worth the Investment

Item 19 data appears straightforward on the surface: it tells you what locations earn. But interpreting that data correctly requires understanding statistical methodology (averages vs. medians vs. distributions), the fee structure that applies to every revenue dollar, local market conditions that may differ from the system average, and how to build a complete financial model that accounts for all costs.

At Lopes Law LLC, our flat-fee FDD validation review is $3,000 and includes detailed analysis of Item 19 alongside all other FDD items. We help clients build financial models that combine Item 19 revenue data with Item 6 fee obligations, local market research, and realistic cost assumptions. The result is a clear picture of what the franchise is likely to generate in your specific situation, not just what the system average suggests. For a full overview of the review process, see our guide on what to expect from an FDD review.

Frequently Asked Questions About Dunkin’ FDD Item 19

Reach out, we are friendly. Call now for a free consultation at (267) 777-9117 or schedule your free 20-minute consultation online.

Last updated: March 10, 2026