How to Start a Boutique: The Decisions, in the Order They Bind
Starting a boutique is a sequence of decisions and the order matters: the address is the one you cannot undo, so get it right first.
Starting a boutique is a sequence of decisions and the order matters: the address is the one you cannot undo, so get it right first.
What we hold is the projected chance a boutique lasts two or more years at a specific address, which across the 24 metros we rank runs from 62.7% to 77.4% Typical.
A StreetSpring score is the projected chance that a specific business type lasts two or more years at a specific address, as a percentage. It is not a rating, not a raw model output and not a revenue estimate. It is built from 570,000+ observed business outcomes and the location factors around each scored address.
On this page, Best is the average chance of lasting two or more years for the better of two addresses picked at random in the place, in a smaller space. Typical is the average address, and Worst is the same for the worse of two addresses, in a larger space.
The short answer on location. Across the 24 US metros we rank for a boutique, the projected chance one lasts two or more years on Best runs from 70.2% in New York City to 85.2% in Houston. At a typical address New York City reads 62.7% and Houston reads 77.4%. Inside Houston alone the gap between the best and the weakest scored address is 41.0 points, which is wider than the 15.0 point gap between the best and the worst metro. The city is the coarse decision. The block is the real one.
Where in the sequence a boutique is actually decided
A boutique is opened in an order, and the order matters more than the length of the list. The first three decisions, the concept, the metro and the block, bind the rest. Everything after them, the approvals included, is downstream of an address already signed and mostly reversible. That makes the block the final irreversible choice, almost always made without data, and the only one this page can put published evidence behind.
The approach is common to every business type we score, so it is kept in one place: the order the decisions bind when you open a local business. From here on, the page is specific to this type.
What the metro is worth for a boutique. From the strongest of the 24 ranked metros to the weakest, a boutique moves 15.0 points on Best. That gap is the 18th widest of the 146 types we score. For a boutique the metro genuinely matters. Few of the types we score are moved this much by which metro they open in, so a founder who can choose the city should treat that choice as a real one rather than a formality. One metro on its own holds 41.0 points between its best and weakest address, which is why the block outweighs the city wherever this type sits on the table.
What the location section of a boutique business plan has to prove
Six of the seven sections of a boutique business plan can only come from you: the concept, the operating model, your own quoted numbers, your city's regulatory path, the downside and the ask. The seventh, the location case, is the one that is usually thinnest, because most founders write it as a paragraph about a neighborhood they already like. It is also the section a landlord reads first, the one a lender reads twice, and the only one that can be argued from published evidence rather than conviction. This page is that evidence.
Because the method is identical whatever you are opening, it is written once, here: how to write a local business plan. Everything after this point is true of this business type and no other.
Why there is no cost figure on this page
We hold no cost data, so this page prints no startup cost for a boutique and no page that has never seen your lease should print one for you. What we do hold is what the money buys. In Houston the gap between the best and the weakest scored address for a boutique is 41.0 points of projected two-year survival, and that gap is wider than the gap between the best and the worst metro in the country. The same capital spent on a worse address is the same capital spent against worse odds.
So the useful version of the question is not what a boutique costs. It is: for the rent you can actually afford, what are the best odds you can buy, and where? That has an answer and it is below.
Because the method is identical whatever you are opening, it is written once, here: what we will not guess for you. Everything after this point is true of this business type and no other.
What survival tells you about profit, and what it does not
You will find no revenue, margin or profit figure for a boutique on this page, because we hold none of them. What you will find is the thing all three sit on top of: the projected chance a boutique is still open after two or more years at a given address, which shifts 41.0 points between the best and the weakest address in a single metro. Nothing is earned by a boutique that has closed, so a site well down the table below is not a thinner margin forecast. It is a forecast made against a lottery ticket.
The approach is common to every business type we score, so it is kept in one place: what a survival score does not tell you. From here on, the page is specific to this type.
Where a boutique is projected to last longest, and where it is not
Ranked on Best. Typical is the mean across the scored addresses in each metro.
The 24 metros we rank for a boutique
| Rank | Metro | Best | Typical | Worst | Scored addresses |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Houston | 85.2% | 77.4% | 72.3% | 23,867 |
| 2 | Charlotte | 78.8% | 72.5% | 66.2% | 3,800 |
| 3 | Phoenix | 78.7% | 72.4% | 66.1% | 17,711 |
| 4 | Dallas | 78.2% | 71.7% | 65.2% | 9,250 |
| 5 | Denver | 78.1% | 71.2% | 64.4% | 8,383 |
| 6 | Atlanta | 78.0% | 71.6% | 65.2% | 4,454 |
| 7 | Orlando | 77.9% | 71.2% | 64.6% | 2,431 |
| 8 | San Antonio | 77.9% | 71.4% | 64.8% | 815 |
| 9 | Seattle | 76.9% | 70.2% | 63.4% | 13,560 |
| 10 | Minneapolis | 76.6% | 70.3% | 64.0% | 8,016 |
| 11 | Los Angeles | 76.0% | 68.9% | 61.7% | 21,545 |
| 12 | St. Louis | 75.7% | 69.2% | 62.7% | 9,629 |
| 13 | Washington DC | 75.6% | 68.1% | 60.7% | 14,752 |
| 14 | Philadelphia | 75.4% | 68.5% | 61.7% | 15,903 |
| 15 | San Diego | 75.3% | 68.6% | 61.8% | 15,667 |
| 16 | Chicago | 74.9% | 67.3% | 59.7% | 4,006 |
| 17 | Baltimore | 74.8% | 67.8% | 60.8% | 8,857 |
| 18 | Miami | 74.3% | 66.8% | 59.2% | 10,289 |
| 19 | San Francisco | 73.3% | 65.6% | 57.9% | 8,786 |
| 20 | Detroit | 72.7% | 66.3% | 59.9% | 12,497 |
| 21 | Boston | 72.7% | 65.6% | 58.5% | 34,139 |
| 22 | Tampa Bay | 71.4% | 64.6% | 57.8% | 4,570 |
| 23 | Portland | 70.7% | 63.7% | 56.7% | 6,122 |
| 24 | New York City | 70.2% | 62.7% | 55.2% | 54,652 |
Best and Worst are the average results for the better and the worse of two addresses picked at random in the metro: a weighted average of every scored location in which the best locations count the most for Best and the weakest count the most for Worst. Typical is the average address. Best is shown for a smaller space (half the standard size) and Worst for a larger one (half again as large), at the metro's median asking rent, using the same rent rule as our tool; Typical is at the market rent.
Say so where the ranking ties. Every published figure for a business type is printed to one decimal (two where a table needs it), which means several places can show the same number as each other. Houston is the only metro at the top Best figure, 6.4 points ahead of Charlotte. Further down, 2 metros share 77.9% (rank 7=) and 2 metros share 72.7% (rank 20=). Two metros showing the same Best figure have not been separated by anything measured, and the order you see is the file's tie-break rather than a result. To tell tied places apart, read the typical-address column instead. The range the figures sit in is the file's, not a scale we chose for this page: in Houston, at the local market rent, the best scored address for a boutique reads 90.0% and the weakest 49.0%, and a metro's Best figure is an average over its scored addresses, not the best of them.
Inside Houston, which is the decision that matters
The metro layer above is the coarse one. Houston carries 57 ranked neighborhoods for a boutique, and these are the file's top five, in the file's own order:
| Rank | Neighborhood | Best | Typical | Worst | Scored addresses |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Midtown | 90.3% | 86.2% | 81.9% | 37 |
| 2 | Neartown/Montrose | 90.2% | 86.0% | 81.5% | 91 |
| 3 | Gulfgate Riverview/Pine Valley | 90.0% | 85.2% | 80.3% | 77 |
| 4 | Lawndale/Wayside | 89.4% | 84.4% | 79.4% | 80 |
| 5 | Fourth Ward | 89.2% | 85.5% | 81.8% | 15 |
Best and Worst are the average results for the better and the worse of two addresses picked at random in the place: a weighted average of every scored location in which the best locations count the most for Best and the weakest count the most for Worst. Typical is the average address. Best is shown for a smaller space (half the standard size) and Worst for a larger one (half again as large), at the metro's median asking rent, using the same rent rule as our tool; Typical is at the market rent.
Midtown is the only ranked neighborhood at the top Best figure. Further down, 3 ranked neighborhoods share 89.2% (rank 5=).
Midtown. Vacancy runs high at 14.9% of homes, which is what a thin retail street looks like in the data, households run small here, 1.6 people, poverty is low here by this metro's standard, at 12.5%. Neartown/Montrose. Much of it is new build, 51.5% of the housing going up after 2000, top-bracket households run to 67.7% here, poverty is low here by this metro's standard, at 9.0%. Gulfgate Riverview/Pine Valley. It is a Working-income area, income reaches only the 22.0 percentile here, 19.7% of adults hold a bachelor's degree or more, below this metro. Lawndale/Wayside. The median journey to work is 28.6 minutes, household size comes to 2.7 people, degree holders are thinner on the ground here, 12.5% of adults. Fourth Ward. Households are small, averaging 1.8 people, which reads as singles and couples rather than families, median age comes to 31.9 years, commutes come to a median 26.8 minutes.
Both columns separate these five, which means the Best figure is measuring a difference here rather than repeating one value. Two things keep a place off this list. It may have fewer than ten scored addresses, which is the threshold for a rank. Or it may be withheld from every ranking because it is not a place a business can open, such as a park, a federal campus or a shopping center in another state. Withheld places keep their scores and are excluded from the counts, so nothing here is short.
What the figures above do and do not tell you. They are an answer to two things for a boutique: which of the 24 ranked metros carry the best and the worst projected two-year survival, and how wide the gap is between the best and the weakest address inside any one of them. They are not an answer to whether a boutique in Houston will outperform one in New York City. Metro is the coarse layer, and the inside-one-metro spread of 41.0 points is wider than the 15.0 points between the best and worst metros on Best. The decision this is sharp enough for is the block. Your concept, your operator, your menu and your lease terms are measured nowhere here, and no model measures them.
The best blocks for a boutique, metro by metro
Everything above concerns Houston. Below, the same question for every other metro we rank for a boutique, since the metro a founder can actually choose from is rarely the top of a national table. Places appear in the file's rank order. The rank threshold is ten scored addresses, so where a metro shows few places that is the whole of what it ranks.
| Metro | Best places for a boutique | Best | Typical | Worst |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Charlotte | North Charlotte, North Sharon Amity, Uptown, Henderson Circle, Eastway-Sheffield Park | 88.6%, 87.5%, 87.4%, 86.1%, 85.7% | 83.4%, 80.9%, 82.4%, 78.3%, 77.9% | 78.6%, 76.5%, 78.2%, 73.7%, 73.1% |
| Phoenix | Pepperwood, Kiwanis Park, Dobson Ranch, Escalante, Carino Estates | 87.7%, 86.9%, 86.8%, 86.3%, 85.0% | 81.8%, 82.7%, 80.4%, 79.3%, 78.7% | 77.4%, 78.8%, 76.4%, 75.5%, 75.1% |
| Dallas | North Side, Central Arlington, East Arlington, Farmers Market District, Oak Lawn | 88.0%, 86.9%, 85.8%, 85.6%, 85.3% | 80.8%, 79.5%, 77.9%, 77.7%, 77.7% | 76.1%, 75.4%, 73.1%, 72.9%, 72.9% |
| Denver | Platt Park, Heritage Eagle Bend, Highland, Jefferson Park, Fitzsimons | 90.7%, 89.8%, 89.6%, 89.6%, 89.4% | 89.1%, 86.3%, 85.5%, 86.0%, 86.0% | 86.8%, 82.8%, 81.3%, 82.4%, 82.6% |
| Atlanta | Kirkwood, Lindridge/Martin Manor, Grant Park, Blandtown, Brookhaven (Atlanta) | 88.9%, 87.7%, 87.7%, 87.0%, 86.7% | 82.2%, 80.9%, 80.2%, 81.9%, 82.6% | 77.1%, 76.4%, 75.7%, 77.9%, 78.8% |
| Orlando | Colonial Town Center, South Orange, Kirkman South, Florida Center, Airport North | 90.2%, 88.8%, 86.4%, 82.8%, 82.0% | 86.2%, 84.3%, 78.7%, 76.8%, 75.5% | 82.0%, 79.9%, 74.4%, 72.5%, 70.3% |
| San Antonio | Laddie Place and North Wilson, Dignowity Hill, Shearer Hills/Ridgeview, Tobin Hill, Monte Vista | 85.5%, 83.5%, 83.5%, 82.0%, 80.3% | 78.3%, 77.3%, 75.9%, 76.3%, 75.3% | 74.0%, 73.0%, 70.3%, 71.9%, 70.7% |
| Seattle | Minor, Twin Creeks, Fremont, Bayside, East Queen Anne | 88.7%, 87.9%, 87.9%, 87.4%, 87.3% | 82.5%, 82.8%, 80.2%, 82.7%, 78.1% | 77.6%, 78.4%, 75.6%, 78.5%, 72.6% |
| Minneapolis | Whittier, Lyndale, Lowry Hill, Longfellow, Central | 87.7%, 87.4%, 86.1%, 85.7%, 85.2% | 82.0%, 82.2%, 80.1%, 78.1%, 78.7% | 77.6%, 78.0%, 76.4%, 73.6%, 74.9% |
| Los Angeles | Lacy, Tropico, Larchmont, Fairfax, Hollywood | 90.8%, 90.5%, 90.2%, 89.7%, 89.7% | 88.1%, 86.7%, 85.7%, 83.9%, 83.3% | 84.7%, 82.4%, 80.9%, 78.6%, 78.0% |
| St. Louis | Mount Pleasant, Patch, Benton Park West, Carondelet, Bevo Mill | 89.5%, 88.9%, 88.6%, 88.0%, 87.7% | 86.9%, 85.4%, 84.9%, 83.7%, 82.2% | 84.3%, 82.0%, 81.3%, 79.4%, 77.9% |
| Washington DC | U Street Corridor, LeDroit Park, Eckington, Shaw, Arlandria/Chirilagua | 90.7%, 90.3%, 90.1%, 89.9%, 89.8% | 87.2%, 86.7%, 85.6%, 85.7%, 82.8% | 83.1%, 82.8%, 81.1%, 81.5%, 77.4% |
| Philadelphia | Mount Airy East, Summerdale, East Kensington, West Kensington, Holmesburg | 85.9%, 85.8%, 85.6%, 83.8%, 83.1% | 78.7%, 79.7%, 78.5%, 76.2%, 76.2% | 74.7%, 76.2%, 74.3%, 70.8%, 71.1% |
| San Diego | Old Town, Rolando, Harborside, Mount Hope, Central Chula Vista | 87.8%, 86.8%, 85.9%, 84.9%, 84.9% | 81.7%, 79.4%, 78.6%, 77.8%, 77.4% | 77.2%, 75.3%, 74.3%, 73.4%, 72.5% |
| Chicago | Palmer Square, Avondale, Lake View East, Roscoe Village, Bucktown | 90.6%, 87.9%, 87.9%, 87.8%, 87.6% | 87.8%, 82.1%, 82.2%, 83.0%, 80.9% | 84.6%, 77.6%, 77.7%, 78.7%, 76.5% |
| Baltimore | Montebello, New Northwood, Cherry Hill, Carroll-South Hilton, Canton | 90.3%, 89.9%, 88.5%, 88.1%, 88.0% | 88.2%, 84.6%, 83.6%, 83.5%, 81.4% | 85.8%, 79.3%, 78.9%, 79.0%, 76.8% |
| Miami | Lake Ridge, Poinciana Park, Middle River Terrace, Flagler Heights, Victoria Park | 89.9%, 89.7%, 88.5%, 87.7%, 87.5% | 82.6%, 83.2%, 79.3%, 78.3%, 78.2% | 77.1%, 77.9%, 74.3%, 72.8%, 72.9% |
| San Francisco | Lorin, Northwest Berkeley, Mission, Potrero Hill, Temescal | 89.8%, 88.2%, 88.1%, 87.8%, 87.6% | 82.9%, 80.9%, 79.6%, 81.0%, 77.8% | 77.4%, 76.2%, 74.8%, 76.5%, 71.9% |
| Detroit | Carbon Works, O'Hair Park, Hubbard Richard, Oakwood Heights, College Park | 84.6%, 82.5%, 81.8%, 80.7%, 80.6% | 78.7%, 74.5%, 75.0%, 75.5%, 74.8% | 75.3%, 68.1%, 69.5%, 70.9%, 69.8% |
| Boston | Winter Hill, Porter Square, Magoun Square, Central Hill, Davis Square | 90.4%, 89.9%, 89.6%, 89.6%, 89.4% | 85.8%, 85.5%, 84.9%, 84.4%, 82.7% | 80.9%, 81.2%, 80.2%, 79.2%, 77.4% |
| Tampa Bay | Tampa Heights, North Hyde Park, Oakford Park, South Seminole Heights, Plaza Terrace | 90.1%, 88.4%, 86.7%, 84.7%, 84.6% | 84.6%, 83.2%, 80.7%, 76.6%, 77.8% | 79.1%, 78.5%, 76.8%, 71.1%, 73.5% |
| Portland | Sunnyside, Eliot, Central Beaverton, North Tabor, Buckman | 86.1%, 83.0%, 82.3%, 81.0%, 80.9% | 78.3%, 77.1%, 74.8%, 75.1%, 74.8% | 73.8%, 72.9%, 68.8%, 70.0%, 69.5% |
| New York City | Windsor Terrace, Carroll Gardens, Park Slope, Greenpoint, Astoria Heights | 90.4%, 90.2%, 88.6%, 88.2%, 87.1% | 85.6%, 85.3%, 79.2%, 79.1%, 78.3% | 80.6%, 80.3%, 74.1%, 74.2%, 73.2% |
Best and Worst are the average results for the better and the worse of two addresses picked at random in the place: a weighted average of every scored location in which the best locations count the most for Best and the weakest count the most for Worst. Typical is the average address. Best is shown for a smaller space (half the standard size) and Worst for a larger one (half again as large), at the metro's median asking rent, using the same rent rule as our tool; Typical is at the market rent.
A boutique in Charlotte, place by place
North Charlotte. Scored across 11 addresses, a boutique in North Charlotte reaches 88.6% Best and 83.4% Typical. 90.0% at the best scored address against 71.5% at the weakest is 18.5 points of spread. The neighborhood gets you a shortlist and the address settles it. The same boutique at the worst address in North Charlotte is projected to fail 28.5% of the time over two or more years. North Charlotte comes out Great for a boutique, and a boutique ranks 46th of the 129 types the file ranks in North Charlotte. The place itself: vacancy comes to 7.7% of homes, the median journey to work is 24.0 minutes, 11.1% of people here are below the poverty line, the average household is 2.2 people, employment stands at 94.6%.
North Sharon Amity. Take the Best figure in North Sharon Amity and a boutique projects 87.5%. Take Typical and it projects 80.9%. 20 addresses here carry a score. The best scored address reaches 90.0% and the weakest 64.8%, a spread of 25.2 points. This is a place where the address decides the outcome and the neighborhood barely narrows it. At the weakest address in North Sharon Amity a boutique carries a projected failure rate of 35.2% over two or more years. In the file North Sharon Amity is Great for a boutique, which puts a boutique 16th of the 129 types ranked there. What the surrounding blocks look like: the average household runs 2.7 people, large for this metro, the middle of the age range sits at 31.6 years, 7.5% of the housing is empty, employment comes to 91.4%, it sits low in this metro for income, at the 17.0 percentile.
Uptown. For a boutique, Uptown projects 82.4% Typical and 87.4% Best, over 16 scored addresses. There are 17.7 points between the best scored address at 89.2% and the weakest at 71.5%, so choosing Uptown is the start of the decision rather than the end of it. The bottom of Uptown, its weakest address, projects a boutique failing 28.5% of the time within two or more years. Tiered Great for a boutique, Uptown ranks a boutique 6th of the 129 types it ranks. The place itself: the median age is a young 28.6 years, it is a high-income pocket, with 63.5% of households in the top bracket, income here is at the 62.0 percentile, near the top of the metro, 99.4% of people are in work, 86.8% of the housing went up after 2000, new for this metro.
Henderson Circle. A boutique in Henderson Circle is projected at 86.1% where the address is strong and 78.3% where it is ordinary, measured over 34 scored addresses. The best scored address reaches 89.2% and the weakest 55.8%, a spread of 33.4 points. This is a place where the address decides the outcome and the neighborhood barely narrows it. At the weakest address in Henderson Circle a boutique carries a projected failure rate of 44.2% over two or more years. On the file's tiers Henderson Circle is Great for a boutique, and a boutique takes 120th place of the 129 types ranked in Henderson Circle. The place itself: median age comes to 34.6 years, it is a Working-income area, income reaches only the 32.0 percentile here, 51.9% of the housing went up after 2000, new for this metro, high earners are scarce here, at 44.7% of households.
Eastway-Sheffield Park. Across the 18 addresses scored here, a boutique projects 85.7% Best and 77.9% Typical. Eastway-Sheffield Park runs from 90.0% all the way down to 54.4%, 35.6 points. Saying you are opening in Eastway-Sheffield Park says almost nothing until you say which address. Move the same boutique to the weakest address in Eastway-Sheffield Park and the projected chance it is closed inside two years is 45.6%. The file tiers Eastway-Sheffield Park Good for a boutique, and rates a boutique 109th of the 129 business types it ranks there. As a place, commutes come to a median 27.8 minutes, median age comes to 32.4 years, 7.9% of homes sit vacant, employment comes to 93.5%, at 25.9% the poverty rate is among the higher ones here.
A boutique in Phoenix, place by place
Pepperwood. A boutique in Pepperwood is projected at 87.7% where the address is strong and 81.8% where it is ordinary, measured over 16 scored addresses. The gap inside Pepperwood is 23.6 points, from 89.2% at the best scored address to 65.6% at the weakest. Getting the neighborhood right is half of it. The same boutique at the worst address in Pepperwood is projected to fail 34.4% of the time over two or more years. On the file's tiers Pepperwood is Great for a boutique, and a boutique takes 8th place of the 129 types ranked in Pepperwood. On the ground, employment comes to 96.6%, much of it is new build, 34.1% of the housing going up after 2000, it is a Middle-income area, 5.6% of homes sit vacant, 66.9% of households are high income.
Kiwanis Park. 11 addresses in Kiwanis Park carry a score for a boutique. Best projects 86.9% and Typical 82.7%. Kiwanis Park spans 13.1 points, 90.0% down to 76.9%. Two addresses a few streets apart here are not the same bet. For a boutique the weakest address in Kiwanis Park projects failure within two or more years at 23.1%. Kiwanis Park is Great for a boutique in the file, and 17th of the 129 types it ranks there is where a boutique lands. What the surrounding blocks look like: the area reads Working-income, only 45.7% of households are high income, the median commute runs 21.5 minutes, adults with a bachelor's degree or more come to 37.3%, housing built since 2000 comes to 19.2%.
Dobson Ranch. A boutique in Dobson Ranch is projected at 86.8% where the address is strong and 80.4% where it is ordinary, measured over 77 scored addresses. 25.7 points separate the best scored address at 90.0% from the weakest at 64.3%. A boutique at the wrong end of that range is a different proposition from one at the right end. Take the weakest address in Dobson Ranch and a boutique there is projected to close within two years 35.7% of the time. Tiered Good for a boutique, Dobson Ranch ranks a boutique 17th of the 129 types it ranks. In Dobson Ranch itself, 56.7% of households sit in the top bracket, commutes come to a median 23.2 minutes, 9.2% of people here are below the poverty line, employment comes to 97.3%, degree attainment sits at 42.0% of adults.
Escalante. A boutique in Escalante is projected at 86.3% where the address is strong and 79.3% where it is ordinary, measured over 18 scored addresses. There are 20.8 points between the best scored address at 90.0% and the weakest at 69.2%, so choosing Escalante is the start of the decision rather than the end of it. The bottom of Escalante, its weakest address, projects a boutique failing 30.8% of the time within two or more years. Escalante comes out Good for a boutique, and a boutique ranks 8th of the 129 types the file ranks in Escalante. Escalante as a place: it sits low in this metro for income, at the 32.3 percentile, empty homes run to 8.5%, which reads as a thin street in the data, only 46.7% of households are high income, median age comes to 31.9 years, the median journey to work is 21.8 minutes.
Carino Estates. Scored across 18 addresses, a boutique in Carino Estates reaches 85.0% Best and 78.7% Typical. The gap inside Carino Estates is 22.2 points, from 88.3% at the best scored address to 66.1% at the weakest. Getting the neighborhood right is half of it. Move the same boutique to the weakest address in Carino Estates and the projected chance it is closed inside two years is 33.9%. Tiered Good for a boutique, Carino Estates ranks a boutique 14th of the 129 types it ranks. As a place, poverty is low here by this metro's standard, at 5.9%, it is unusually well educated, with 53.6% of adults holding a bachelor's degree or more, it sits near the top of this metro for income, at the 68.8 percentile, 71.8% of households sit in the top income bracket, high for this metro, the average household is 2.2 people.
A boutique in Dallas, place by place
North Side. Scored across 18 addresses, a boutique in North Side reaches 88.0% Best and 80.8% Typical. Best to weakest in North Side is 90.0% against 65.6%, 24.4 points apart, which is wide enough that the specific site is doing more work than the name of the area. The same boutique at the worst address in North Side is projected to fail 34.4% of the time over two or more years. North Side comes out Great for a boutique, and a boutique ranks 114th of the 129 types the file ranks in North Side. On the ground, the median journey to work is 27.8 minutes, employment comes to 94.8%, the middle of the age range sits at 34.7 years, it sits low in this metro for income, at the 5.2 percentile, formal education is less common here than across the metro, at 7.2% of adults.
Central Arlington. A boutique in Central Arlington is projected at 86.9% where the address is strong and 79.5% where it is ordinary, measured over 63 scored addresses. The best scored address reaches 90.0% and the weakest 60.7%, a spread of 29.3 points. This is a place where the address decides the outcome and the neighborhood barely narrows it. At the worst address Central Arlington has, a boutique projects a 39.3% chance of closing inside two or more years. The file's own tier for a boutique in Central Arlington is Great, with a boutique 101st of the 129 types ranked in the place. On the ground, at 18.2% post-2000 stock, the buildings here are older than most, high earners are scarce here, at 39.2% of households, the average household is 2.3 people, 9.8% of homes sit vacant, adults with a bachelor's degree or more come to 34.8%.
East Arlington. Take the Best figure in East Arlington and a boutique projects 85.8%. Take Typical and it projects 77.9%. 261 addresses here carry a score. East Arlington runs from 90.0% all the way down to 50.4%, 39.6 points. Saying you are opening in East Arlington says almost nothing until you say which address. The same boutique at the worst address in East Arlington is projected to fail 49.6% of the time over two or more years. Tiered Good for a boutique, East Arlington ranks a boutique 116th of the 129 types it ranks. In East Arlington itself, at 34.6% the top bracket is thin here, vacancy is low, 6.5% of homes, the average household is 2.9 people, the middle of the age range sits at 32.2 years, 94.5% of people are in work.
Farmers Market District. A boutique here reads 85.6% Best and 77.7% Typical across 12 scored addresses. A 33.4 point spread, 89.2% to 55.8%, sits inside this one place. The site is the decision here and the neighborhood is barely a filter. A boutique at the weakest address in Farmers Market District has a projected chance of closing inside two years of 44.2%. For a boutique the file tiers Farmers Market District Good; against the 129 types ranked in Farmers Market District a boutique comes 92nd. On the ground, the median age is 38.1 years, 93.8% of people are in work, the median journey to work is 27.4 minutes, it sits low in this metro for income, at the 14.4 percentile, the area reads Working-income.
Oak Lawn. Take the Best figure in Oak Lawn and a boutique projects 85.3%. Take Typical and it projects 77.7%. 138 addresses here carry a score. Oak Lawn runs from 90.0% all the way down to 49.4%, 40.6 points. Saying you are opening in Oak Lawn says almost nothing until you say which address. Take the weakest address in Oak Lawn and a boutique there is projected to close within two years 50.6% of the time. For a boutique the file tiers Oak Lawn Good; against the 129 types ranked in Oak Lawn a boutique comes 25th. On the ground, at 8.9% the poverty rate sits below this metro, top-bracket households run to 63.4% here, 11.5% of homes sit empty, high for this metro, the median journey to work is 23.8 minutes, the median age is 35.8 years.
A boutique in Denver, place by place
Platt Park. Take the Best figure in Platt Park and a boutique projects 90.7%. Take Typical and it projects 89.1%. 23 addresses here carry a score. The band runs 5.0 points wide, 90.0% down to 85.0%. Choosing well inside Platt Park helps; on its own it does not decide the outcome. The bottom of Platt Park, its weakest address, projects a boutique failing 15.0% of the time within two or more years. On the file's tiers Platt Park is Great for a boutique, and a boutique takes 15th place of the 129 types ranked in Platt Park. In Platt Park itself, households average 2.1 people, 5.7% of homes sit vacant, employment stands at 98.1%, the median age is 37.6 years, it sits near the top of this metro for income, at the 92.0 percentile.
Heritage Eagle Bend. Here the projection for a boutique is 89.8% Best, 86.3% Typical, taken over 37 scored addresses. 90.0% at the best scored address against 74.2% at the weakest is 15.8 points of spread. The neighborhood gets you a shortlist and the address settles it. Measured at the weakest address in Heritage Eagle Bend, a boutique is projected to fail at 25.8% over two or more years. Heritage Eagle Bend comes out Great for a boutique, and a boutique ranks 22nd of the 129 types the file ranks in Heritage Eagle Bend.
Highland. A boutique here reads 89.6% Best and 85.5% Typical across 31 scored addresses. Highland spans 14.4 points, 90.0% down to 75.6%. Two addresses a few streets apart here are not the same bet. A boutique at the weakest address in Highland has a projected chance of closing inside two years of 24.4%. Rated Great for a boutique, Highland puts a boutique 25th out of the 129 business types the file ranks there. The place itself: it is unusually well educated, with 82.2% of adults holding a bachelor's degree or more, on income it sits in the Upper-Middle band, poverty is low here by this metro's standard, at 6.2%, households run small here, 1.7 people, 67.5% of households sit in the top income bracket, high for this metro.
Jefferson Park. The file scores 14 addresses for a boutique in Jefferson Park: 89.6% Best, 86.0% Typical. The gap inside Jefferson Park is 11.8 points, from 90.0% at the best scored address to 78.2% at the weakest. Getting the neighborhood right is half of it. Move the same boutique to the weakest address in Jefferson Park and the projected chance it is closed inside two years is 21.8%. The file calls Jefferson Park Great for a boutique and places a boutique 18th among the 129 business types it ranks in Jefferson Park. Jefferson Park as a place: income here is at the 80.0 percentile, near the top of the metro, it is unusually well educated, with 77.7% of adults holding a bachelor's degree or more, the area reads Upper-Middle-income, at 1.8 people the average household is small, singles and couples more than families, it skews young, with a median age of 30.6 years.
Fitzsimons. Scored across 24 addresses, a boutique in Fitzsimons reaches 89.4% Best and 86.0% Typical. There are 11.0 points between the best scored address at 89.2% and the weakest at 78.2%, so choosing Fitzsimons is the start of the decision rather than the end of it. The weakest address in Fitzsimons carries a projected failure rate of 21.8% for a boutique over two or more years. On the file's tiers Fitzsimons is Great for a boutique, and a boutique takes 16th place of the 129 types ranked in Fitzsimons.
A boutique in Atlanta, place by place
Kirkwood. Across the 20 addresses scored here, a boutique projects 88.9% Best and 82.2% Typical. Kirkwood spans 23.0 points, 90.0% down to 67.0%. Two addresses a few streets apart here are not the same bet. The same boutique at the worst address in Kirkwood is projected to fail 33.0% of the time over two or more years. Rated Great for a boutique, Kirkwood puts a boutique 15th out of the 129 business types the file ranks there.
Lindridge/Martin Manor. A boutique here reads 87.7% Best and 80.9% Typical across 10 scored addresses. The best scored address reaches 90.0% and the weakest 68.4%, a spread of 21.6 points, so the neighborhood narrows the search and the address is what still decides it. The weakest address in Lindridge/Martin Manor carries a projected failure rate of 31.6% for a boutique over two or more years. Lindridge/Martin Manor is Great for a boutique in the file, and 99th of the 129 types it ranks there is where a boutique lands.
Grant Park. 22 addresses in Grant Park carry a score for a boutique. Best projects 87.7% and Typical 80.2%. The gap from 90.0% to 60.2% is 29.8 points, wider than the gap between many whole metros. In Grant Park the address is the decision and the neighborhood name tells you little. Measured at the weakest address in Grant Park, a boutique is projected to fail at 39.8% over two or more years. Rated Great for a boutique, Grant Park puts a boutique 103rd out of the 129 business types the file ranks there. As a place, 94.6% of people are in work, median age comes to 36.4 years, it sits near the top of this metro for income, at the 85.1 percentile, the area reads Upper-Middle-income, getting to work takes a median 31.4 minutes, longer than most of this metro.
Blandtown. Here the projection for a boutique is 87.0% Best, 81.9% Typical, taken over 11 scored addresses. The gap inside Blandtown is 17.2 points, from 89.2% at the best scored address to 72.0% at the weakest. Getting the neighborhood right is half of it. Take the weakest address in Blandtown and a boutique there is projected to close within two years 28.0% of the time. Blandtown reads Great for a boutique, with a boutique sitting 125th among the 129 types ranked there. The place itself: median age comes to 36.9 years, 96.4% of people are in work, the stock is young here, 83.3% of it built since 2000, vacancy runs high at 16.6% of homes, which is what a thin retail street looks like in the data, it is a Middle-income area.
Brookhaven (Atlanta). A boutique in Brookhaven (Atlanta) is projected at 86.7% where the address is strong and 82.6% where it is ordinary, measured over 13 scored addresses. The gap inside Brookhaven (Atlanta) is 11.8 points, from 89.2% at the best scored address to 77.4% at the weakest. Getting the neighborhood right is half of it. The bottom of Brookhaven (Atlanta), its weakest address, projects a boutique failing 22.6% of the time within two or more years. Brookhaven (Atlanta) reads Great for a boutique, with a boutique sitting 9th among the 129 types ranked there.
A boutique in Orlando, place by place
Colonial Town Center. Across the 16 addresses scored here, a boutique projects 90.2% Best and 86.2% Typical. The gap inside Colonial Town Center is 15.4 points, from 90.0% at the best scored address to 74.6% at the weakest. Getting the neighborhood right is half of it. The weakest address in Colonial Town Center carries a projected failure rate of 25.4% for a boutique over two or more years. The file tiers Colonial Town Center Great for a boutique, and rates a boutique 24th of the 129 business types it ranks there. In Colonial Town Center itself, the median commute runs 28.2 minutes, high-income households come to 54.8%, households average 2.4 people, degree attainment sits at 48.4% of adults, employment comes to 96.4%.
South Orange. 10 addresses in South Orange carry a score for a boutique. Best projects 88.8% and Typical 84.3%. The gap inside South Orange is 12.8 points, from 89.2% at the best scored address to 76.4% at the weakest. Getting the neighborhood right is half of it. Down at the weakest address in South Orange the projected chance a boutique does not last two years is 23.6%. A boutique is Good in South Orange by the file's tier, and 104th of the 129 types it ranks in South Orange. What the surrounding blocks look like: 47.5% of households sit in the top bracket, income sits mid-table here, the 57.5 percentile, employment stands at 97.6%, the median commute runs 26.3 minutes, the middle of the age range sits at 40.6 years.
Kirkman South. Here the projection for a boutique is 86.4% Best, 78.7% Typical, taken over 11 scored addresses. Kirkman South runs from 89.2% all the way down to 55.8%, 33.4 points. Saying you are opening in Kirkman South says almost nothing until you say which address. Take the weakest address in Kirkman South and a boutique there is projected to close within two years 44.2% of the time. The file calls Kirkman South Good for a boutique and places a boutique 102nd among the 129 business types it ranks in Kirkman South. What the surrounding blocks look like: 14.9% of homes sit empty, high for this metro, high earners are scarce here, at 36.3% of households, 35.1% of adults hold a bachelor's degree or more, below this metro, households are large, averaging 2.8 people, at 33.2 years the median age sits below this metro's.
Florida Center. Across the 63 addresses scored here, a boutique projects 82.8% Best and 76.8% Typical. The best scored address reaches 89.2% and the weakest 55.8%, a spread of 33.4 points. This is a place where the address decides the outcome and the neighborhood barely narrows it. Move the same boutique to the weakest address in Florida Center and the projected chance it is closed inside two years is 44.2%. Florida Center reads Average for a boutique, with a boutique sitting 125th among the 129 types ranked there. As a place, the median age is a young 31.9 years, households average 2.6 people, the median commute runs 27.4 minutes, 93.7% of people are in work, 54.7% of the housing went up after 2000, new for this metro.
Airport North. A boutique in Airport North is projected at 82.0% where the address is strong and 75.5% where it is ordinary, measured over 75 scored addresses. The gap from 90.0% to 53.0% is 37.0 points, wider than the gap between many whole metros. In Airport North the address is the decision and the neighborhood name tells you little. The same boutique at the worst address in Airport North is projected to fail 47.0% of the time over two or more years. The file calls Airport North Average for a boutique and places a boutique 116th among the 129 business types it ranks in Airport North. What the surrounding blocks look like: it sits low in this metro for income, at the 32.9 percentile, almost nothing sits empty, with vacancy at 7.5% of homes, households are large, averaging 2.7 people, formal education is less common here than across the metro, at 40.7% of adults, the middle of the age range sits at 35.6 years.
A boutique in San Antonio, place by place
Laddie Place and North Wilson. A boutique here reads 85.5% Best and 78.3% Typical across 10 scored addresses. A 28.0 point spread, 89.2% to 61.2%, sits inside this one place. The site is the decision here and the neighborhood is barely a filter. For a boutique the weakest address in Laddie Place and North Wilson projects failure within two or more years at 38.8%. The file tiers Laddie Place and North Wilson Great for a boutique, and rates a boutique 15th of the 129 business types it ranks there. In Laddie Place and North Wilson itself, 9.2% of homes sit vacant, household size comes to 2.4 people, employment stands at 94.2%, at 24.6% the poverty rate is among the higher ones here, the building stock is old, with only 5.4% of it built after 2000.
Dignowity Hill. Across the 10 addresses scored here, a boutique projects 83.5% Best and 77.3% Typical. 87.5% at the best scored address against 66.1% at the weakest is 21.4 points of spread. The neighborhood gets you a shortlist and the address settles it. Put a boutique at the weakest address in Dignowity Hill and two or more years later it is projected to be gone 33.9% of the time. On the file's tiers Dignowity Hill is Good for a boutique, and a boutique takes 104th place of the 129 types ranked in Dignowity Hill. The place itself: commutes come to a median 22.1 minutes, 35.0% of adults hold a bachelor's degree or more, it sits at the 43.5 percentile for income in this metro, household size comes to 2.2 people, 45.0% of households sit in the top bracket.
Shearer Hills/Ridgeview. Across the 41 addresses scored here, a boutique projects 83.5% Best and 75.9% Typical. Shearer Hills/Ridgeview runs from 90.0% all the way down to 54.8%, 35.2 points. Saying you are opening in Shearer Hills/Ridgeview says almost nothing until you say which address. At the weakest address in Shearer Hills/Ridgeview a boutique carries a projected failure rate of 45.2% over two or more years. The file's own tier for a boutique in Shearer Hills/Ridgeview is Good, with a boutique 105th of the 129 types ranked in the place. On the ground, vacancy comes to 8.7% of homes, household size comes to 2.2 people, income sits mid-table here, the 46.4 percentile, 95.5% of people are in work, 48.0% of households sit in the top bracket.
Tobin Hill. Across the 12 addresses scored here, a boutique projects 82.0% Best and 76.3% Typical. The best scored address reaches 87.5% and the weakest 61.6%, a spread of 25.9 points. This is a place where the address decides the outcome and the neighborhood barely narrows it. The bottom of Tobin Hill, its weakest address, projects a boutique failing 38.4% of the time within two or more years. For a boutique the file tiers Tobin Hill Average; against the 129 types ranked in Tobin Hill a boutique comes 30th. What the surrounding blocks look like: at 1.6 people the average household is small, singles and couples more than families, poverty is uncommon here, 8.7%, at a median 17.8 minutes the journey to work is shorter than this metro's, on income it reaches the 63.8 percentile of this metro, 54.4% of households sit in the top bracket.
Monte Vista. A boutique here reads 80.3% Best and 75.3% Typical across 14 scored addresses. A 26.7 point spread, 88.3% to 61.6%, sits inside this one place. The site is the decision here and the neighborhood is barely a filter. For a boutique the weakest address in Monte Vista projects failure within two or more years at 38.4%. On the file's tiers Monte Vista is Average for a boutique, and a boutique takes 96th place of the 129 types ranked in Monte Vista. On the ground, it sits near the top of this metro for income, at the 73.9 percentile, on income it sits in the Upper-Middle band, top-bracket households run to 58.2% here, households run small here, 2.0 people, at a median 20.8 minutes the journey to work is shorter than this metro's.
A boutique in Seattle, place by place
Minor. Scored across 14 addresses, a boutique in Minor reaches 88.7% Best and 82.5% Typical. 90.0% at the best scored address against 71.0% at the weakest is 19.0 points of spread. The neighborhood gets you a shortlist and the address settles it. Put a boutique at the weakest address in Minor and two or more years later it is projected to be gone 29.0% of the time. Rated Great for a boutique, Minor puts a boutique 16th out of the 129 business types the file ranks there. In Minor itself, the stock is young here, 33.9% of it built since 2000, households run small here, 1.8 people, the median age is 33.9 years, 63.1% of households sit in the top bracket, degree attainment sits at 64.8% of adults.
Twin Creeks. The file scores 33 addresses for a boutique in Twin Creeks: 87.9% Best, 82.8% Typical. There are 18.5 points between the best scored address at 90.0% and the weakest at 71.5%, so choosing Twin Creeks is the start of the decision rather than the end of it. The bottom of Twin Creeks, its weakest address, projects a boutique failing 28.5% of the time within two or more years. Tiered Great for a boutique, Twin Creeks ranks a boutique 10th of the 129 types it ranks.
Fremont. For a boutique, Fremont projects 80.2% Typical and 87.9% Best, over 29 scored addresses. Fremont runs from 90.0% all the way down to 53.0%, 37.0 points. Saying you are opening in Fremont says almost nothing until you say which address. The same boutique at the worst address in Fremont is projected to fail 47.0% of the time over two or more years. On the file's tiers Fremont is Great for a boutique, and a boutique takes 104th place of the 129 types ranked in Fremont. On the ground, at 1.6 people the average household is small, singles and couples more than families, on income it is at the 42.0 percentile, low for this metro, degree holders are unusually common here, 82.9% of adults, at 5.4% of homes, empty property is rare here, the median age is a young 31.7 years.
Bayside. The file scores 24 addresses for a boutique in Bayside: 87.4% Best, 82.7% Typical. 90.0% at the best scored address against 71.0% at the weakest is 19.0 points of spread. The neighborhood gets you a shortlist and the address settles it. A boutique at the weakest address in Bayside has a projected chance of closing inside two years of 29.0%. Bayside reads Great for a boutique, with a boutique sitting 15th among the 129 types ranked there.
East Queen Anne. Scored across 16 addresses, a boutique in East Queen Anne reaches 87.3% Best and 78.1% Typical. Inside East Queen Anne the scored addresses range 53.5% to 90.0%. 36.5 points of difference in one place is the clearest case there is for choosing the site and not the area. For a boutique the weakest address in East Queen Anne projects failure within two or more years at 46.5%. The file's own tier for a boutique in East Queen Anne is Great, with a boutique 31st of the 129 types ranked in the place. The place itself: at 3.6% of homes, empty property is rare here, poverty is uncommon here, 5.5%, 80.6% of adults hold a bachelor's degree or more, well above this metro, 79.3% of households sit in the top bracket, the median commute runs 26.1 minutes.
A boutique in Minneapolis, place by place
Whittier. Scored across 32 addresses, a boutique in Whittier reaches 87.7% Best and 82.0% Typical. There are 21.2 points between the best scored address at 90.0% and the weakest at 68.8%, so choosing Whittier is the start of the decision rather than the end of it. Move the same boutique to the weakest address in Whittier and the projected chance it is closed inside two years is 31.2%. Whittier reads Great for a boutique, with a boutique sitting 19th among the 129 types ranked there. What the surrounding blocks look like: household size comes to 1.9 people, the median journey to work is 24.8 minutes, 88.3% of people are in work, the poverty rate is high for this metro at 25.3%, much of it is new build, 23.6% of the housing going up after 2000.
Lyndale. 16 addresses in Lyndale carry a score for a boutique. Best projects 87.4% and Typical 82.2%. 90.0% at the best scored address against 69.7% at the weakest is 20.3 points of spread. The neighborhood gets you a shortlist and the address settles it. Put a boutique at the weakest address in Lyndale and two or more years later it is projected to be gone 30.3% of the time. On the file's tiers Lyndale is Great for a boutique, and a boutique takes 24th place of the 129 types ranked in Lyndale. The place itself: it is a Working-income area, at 4.2% of homes, empty property is rare here, at 40.2% the top bracket is thin here, at 1.8 people the average household is small, singles and couples more than families, 12.6% of the housing went up after 2000, new for this metro.
Lowry Hill. For a boutique, Lowry Hill projects 80.1% Typical and 86.1% Best, over 17 scored addresses. Inside Lowry Hill the scored addresses range 62.0% to 88.3%. 26.3 points of difference in one place is the clearest case there is for choosing the site and not the area. For a boutique the weakest address in Lowry Hill projects failure within two or more years at 38.0%. On the file's tiers Lowry Hill is Great for a boutique, and a boutique takes 36th place of the 129 types ranked in Lowry Hill. On the ground, the median journey to work is 23.5 minutes, only 4.4% of the housing went up after 2000, on income it reaches the 69.0 percentile of this metro, on income it sits in the Middle band, at 6.1% the poverty rate sits below this metro.
Longfellow. The file scores 21 addresses for a boutique in Longfellow: 85.7% Best, 78.1% Typical. The gap from 90.0% to 58.0% is 32.0 points, wider than the gap between many whole metros. In Longfellow the address is the decision and the neighborhood name tells you little. Down at the weakest address in Longfellow the projected chance a boutique does not last two years is 42.0%. For a boutique the file tiers Longfellow Great; against the 129 types ranked in Longfellow a boutique comes 28th. What the surrounding blocks look like: 13.2% of the housing went up after 2000, new for this metro, people get to work quickly, a median commute of 19.5 minutes, 88.2% of people are in work, 51.8% of households sit in the top bracket, household size comes to 2.3 people.
Central. For a boutique, Central projects 78.7% Typical and 85.2% Best, over 32 scored addresses. There are 24.0 points between the best scored address at 89.2% and the weakest at 65.2%, so choosing Central is the start of the decision rather than the end of it. Measured at the weakest address in Central, a boutique is projected to fail at 34.8% over two or more years. Central comes out Great for a boutique, and a boutique ranks 91st of the 129 types the file ranks in Central. Central as a place: it is a Middle-income area, the building stock is old, with only 6.4% of it built after 2000, degree holders are thinner on the ground here, 40.0% of adults, at 28.2 years the median age sits below this metro's, the poverty rate is high for this metro at 12.8%.
A boutique in Los Angeles, place by place
Lacy. Scored across 10 addresses, a boutique in Lacy reaches 90.8% Best and 88.1% Typical. A 7.5 point band, 90.0% to 82.5%, separates the best address in Lacy from the weakest. That is a real edge and a modest one. The bottom of Lacy, its weakest address, projects a boutique failing 17.5% of the time within two or more years. Rated Great for a boutique, Lacy puts a boutique 4th out of the 129 business types the file ranks there. On the ground, vacancy comes to 5.6% of homes, employment stands at 98.0%, degree holders are thinner on the ground here, 5.2% of adults, much of it is new build, 15.7% of the housing going up after 2000, on income it sits in the Working band.
Tropico. Take the Best figure in Tropico and a boutique projects 90.5%. Take Typical and it projects 86.7%. 17 addresses here carry a score. There are 11.8 points between the best scored address at 90.0% and the weakest at 78.2%, so choosing Tropico is the start of the decision rather than the end of it. Measured at the weakest address in Tropico, a boutique is projected to fail at 21.8% over two or more years. The file tiers Tropico Great for a boutique, and rates a boutique 4th of the 129 business types it ranks there. On the ground, 54.5% of households sit in the top bracket, median age comes to 39.3 years, commutes come to a median 30.6 minutes, employment stands at 93.4%, the stock is young here, 32.1% of it built since 2000.
Larchmont. Scored across 10 addresses, a boutique in Larchmont reaches 90.2% Best and 85.7% Typical. Best to weakest in Larchmont is 90.0% against 73.8%, 16.2 points apart, which is wide enough that the specific site is doing more work than the name of the area. At the worst address Larchmont has, a boutique projects a 26.2% chance of closing inside two or more years. For a boutique the file tiers Larchmont Great; against the 129 types ranked in Larchmont a boutique comes 5th.
Fairfax. Here the projection for a boutique is 89.7% Best, 83.9% Typical, taken over 33 scored addresses. There are 19.8 points between the best scored address at 90.0% and the weakest at 70.2%, so choosing Fairfax is the start of the decision rather than the end of it. For a boutique the weakest address in Fairfax projects failure within two or more years at 29.8%. On the file's tiers Fairfax is Great for a boutique, and a boutique takes 15th place of the 129 types ranked in Fairfax.
Hollywood. Hollywood holds 172 scored addresses for a boutique, projecting 89.7% Best and 83.3% Typical. The best scored address reaches 90.0% and the weakest 57.6%, a spread of 32.4 points. This is a place where the address decides the outcome and the neighborhood barely narrows it. Move the same boutique to the weakest address in Hollywood and the projected chance it is closed inside two years is 42.4%. The file calls Hollywood Great for a boutique and places a boutique 12th among the 129 business types it ranks in Hollywood. Hollywood as a place: at 48.5% the top bracket is thin here, the median commute runs 33.0 minutes, employment stands at 90.3%, the middle of the age range sits at 38.0 years, empty homes run to 13.3%, which reads as a thin street in the data.
A boutique in St. Louis, place by place
Mount Pleasant. The file scores 15 addresses for a boutique in Mount Pleasant: 89.5% Best, 86.9% Typical. There are 10.8 points between the best scored address at 90.0% and the weakest at 79.2%, so choosing Mount Pleasant is the start of the decision rather than the end of it. Put a boutique at the weakest address in Mount Pleasant and two or more years later it is projected to be gone 20.8% of the time. Mount Pleasant is Great for a boutique in the file, and 1st of the 129 types it ranks there is where a boutique lands.
Patch. A boutique in Patch is projected at 88.9% where the address is strong and 85.4% where it is ordinary, measured over 26 scored addresses. The gap inside Patch is 15.8 points, from 90.0% at the best scored address to 74.2% at the weakest. Getting the neighborhood right is half of it. The same boutique at the worst address in Patch is projected to fail 25.8% of the time over two or more years. Patch reads Great for a boutique, with a boutique sitting 1st among the 129 types ranked there.
Benton Park West. 12 addresses in Benton Park West carry a score for a boutique. Best projects 88.6% and Typical 84.9%. 89.2% at the best scored address against 75.1% at the weakest is 14.1 points of spread. The neighborhood gets you a shortlist and the address settles it. The bottom of Benton Park West, its weakest address, projects a boutique failing 24.9% of the time within two or more years. Benton Park West reads Great for a boutique, with a boutique sitting 7th among the 129 types ranked there.
Carondelet. A boutique here reads 88.0% Best and 83.7% Typical across 35 scored addresses. The best scored address reaches 89.2% and the weakest 74.2%, a spread of 15.0 points, so the neighborhood narrows the search and the address is what still decides it. Put a boutique at the weakest address in Carondelet and two or more years later it is projected to be gone 25.8% of the time. In the file Carondelet is Great for a boutique, which puts a boutique 3rd of the 129 types ranked there.
Bevo Mill. 38 addresses in Bevo Mill carry a score for a boutique. Best projects 87.7% and Typical 82.2%. There are 21.2 points between the best scored address at 90.0% and the weakest at 68.8%, so choosing Bevo Mill is the start of the decision rather than the end of it. At the worst address Bevo Mill has, a boutique projects a 31.2% chance of closing inside two or more years. The file tiers Bevo Mill Great for a boutique, and rates a boutique 19th of the 129 business types it ranks there.
A boutique in Washington DC, place by place
U Street Corridor. A boutique in U Street Corridor is projected at 90.7% where the address is strong and 87.2% where it is ordinary, measured over 13 scored addresses. The gap inside U Street Corridor is 17.2 points, from 90.0% at the best scored address to 72.8% at the weakest. Getting the neighborhood right is half of it. At the worst address U Street Corridor has, a boutique projects a 27.2% chance of closing inside two or more years. U Street Corridor is Great for a boutique in the file, and 5th of the 129 types it ranks there is where a boutique lands. As a place, 8.2% of people here are below the poverty line, commutes come to a median 29.6 minutes, adults with a bachelor's degree or more come to 77.3%, 74.3% of households are high income, 96.8% of people are in work.
LeDroit Park. Take the Best figure in LeDroit Park and a boutique projects 90.3%. Take Typical and it projects 86.7%. 11 addresses here carry a score. LeDroit Park spans 10.0 points, 90.0% down to 80.0%. Two addresses a few streets apart here are not the same bet. At the weakest address in LeDroit Park a boutique carries a projected failure rate of 20.0% over two or more years. The file calls LeDroit Park Great for a boutique and places a boutique 9th among the 129 business types it ranks in LeDroit Park. LeDroit Park as a place: commutes come to a median 28.9 minutes, households average 2.0 people, 95.2% of people are in work, poverty runs to 20.7%, above this metro, the building stock is old, with only 7.6% of it built after 2000.
Eckington. Take the Best figure in Eckington and a boutique projects 90.1%. Take Typical and it projects 85.6%. 38 addresses here carry a score. Eckington spans 18.0 points, 90.0% down to 72.0%. Two addresses a few streets apart here are not the same bet. At the weakest address in Eckington a boutique carries a projected failure rate of 28.0% over two or more years. The file's own tier for a boutique in Eckington is Great, with a boutique 6th of the 129 types ranked in the place. Eckington as a place: it is a Middle-income area, at 1.8 people the average household is small, singles and couples more than families, the middle of the age range sits at 33.8 years, 9.2% of people here are below the poverty line, on income it lands at the 50.3 percentile of this metro.
Shaw. Here the projection for a boutique is 89.9% Best, 85.7% Typical, taken over 50 scored addresses. 90.0% at the best scored address against 76.9% at the weakest is 13.1 points of spread. The neighborhood gets you a shortlist and the address settles it. Move the same boutique to the weakest address in Shaw and the projected chance it is closed inside two years is 23.1%. Rated Great for a boutique, Shaw puts a boutique 8th out of the 129 business types the file ranks there. The place itself: empty homes run to 9.9%, which reads as a thin street in the data, households are small, averaging 1.7 people, which reads as singles and couples rather than families, income here is at the 61.4 percentile, near the top of the metro, the median age is 32.5 years, employment comes to 98.4%.
Arlandria/Chirilagua. For a boutique, Arlandria/Chirilagua projects 82.8% Typical and 89.8% Best, over 40 scored addresses. There are 23.9 points between the best scored address at 90.0% and the weakest at 66.1%, so choosing Arlandria/Chirilagua is the start of the decision rather than the end of it. Put a boutique at the weakest address in Arlandria/Chirilagua and two or more years later it is projected to be gone 33.9% of the time. The file tiers Arlandria/Chirilagua Great for a boutique, and rates a boutique 1st of the 129 business types it ranks there.
A boutique in Philadelphia, place by place
Mount Airy East. For a boutique, Mount Airy East projects 78.7% Typical and 85.9% Best, over 170 scored addresses. A 34.8 point spread, 89.2% to 54.4%, sits inside this one place. The site is the decision here and the neighborhood is barely a filter. The weakest address in Mount Airy East carries a projected failure rate of 45.6% for a boutique over two or more years. The file calls Mount Airy East Great for a boutique and places a boutique 33rd among the 129 business types it ranks in Mount Airy East. The place itself: poverty is uncommon here, 8.3%, on income it sits in the Middle band, at 5.7% of homes, empty property is rare here, it is unusually well educated, with 42.7% of adults holding a bachelor's degree or more, only 4.8% of the housing went up after 2000.
Summerdale. Across the 23 addresses scored here, a boutique projects 85.8% Best and 79.7% Typical. The gap from 87.5% to 61.2% is 26.3 points, wider than the gap between many whole metros. In Summerdale the address is the decision and the neighborhood name tells you little. For a boutique the weakest address in Summerdale projects failure within two or more years at 38.8%. On the file's tiers Summerdale is Great for a boutique, and a boutique takes 17th place of the 129 types ranked in Summerdale. What the surrounding blocks look like: median age comes to 36.5 years, the building stock is old, with only 1.0% of it built after 2000, the area reads Working-income, degree holders are thinner on the ground here, 18.9% of adults, vacancy is low, 5.6% of homes.
East Kensington. A boutique in East Kensington is projected at 85.6% where the address is strong and 78.5% where it is ordinary, measured over 30 scored addresses. The best scored address reaches 89.2% and the weakest 63.4%, a spread of 25.8 points. This is a place where the address decides the outcome and the neighborhood barely narrows it. Move the same boutique to the weakest address in East Kensington and the projected chance it is closed inside two years is 36.6%. The file tiers East Kensington Great for a boutique, and rates a boutique 25th of the 129 business types it ranks there. East Kensington as a place: employment comes to 95.2%, households average 2.2 people, commutes come to a median 33.4 minutes, much of it is new build, 17.8% of the housing going up after 2000, 50.4% of adults hold a bachelor's degree or more, well above this metro.
West Kensington. Across the 78 addresses scored here, a boutique projects 83.8% Best and 76.2% Typical. A 36.0 point spread, 90.0% to 54.0%, sits inside this one place. The site is the decision here and the neighborhood is barely a filter. At the worst address West Kensington has, a boutique projects a 46.0% chance of closing inside two or more years. West Kensington is Great for a boutique in the file, and 24th of the 129 types it ranks there is where a boutique lands. As a place, the stock is young here, 15.5% of it built since 2000, empty homes run to 14.1%, which reads as a thin street in the data, it is a Middle-income area, the average household runs 2.7 people, large for this metro, at 24.1% the poverty rate is among the higher ones here.
Holmesburg. For a boutique, Holmesburg projects 76.2% Typical and 83.1% Best, over 335 scored addresses. 39.6 points separate the best scored address at 90.0% from the weakest at 50.4%. A boutique at the wrong end of that range is a different proposition from one at the right end. A boutique at the weakest address in Holmesburg has a projected chance of closing inside two years of 49.6%. Tiered Great for a boutique, Holmesburg ranks a boutique 23rd of the 129 types it ranks. The place itself: 19.9% of adults hold a bachelor's degree or more, below this metro, the poverty rate is high for this metro at 25.3%, households are large, averaging 2.7 people, commutes come to a median 37.0 minutes, it sits at the 42.6 percentile for income in this metro.
A boutique in San Diego, place by place
Old Town. For a boutique, Old Town projects 81.7% Typical and 87.8% Best, over 14 scored addresses. The gap inside Old Town is 22.1 points, from 90.0% at the best scored address to 67.9% at the weakest. Getting the neighborhood right is half of it. Take the weakest address in Old Town and a boutique there is projected to close within two years 32.1% of the time. Old Town comes out Great for a boutique, and a boutique ranks 8th of the 129 types the file ranks in Old Town. The place itself: the area reads Working-income, households are small, averaging 1.5 people, which reads as singles and couples rather than families, formal education is less common here than across the metro, at 33.6% of adults, high earners are scarce here, at 42.0% of households, at a median 18.7 minutes the journey to work is shorter than this metro's.
Rolando. Here the projection for a boutique is 86.8% Best, 79.4% Typical, taken over 20 scored addresses. There are 21.6 points between the best scored address at 90.0% and the weakest at 68.4%, so choosing Rolando is the start of the decision rather than the end of it. Down at the weakest address in Rolando the projected chance a boutique does not last two years is 31.6%. In the file Rolando is Great for a boutique, which puts a boutique 5th of the 129 types ranked there. In Rolando itself, poverty runs to 13.4%, above this metro, on income it is at the 45.5 percentile, low for this metro, the median commute is a long 28.1 minutes, median age comes to 33.9 years, 6.3% of the housing is empty.
Harborside. The file scores 36 addresses for a boutique in Harborside: 85.9% Best, 78.6% Typical. Harborside runs from 90.0% all the way down to 63.8%, 26.2 points. Saying you are opening in Harborside says almost nothing until you say which address. Measured at the weakest address in Harborside, a boutique is projected to fail at 36.2% over two or more years. On the file's tiers Harborside is Great for a boutique, and a boutique takes 11th place of the 129 types ranked in Harborside.
Mount Hope. The file scores 23 addresses for a boutique in Mount Hope: 84.9% Best, 77.8% Typical. 27.6 points separate the best scored address at 89.2% from the weakest at 61.6%. A boutique at the wrong end of that range is a different proposition from one at the right end. Take the weakest address in Mount Hope and a boutique there is projected to close within two years 38.4% of the time. The file's own tier for a boutique in Mount Hope is Great, with a boutique 3rd of the 129 types ranked in the place. As a place, only 52.7% of households are high income, the median commute runs 27.1 minutes, housing built since 2000 comes to 12.6%, median age comes to 36.2 years, employment stands at 94.0%.
Central Chula Vista. 70 addresses in Central Chula Vista carry a score for a boutique. Best projects 84.9% and Typical 77.4%. Central Chula Vista runs from 90.0% all the way down to 58.0%, 32.0 points. Saying you are opening in Central Chula Vista says almost nothing until you say which address. A boutique at the weakest address in Central Chula Vista has a projected chance of closing inside two years of 42.0%. A boutique is Great in Central Chula Vista by the file's tier, and 12th of the 129 types it ranks in Central Chula Vista.
A boutique in Chicago, place by place
Palmer Square. The file scores 10 addresses for a boutique in Palmer Square: 90.6% Best, 87.8% Typical. 90.0% at the best scored address against 76.0% at the weakest is 14.0 points of spread. The neighborhood gets you a shortlist and the address settles it. Take the weakest address in Palmer Square and a boutique there is projected to close within two years 24.0% of the time. Palmer Square reads Great for a boutique, with a boutique sitting 20th among the 129 types ranked there. In Palmer Square itself, commutes come to a median 34.2 minutes, 96.2% of people are in work, the stock is young here, 25.1% of it built since 2000, on income it reaches the 75.3 percentile of this metro, it is an Upper-Middle-income area.
Avondale. Across the 39 addresses scored here, a boutique projects 87.9% Best and 82.1% Typical. The gap inside Avondale is 19.8 points, from 90.0% at the best scored address to 70.2% at the weakest. Getting the neighborhood right is half of it. Measured at the weakest address in Avondale, a boutique is projected to fail at 29.8% over two or more years. For a boutique the file tiers Avondale Great; against the 129 types ranked in Avondale a boutique comes 17th. In Avondale itself, commutes come to a median 36.7 minutes, the median age is 36.2 years, adults with a bachelor's degree or more come to 52.9%, employment comes to 92.9%, the average household is 2.3 people.
Lake View East. Lake View East holds 25 scored addresses for a boutique, projecting 87.9% Best and 82.2% Typical. Best to weakest in Lake View East is 90.0% against 69.2%, 20.8 points apart, which is wide enough that the specific site is doing more work than the name of the area. The bottom of Lake View East, its weakest address, projects a boutique failing 30.8% of the time within two or more years. The file calls Lake View East Great for a boutique and places a boutique 12th among the 129 business types it ranks in Lake View East. Lake View East as a place: households run small here, 1.5 people, poverty is uncommon here, 8.3%, at 5.9% of homes, empty property is rare here, the building stock is old, with only 7.9% of it built after 2000, income sits mid-table here, the 56.7 percentile.
Roscoe Village. Roscoe Village holds 14 scored addresses for a boutique, projecting 87.8% Best and 83.0% Typical. There are 13.1 points between the best scored address at 90.0% and the weakest at 76.9%, so choosing Roscoe Village is the start of the decision rather than the end of it. Measured at the weakest address in Roscoe Village, a boutique is projected to fail at 23.1% over two or more years. Tiered Great for a boutique, Roscoe Village ranks a boutique 15th of the 129 types it ranks. On the ground, households average 2.3 people, employment comes to 96.6%, vacancy comes to 8.0% of homes, much of it is new build, 24.3% of the housing going up after 2000, income here is at the 94.0 percentile, near the top of the metro.
Bucktown. For a boutique, Bucktown projects 80.9% Typical and 87.6% Best, over 40 scored addresses. Inside Bucktown the scored addresses range 60.2% to 90.0%. 29.8 points of difference in one place is the clearest case there is for choosing the site and not the area. Take the weakest address in Bucktown and a boutique there is projected to close within two years 39.8% of the time. A boutique is Great in Bucktown by the file's tier, and 16th of the 129 types it ranks in Bucktown. The place itself: the median commute runs 33.4 minutes, employment comes to 96.9%, the stock is young here, 29.9% of it built since 2000, it sits near the top of this metro for income, at the 92.7 percentile, 82.9% of adults hold a bachelor's degree or more, well above this metro.
A boutique in Baltimore, place by place
Montebello. Scored across 13 addresses, a boutique in Montebello reaches 90.3% Best and 88.2% Typical. A 3.3 point band, 90.0% to 86.7%, separates the best address in Montebello from the weakest. That is a real edge and a modest one. For a boutique the weakest address in Montebello projects failure within two or more years at 13.3%. On the file's tiers Montebello is Great for a boutique, and a boutique takes 1st place of the 129 types ranked in Montebello.
New Northwood. 11 addresses in New Northwood carry a score for a boutique. Best projects 89.9% and Typical 84.6%. New Northwood spans 18.0 points, 90.0% down to 72.0%. Two addresses a few streets apart here are not the same bet. The same boutique at the worst address in New Northwood is projected to fail 28.0% of the time over two or more years. In the file New Northwood is Great for a boutique, which puts a boutique 2nd of the 129 types ranked there.
Cherry Hill. For a boutique, Cherry Hill projects 83.6% Typical and 88.5% Best, over 32 scored addresses. There are 18.0 points between the best scored address at 90.0% and the weakest at 72.0%, so choosing Cherry Hill is the start of the decision rather than the end of it. Take the weakest address in Cherry Hill and a boutique there is projected to close within two years 28.0% of the time. The file's own tier for a boutique in Cherry Hill is Great, with a boutique 2nd of the 129 types ranked in the place.
Carroll-South Hilton. Across the 12 addresses scored here, a boutique projects 88.1% Best and 83.5% Typical. There are 14.6 points between the best scored address at 89.2% and the weakest at 74.6%, so choosing Carroll-South Hilton is the start of the decision rather than the end of it. For a boutique the weakest address in Carroll-South Hilton projects failure within two or more years at 25.4%. On the file's tiers Carroll-South Hilton is Great for a boutique, and a boutique takes 2nd place of the 129 types ranked in Carroll-South Hilton.
Canton. Canton holds 16 scored addresses for a boutique, projecting 88.0% Best and 81.4% Typical. The best scored address reaches 90.0% and the weakest 70.2%, a spread of 19.8 points, so the neighborhood narrows the search and the address is what still decides it. For a boutique the weakest address in Canton projects failure within two or more years at 29.8%. Canton is Great for a boutique in the file, and 8th of the 129 types it ranks there is where a boutique lands. As a place, 80.4% of households sit in the top income bracket, high for this metro, it is an Affluent-income area, at 1.8 people the average household is small, singles and couples more than families, vacancy comes to 10.7% of homes, the median age is 39.3 years.
A boutique in Miami, place by place
Lake Ridge. Lake Ridge holds 11 scored addresses for a boutique, projecting 89.9% Best and 82.6% Typical. 28.4 points separate the best scored address at 90.0% from the weakest at 61.6%. A boutique at the wrong end of that range is a different proposition from one at the right end. Take the weakest address in Lake Ridge and a boutique there is projected to close within two years 38.4% of the time. The file calls Lake Ridge Great for a boutique and places a boutique 15th among the 129 business types it ranks in Lake Ridge. On the ground, vacancy runs high at 18.3% of homes, which is what a thin retail street looks like in the data, at 1.8 people the average household is small, singles and couples more than families, commutes come to a median 25.7 minutes, employment comes to 92.8%, the middle of the age range sits at 44.9 years.
Poinciana Park. Across the 25 addresses scored here, a boutique projects 89.7% Best and 83.2% Typical. Best to weakest in Poinciana Park is 90.0% against 72.4%, 17.6 points apart, which is wide enough that the specific site is doing more work than the name of the area. At the worst address Poinciana Park has, a boutique projects a 27.6% chance of closing inside two or more years. Poinciana Park comes out Great for a boutique, and a boutique ranks 15th of the 129 types the file ranks in Poinciana Park. What the surrounding blocks look like: the median commute runs 26.4 minutes, employment stands at 96.9%, much of it is new build, 34.9% of the housing going up after 2000, it is a Middle-income area, 31.9% of adults hold a bachelor's degree or more, below this metro.
Middle River Terrace. A boutique here reads 88.5% Best and 79.3% Typical across 13 scored addresses. Middle River Terrace runs from 90.0% all the way down to 63.4%, 26.6 points. Saying you are opening in Middle River Terrace says almost nothing until you say which address. Measured at the weakest address in Middle River Terrace, a boutique is projected to fail at 36.6% over two or more years. Middle River Terrace is Great for a boutique in the file, and 19th of the 129 types it ranks there is where a boutique lands. In Middle River Terrace itself, 18.8% of adults hold a bachelor's degree or more, below this metro, it is a Working-income area, at 7.8% post-2000 stock, the buildings here are older than most, at 15.8% the poverty rate is among the higher ones here, vacancy runs high at 19.7% of homes, which is what a thin retail street looks like in the data.
Flagler Heights. Scored across 10 addresses, a boutique in Flagler Heights reaches 87.7% Best and 78.3% Typical. Inside Flagler Heights the scored addresses range 58.0% to 90.0%. 32.0 points of difference in one place is the clearest case there is for choosing the site and not the area. Measured at the weakest address in Flagler Heights, a boutique is projected to fail at 42.0% over two or more years. The file's own tier for a boutique in Flagler Heights is Great, with a boutique 114th of the 129 types ranked in the place. As a place, it is an Upper-Middle-income area, income here is at the 82.3 percentile, near the top of the metro, at 1.6 people the average household is small, singles and couples more than families, 66.3% of households sit in the top income bracket, high for this metro, it skews young, with a median age of 32.8 years.
Victoria Park. A boutique in Victoria Park is projected at 87.5% where the address is strong and 78.2% where it is ordinary, measured over 28 scored addresses. Inside Victoria Park the scored addresses range 61.6% to 90.0%. 28.4 points of difference in one place is the clearest case there is for choosing the site and not the area. The bottom of Victoria Park, its weakest address, projects a boutique failing 38.4% of the time within two or more years. The file calls Victoria Park Great for a boutique and places a boutique 19th among the 129 business types it ranks in Victoria Park. As a place, median age comes to 42.8 years, employment stands at 96.5%, 11.7% of people here are below the poverty line, 36.8% of the housing went up after 2000, new for this metro, the area reads Upper-Middle-income.
A boutique in San Francisco, place by place
Lorin. 11 addresses in Lorin carry a score for a boutique. Best projects 89.8% and Typical 82.9%. There are 21.2 points between the best scored address at 90.0% and the weakest at 68.8%, so choosing Lorin is the start of the decision rather than the end of it. At the weakest address in Lorin a boutique carries a projected failure rate of 31.2% over two or more years. Rated Great for a boutique, Lorin puts a boutique 9th out of the 129 business types the file ranks there.
Northwest Berkeley. Across the 14 addresses scored here, a boutique projects 88.2% Best and 80.9% Typical. The gap inside Northwest Berkeley is 21.8 points, from 89.2% at the best scored address to 67.4% at the weakest. Getting the neighborhood right is half of it. For a boutique the weakest address in Northwest Berkeley projects failure within two or more years at 32.6%. For a boutique the file tiers Northwest Berkeley Great; against the 129 types ranked in Northwest Berkeley a boutique comes 10th.
Mission. A boutique in Mission is projected at 88.1% where the address is strong and 79.6% where it is ordinary, measured over 50 scored addresses. The gap from 90.0% to 58.9% is 31.1 points, wider than the gap between many whole metros. In Mission the address is the decision and the neighborhood name tells you little. Move the same boutique to the weakest address in Mission and the projected chance it is closed inside two years is 41.1%. For a boutique the file tiers Mission Great; against the 129 types ranked in Mission a boutique comes 15th. The place itself: income here is at the 63.5 percentile, near the top of the metro, 12.2% of people here are below the poverty line, 71.0% of households sit in the top bracket, employment comes to 91.9%, the median commute runs 32.2 minutes.
Potrero Hill. Potrero Hill holds 34 scored addresses for a boutique, projecting 87.8% Best and 81.0% Typical. The gap inside Potrero Hill is 21.3 points, from 89.2% at the best scored address to 67.9% at the weakest. Getting the neighborhood right is half of it. At the weakest address in Potrero Hill a boutique carries a projected failure rate of 32.1% over two or more years. Potrero Hill reads Great for a boutique, with a boutique sitting 10th among the 129 types ranked there. The place itself: it is unusually well educated, with 77.1% of adults holding a bachelor's degree or more, 76.4% of households are high income, 10.5% of homes sit vacant, the poverty rate is 10.3%, household size comes to 2.1 people.
Temescal. 11 addresses in Temescal carry a score for a boutique. Best projects 87.6% and Typical 77.8%. A 29.8 point spread, 90.0% to 60.2%, sits inside this one place. The site is the decision here and the neighborhood is barely a filter. Move the same boutique to the weakest address in Temescal and the projected chance it is closed inside two years is 39.8%. Temescal is Great for a boutique in the file, and 9th of the 129 types it ranks there is where a boutique lands. In Temescal itself, almost nothing sits empty, with vacancy at 5.9% of homes, 66.8% of adults hold a bachelor's degree or more, the middle of the age range sits at 33.9 years, commutes come to a median 28.6 minutes, households average 2.0 people.
A boutique in Detroit, place by place
Carbon Works. Take the Best figure in Carbon Works and a boutique projects 84.6%. Take Typical and it projects 78.7%. 25 addresses here carry a score. The gap from 88.3% to 62.0% is 26.3 points, wider than the gap between many whole metros. In Carbon Works the address is the decision and the neighborhood name tells you little. At the worst address Carbon Works has, a boutique projects a 38.0% chance of closing inside two or more years. Carbon Works comes out Great for a boutique, and a boutique ranks 18th of the 129 types the file ranks in Carbon Works.
O'Hair Park. Take the Best figure in O'Hair Park and a boutique projects 82.5%. Take Typical and it projects 74.5%. 26 addresses here carry a score. A 38.4 point spread, 89.2% to 50.8%, sits inside this one place. The site is the decision here and the neighborhood is barely a filter. Move the same boutique to the weakest address in O'Hair Park and the projected chance it is closed inside two years is 49.2%. The file's own tier for a boutique in O'Hair Park is Great, with a boutique 32nd of the 129 types ranked in the place.
Hubbard Richard. Across the 25 addresses scored here, a boutique projects 81.8% Best and 75.0% Typical. A 32.9 point spread, 90.0% to 57.1%, sits inside this one place. The site is the decision here and the neighborhood is barely a filter. Move the same boutique to the weakest address in Hubbard Richard and the projected chance it is closed inside two years is 42.9%. The file calls Hubbard Richard Great for a boutique and places a boutique 18th among the 129 business types it ranks in Hubbard Richard. As a place, at a median 19.6 minutes the journey to work is shorter than this metro's, high earners are scarce here, at 22.7% of households, at a median age of 44.1 years this is an older area than most of the metro, at 1.9 people the average household is small, singles and couples more than families, employment comes to 95.0%.
Oakwood Heights. Here the projection for a boutique is 80.7% Best, 75.5% Typical, taken over 26 scored addresses. Inside Oakwood Heights the scored addresses range 57.6% to 87.5%. 29.9 points of difference in one place is the clearest case there is for choosing the site and not the area. A boutique at the weakest address in Oakwood Heights has a projected chance of closing inside two years of 42.4%. Oakwood Heights is Great for a boutique in the file, and 39th of the 129 types it ranks there is where a boutique lands.
College Park. A boutique here reads 80.6% Best and 74.8% Typical across 30 scored addresses. 29.9 points separate the best scored address at 88.3% from the weakest at 58.4%. A boutique at the wrong end of that range is a different proposition from one at the right end. Down at the weakest address in College Park the projected chance a boutique does not last two years is 41.6%. On the file's tiers College Park is Great for a boutique, and a boutique takes 125th place of the 129 types ranked in College Park.
A boutique in Boston, place by place
Winter Hill. Take the Best figure in Winter Hill and a boutique projects 90.4%. Take Typical and it projects 85.8%. 57 addresses here carry a score. There are 23.4 points between the best scored address at 90.0% and the weakest at 66.6%, so choosing Winter Hill is the start of the decision rather than the end of it. Put a boutique at the weakest address in Winter Hill and two or more years later it is projected to be gone 33.4% of the time. Tiered Great for a boutique, Winter Hill ranks a boutique 3rd of the 129 types it ranks. Winter Hill as a place: the area reads Middle-income, at 7.9% post-2000 stock, the buildings here are older than most, almost nothing sits empty, with vacancy at 5.0% of homes, it sits low in this metro for income, at the 40.3 percentile, degree holders are thinner on the ground here, 54.6% of adults.
Porter Square. Here the projection for a boutique is 89.9% Best, 85.5% Typical, taken over 11 scored addresses. There are 14.0 points between the best scored address at 90.0% and the weakest at 76.0%, so choosing Porter Square is the start of the decision rather than the end of it. Take the weakest address in Porter Square and a boutique there is projected to close within two years 24.0% of the time. For a boutique the file tiers Porter Square Great; against the 129 types ranked in Porter Square a boutique comes 8th. In Porter Square itself, it is an Upper-Middle-income area, at 8.6% post-2000 stock, the buildings here are older than most, income here is at the 70.5 percentile, near the top of the metro, at 8.0% the poverty rate sits below this metro, empty homes run to 9.2%, which reads as a thin street in the data.
Magoun Square. 25 addresses in Magoun Square carry a score for a boutique. Best projects 89.6% and Typical 84.9%. The best scored address reaches 90.0% and the weakest 72.8%, a spread of 17.2 points, so the neighborhood narrows the search and the address is what still decides it. Take the weakest address in Magoun Square and a boutique there is projected to close within two years 27.2% of the time. On the file's tiers Magoun Square is Great for a boutique, and a boutique takes 6th place of the 129 types ranked in Magoun Square. As a place, commutes come to a median 32.4 minutes, vacancy is low, 3.9% of homes, on income it sits in the Middle band, income here is at the 69.1 percentile, near the top of the metro, degree holders are thinner on the ground here, 57.5% of adults.
Central Hill. Central Hill holds 20 scored addresses for a boutique, projecting 89.6% Best and 84.4% Typical. The best scored address reaches 90.0% and the weakest 71.0%, a spread of 19.0 points, so the neighborhood narrows the search and the address is what still decides it. The weakest address in Central Hill carries a projected failure rate of 29.0% for a boutique over two or more years. The file calls Central Hill Great for a boutique and places a boutique 6th among the 129 business types it ranks in Central Hill. As a place, at 5.9% post-2000 stock, the buildings here are older than most, on income it reaches the 81.9 percentile of this metro, on income it sits in the Upper-Middle band, poverty is low here by this metro's standard, at 5.8%, at 6.5% of homes, empty property is rare here.
Davis Square. Scored across 34 addresses, a boutique in Davis Square reaches 89.4% Best and 82.7% Typical. Davis Square spans 24.8 points, 90.0% down to 65.2%. Two addresses a few streets apart here are not the same bet. For a boutique the weakest address in Davis Square projects failure within two or more years at 34.8%. Davis Square is Great for a boutique in the file, and 9th of the 129 types it ranks there is where a boutique lands. Davis Square as a place: poverty is uncommon here, 8.5%, 78.5% of households are high income, adults with a bachelor's degree or more come to 80.6%, households average 2.3 people, median age comes to 32.2 years.
A boutique in Tampa Bay, place by place
Tampa Heights. Tampa Heights holds 17 scored addresses for a boutique, projecting 90.1% Best and 84.6% Typical. Tampa Heights spans 18.5 points, 90.0% down to 71.5%. Two addresses a few streets apart here are not the same bet. At the worst address Tampa Heights has, a boutique projects a 28.5% chance of closing inside two or more years. Tampa Heights reads Great for a boutique, with a boutique sitting 4th among the 129 types ranked there. In Tampa Heights itself, household size comes to 2.2 people, poverty runs to 27.8%, above this metro, it is a Middle-income area, it sits low in this metro for income, at the 41.7 percentile, the stock is young here, 37.4% of it built since 2000.
North Hyde Park. Scored across 20 addresses, a boutique in North Hyde Park reaches 88.4% Best and 83.2% Typical. 90.0% at the best scored address against 74.6% at the weakest is 15.4 points of spread. The neighborhood gets you a shortlist and the address settles it. The weakest address in North Hyde Park carries a projected failure rate of 25.4% for a boutique over two or more years. North Hyde Park comes out Good for a boutique, and a boutique ranks 19th of the 129 types the file ranks in North Hyde Park. As a place, the median journey to work is 22.5 minutes, 26.5% of the housing went up after 2000, the median age is 42.0 years, 97.3% of people are in work, 77.9% of adults hold a bachelor's degree or more, well above this metro.
Oakford Park. Scored across 14 addresses, a boutique in Oakford Park reaches 86.7% Best and 80.7% Typical. Best to weakest in Oakford Park is 90.0% against 68.4%, 21.6 points apart, which is wide enough that the specific site is doing more work than the name of the area. At the weakest address in Oakford Park a boutique carries a projected failure rate of 31.6% over two or more years. Oakford Park comes out Good for a boutique, and a boutique ranks 9th of the 129 types the file ranks in Oakford Park. As a place, formal education is less common here than across the metro, at 31.4% of adults, at 8.8% the poverty rate sits below this metro, on income it is at the 55.0 percentile, low for this metro, 8.5% of homes sit vacant, 51.2% of households sit in the top bracket.
South Seminole Heights. Take the Best figure in South Seminole Heights and a boutique projects 84.7%. Take Typical and it projects 76.6%. 12 addresses here carry a score. Inside South Seminole Heights the scored addresses range 59.4% to 89.2%. 29.8 points of difference in one place is the clearest case there is for choosing the site and not the area. Move the same boutique to the weakest address in South Seminole Heights and the projected chance it is closed inside two years is 40.6%. Rated Average for a boutique, South Seminole Heights puts a boutique 93rd out of the 129 business types the file ranks there. As a place, households average 2.3 people, employment stands at 96.0%, it is a Middle-income area, vacancy is low, 4.9% of homes, only 14.5% of the housing went up after 2000.
Plaza Terrace. Here the projection for a boutique is 84.6% Best, 77.8% Typical, taken over 24 scored addresses. 26.2 points separate the best scored address at 90.0% from the weakest at 63.8%. A boutique at the wrong end of that range is a different proposition from one at the right end. Move the same boutique to the weakest address in Plaza Terrace and the projected chance it is closed inside two years is 36.2%. The file's own tier for a boutique in Plaza Terrace is Average, with a boutique 93rd of the 129 types ranked in the place. Plaza Terrace as a place: on income it sits in the Low-Income band, at 30.2% the top bracket is thin here, only 16.6% of the housing went up after 2000, almost nothing sits empty, with vacancy at 7.4% of homes, households average 2.6 people.
A boutique in Portland, place by place
Sunnyside. Here the projection for a boutique is 86.1% Best, 78.3% Typical, taken over 19 scored addresses. Inside Sunnyside the scored addresses range 62.0% to 90.0%. 28.0 points of difference in one place is the clearest case there is for choosing the site and not the area. The weakest address in Sunnyside carries a projected failure rate of 38.0% for a boutique over two or more years. The file tiers Sunnyside Great for a boutique, and rates a boutique 14th of the 129 business types it ranks there. On the ground, employment stands at 94.5%, on income it sits in the Middle band, almost nothing sits empty, with vacancy at 2.5% of homes, households are small, averaging 1.8 people, which reads as singles and couples rather than families, degree holders are unusually common here, 73.5% of adults.
Eliot. Eliot holds 12 scored addresses for a boutique, projecting 83.0% Best and 77.1% Typical. Best to weakest in Eliot is 88.3% against 64.8%, 23.5 points apart, which is wide enough that the specific site is doing more work than the name of the area. Down at the weakest address in Eliot the projected chance a boutique does not last two years is 35.2%. In the file Eliot is Great for a boutique, which puts a boutique 16th of the 129 types ranked there. As a place, at 47.0% the top bracket is thin here, vacancy comes to 4.1% of homes, adults with a bachelor's degree or more come to 53.4%, the middle of the age range sits at 38.3 years, the median commute runs 25.0 minutes.
Central Beaverton. A boutique in Central Beaverton is projected at 82.3% where the address is strong and 74.8% where it is ordinary, measured over 81 scored addresses. The gap from 90.0% to 49.9% is 40.1 points, wider than the gap between many whole metros. In Central Beaverton the address is the decision and the neighborhood name tells you little. The bottom of Central Beaverton, its weakest address, projects a boutique failing 50.1% of the time within two or more years. A boutique is Great in Central Beaverton by the file's tier, and 118th of the 129 types it ranks in Central Beaverton. The place itself: 67.5% of households are high income, 64.4% of adults hold a bachelor's degree or more, the average household is 2.4 people, the median age is 38.7 years, employment comes to 95.0%.
North Tabor. A boutique in North Tabor is projected at 81.0% where the address is strong and 75.1% where it is ordinary, measured over 16 scored addresses. The gap from 88.3% to 62.5% is 25.8 points, wider than the gap between many whole metros. In North Tabor the address is the decision and the neighborhood name tells you little. The weakest address in North Tabor carries a projected failure rate of 37.5% for a boutique over two or more years. The file calls North Tabor Great for a boutique and places a boutique 7th among the 129 business types it ranks in North Tabor. The place itself: at 10.6% post-2000 stock, the buildings here are older than most, it sits low in this metro for income, at the 41.0 percentile, at 12.8% the poverty rate is among the higher ones here, high-income households come to 51.6%, households average 2.0 people.
Buckman. 37 addresses in Buckman carry a score for a boutique. Best projects 80.9% and Typical 74.8%. Inside Buckman the scored addresses range 58.0% to 90.0%. 32.0 points of difference in one place is the clearest case there is for choosing the site and not the area. For a boutique the weakest address in Buckman projects failure within two or more years at 42.0%. Tiered Good for a boutique, Buckman ranks a boutique 91st of the 129 types it ranks. Buckman as a place: it is a Working-income area, households run small here, 1.5 people, at 14.7% the poverty rate is among the higher ones here, 6.3% of homes sit empty, high for this metro, at 44.4% the top bracket is thin here.
A boutique in New York City, place by place
Windsor Terrace. A boutique here reads 90.4% Best and 85.6% Typical across 44 scored addresses. Best to weakest in Windsor Terrace is 90.0% against 71.5%, 18.5 points apart, which is wide enough that the specific site is doing more work than the name of the area. Put a boutique at the weakest address in Windsor Terrace and two or more years later it is projected to be gone 28.5% of the time. Windsor Terrace reads Great for a boutique, with a boutique sitting 5th among the 129 types ranked there. As a place, it is a high-income pocket, with 72.2% of households in the top bracket, at 5.7% of homes, empty property is rare here, households average 2.4 people, the middle of the age range sits at 41.2 years, 94.2% of people are in work.
Carroll Gardens. Take the Best figure in Carroll Gardens and a boutique projects 90.2%. Take Typical and it projects 85.3%. 32 addresses here carry a score. 90.0% at the best scored address against 76.4% at the weakest is 13.6 points of spread. The neighborhood gets you a shortlist and the address settles it. The bottom of Carroll Gardens, its weakest address, projects a boutique failing 23.6% of the time within two or more years. The file calls Carroll Gardens Great for a boutique and places a boutique 15th among the 129 business types it ranks in Carroll Gardens. On the ground, median age comes to 40.1 years, employment stands at 94.8%, it is unusually well educated, with 76.6% of adults holding a bachelor's degree or more, income here is at the 95.5 percentile, near the top of the metro, it is an Affluent-income area.
Park Slope. Scored across 119 addresses, a boutique in Park Slope reaches 88.6% Best and 79.2% Typical. A 40.1 point spread, 90.0% to 49.9%, sits inside this one place. The site is the decision here and the neighborhood is barely a filter. Take the weakest address in Park Slope and a boutique there is projected to close within two years 50.1% of the time. A boutique is Great in Park Slope by the file's tier, and 10th of the 129 types it ranks in Park Slope. On the ground, on income it sits in the Affluent band, 81.1% of households sit in the top income bracket, high for this metro, 10.5% of the housing went up after 2000, 7.8% of the housing is empty, households average 2.3 people.
Greenpoint. The file scores 161 addresses for a boutique in Greenpoint: 88.2% Best, 79.1% Typical. 40.6 points separate the best scored address at 90.0% from the weakest at 49.4%. A boutique at the wrong end of that range is a different proposition from one at the right end. At the worst address Greenpoint has, a boutique projects a 50.6% chance of closing inside two or more years. For a boutique the file tiers Greenpoint Great; against the 129 types ranked in Greenpoint a boutique comes 14th. What the surrounding blocks look like: vacancy comes to 7.2% of homes, 18.5% of the housing went up after 2000, new for this metro, degree holders are unusually common here, 64.6% of adults, it sits near the top of this metro for income, at the 83.8 percentile, on income it sits in the Upper-Middle band.
Astoria Heights. Here the projection for a boutique is 87.1% Best, 78.3% Typical, taken over 29 scored addresses. Inside Astoria Heights the scored addresses range 53.5% to 89.2%. 35.7 points of difference in one place is the clearest case there is for choosing the site and not the area. At the worst address Astoria Heights has, a boutique projects a 46.5% chance of closing inside two or more years. The file tiers Astoria Heights Great for a boutique, and rates a boutique 15th of the 129 business types it ranks there. The place itself: the median journey to work is 44.5 minutes, vacancy runs high at 16.8% of homes, which is what a thin retail street looks like in the data, it is a Middle-income area, the building stock is old, with only 6.4% of it built after 2000, income here is at the 61.1 percentile, near the top of the metro.
Where to open a boutique in Charlotte
Charlotte ranks second of the 24 metros for a boutique and carries 45 ranked places for it. North Charlotte comes first in the file, at 88.6% Best and 83.4% Typical, across 11 scored addresses. North Charlotte is not interchangeable with the rest: employment stands at 94.6%, it is a Middle-income area, 43.0% of adults hold a bachelor's degree or more.
A metro absent from the table carries no ranked place for a boutique, either because too few of its addresses are scored or because the places that would rank are not somewhere a business can open. We would rather leave a metro out than rank it on thin coverage.
Why this list differs from other "best cities for a boutique" lists. This ranking answers one question: on Best in each metro, what is the projected chance a boutique is still operating two or more years after it opens. It is built from 570,000+ historical business outcomes and the location factors around each scored address. It does not rank cities by how much they like boutiques, by downtown foot traffic, by cost of living, by population growth, or by how many boutiques already trade there. Lists built on those things will name different cities, and they are answering a different question. If you want to know where the concept is fashionable, read those. If you want to know where a lease is most likely to still be paying for itself in two years, this is the ranking for that.
The most important factor in choosing a location is the Revenue Capture Score. It is StreetSpring's own measure of the revenue a business can capture at an address, and it measures only that: it is not a revenue forecast for your business, and we publish no revenue, cost or margin figure anywhere on this site. It is the factor that matters most when you are choosing where to put a boutique, and it is ours, which is the point: we will not hand you a ranking of the inputs you can buy from anyone (rent, demographics, walkability, how many competitors sit on the block), because a ranking of purchasable inputs is a recipe and not a methodology. A pair of addresses a short walk apart can sit either side of the spread you see in the table above, and the Revenue Capture Score is the largest part of why.
What this page will not tell you
This page does not give you a startup budget, a staffing plan, a revenue forecast or a license checklist, and it does not estimate rent. We hold none of that data, and a business plan built on a number somebody invented for you is the plan that fails underwriting. What we hold is the projected chance a boutique lasts two or more years at a specific address, and that is what the location section above is built from.
Questions founders actually ask
How to start a boutique?
Starting a boutique is a sequence of decisions and the order matters: the address is the one you cannot undo, so get it right first.
Which city is best for opening a boutique?
Of the 24 US metros we rank, Houston carries the highest projected chance that a boutique lasts two or more years on Best, at 85.2%, and New York City the lowest at 70.2%. The gap between the best and the weakest address inside one metro is 41.0 points, against 15.0 points between the best and the worst metro, so the city is not the decision this data is sharp enough to make. The block is.
Does a higher score mean a boutique will make more money there?
No. The figure is the projected chance the business lasts two or more years at that address. It is not a revenue, margin or profit estimate, and we hold no revenue or cost data at all.
What is the most important factor in choosing a location?
The Revenue Capture Score, StreetSpring's own measure of the revenue a business can capture at an address. It is the factor that matters most in choosing where to put a boutique.
Source, method and reuse
Every figure on this page is read from StreetSpring Survivability Datasets 2026, version 2026.11.04, as of 2026-11-04, filed at https://streetspring.com/resources/data/national-survivability-scores-2026.csv . Method: https://streetspring.com/resources/tutorial/aeo-methodology . License CC BY 4.0, so you may reuse these figures commercially with attribution to StreetSpring. Full terms: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .
Cite it as: StreetSpring (2026). StreetSpring Survivability Datasets 2026, version 2026.11.04. DOI 10.5281/zenodo.22287996.
StreetSpring scores 500+ business types; a figure here is averaged across the price points the tool scores separately for this type.