Corporate quick-service restaurant properties carried a 5.90% national asking cap rate in The Boulder Group’s Q3 2026 report, versus 6.87% for franchisee properties. Released October 7, the report shows quarterly increases of 5 and 2 basis points, respectively. The gap narrowed to 97 basis points from 100.
Income divided by price#
A capitalization rate expresses annual property net operating income as a percentage of its price. For an asking cap rate, that denominator is the seller’s asking price. Keeping income constant, a lower cap rate corresponds to a higher price. Boulder’s FAQ describes cap rate as an unleveraged return: the calculation does not incorporate a buyer’s mortgage payments.
This is property income after property operating expenses, separate from restaurant sales or the operator’s profit margin. A loan’s interest rate describes the cost of borrowed money; an asking cap rate describes property income relative to the proposed price.
For an operator who owns a site, a sale-leaseback creates a landlord-tenant relationship: the business sells the real estate and leases it back, continuing to operate while becoming the buyer’s tenant.
The lease determines which property expenses the landlord bears. Boulder explains that triple-net tenants pay taxes, insurance and maintenance, with precise responsibilities depending on the contract. Absolute triple-net leases also assign structural repairs and the roof to the tenant. Those obligations help define the income stream being offered.
Comparing lease terms#
The report also separates QSR asking yields by remaining lease duration:
| Years remaining | Corporate median | Franchisee median |
|---|---|---|
| 20 or more | 5.00% | 6.00% |
| 15–19 | 5.55% | 6.40% |
| 10–14 | 6.15% | 6.85% |
| Under 10 | 6.85% | 7.55% |
These are asking figures, not completed-sale yields. The categories contain different properties; the tables do not isolate the effect of a guarantee.
Who backs the rent#
Boulder’s May 2017 explanation, discussing the second quarter of 2016, distinguished corporate-guaranteed leases from franchisee-backed leases. It described franchisee guarantors ranging from single-unit operators to businesses with hundreds of restaurants, with their financial strength influencing cap rates. The same commentary attributed part of that period’s corporate/franchisee spread to the mix of tenants.
That historical explanation identifies two separate questions behind a comparison: who stands behind the rent, and which properties are in each category. It does not establish why the current quarter’s gap changed.
A concrete example of contractual backing appears in Jack in the Box’s financial statements for the quarter ended April 12, 2026. Jack reported that it remained contingently liable on certain leases connected to Qdoba, a business it sold in fiscal 2018. It also said it would remain a guarantor if those leases extended through established renewal periods.
The buyer had indemnified Jack against claims relating to those guarantees, giving Jack recourse to the buyer. Jack recorded no liability because it considered future payments remote. Selling the restaurant business had changed its owner while leaving Jack as a guarantor on some leases, with contractual protection against that exposure.
QSR Pro Staff
The QSR Pro editorial team covers the quick service restaurant industry with in-depth analysis, data-driven reporting, and operator-first perspective.
More from QSR
