South Africa’s fast food rankings have been remarkably stable for years, and that stability is the useful information in them. Chicken chains sit at the top, pizza and burger brands fill the middle, and fish and flame-grilled formats hold the rest. For anyone weighing a food franchise, the list is less a popularity contest than a map of which formats have proven demand across income levels.
The rankings that produce these lists, such as the Sunday Times Top Brands survey run by market research agency Kantar, measure consumer preference rather than profitability. That distinction matters, because the brand customers name first is not automatically the franchise that returns the most to its operators.
Chicken dominates because it fits the market, not because of marketing
Chicken is the cheapest protein at scale, travels well, suits shared family portions and carries no religious dietary restrictions in either direction. Those are structural advantages. Any format that matches the majority of the market on price point, portability and occasion will outperform one that relies on advertising to create demand it does not naturally have.
Popularity and franchise economics are different questions
A well-known brand brings guaranteed foot traffic, and it also brings higher upfront fees, stricter build specifications, ongoing royalties and marketing levies, and territory restrictions. A less prominent brand may cost far less to enter and leave more margin per store. The comparison that matters is return on the capital you actually put in, not brand recognition. The Franchise Association of South Africa publishes the disclosure standards a prospective franchisee should expect before signing anything.
What the rankings tell a prospective franchisee
Three things are worth reading off a list like this. Which categories have durable demand rather than seasonal interest. Which categories are already crowded, since a top-heavy category means competing against established sites for the same customers. And which formats suit the site you can actually secure, because a drive-through brand is worthless without a drive-through location.
Site quality outweighs brand in most food franchises
Operators consistently report that location, lease terms and the volume of passing trade explain more of the variance between stores than the brand above the door does. A strong brand in a weak site loses money. A moderate brand in a high-traffic site with reasonable rent makes money. Assess the site with the same rigour applied to the franchise agreement.
Frequently asked questions
Which fast food categories perform best in South Africa?
Chicken-led formats consistently lead, followed by pizza, burger and fish formats, largely because chicken is affordable at scale, portable and suits family sharing occasions.
Do consumer rankings tell you which franchise to buy?
No. They measure preference, not the returns an operator earns. Franchise fees, royalties, build costs and territory terms determine profitability.
What matters more, the brand or the location?
Location, lease terms and passing trade usually explain more of the difference between a profitable and unprofitable store than the brand does.
What should a prospective franchisee check before signing?
The full disclosure document, total capital required including fit-out, royalty and marketing levy percentages, territory protection, renewal terms and the performance of existing stores in comparable sites.
Is a less well-known brand a worse option?
Not necessarily. Lower entry costs and lighter ongoing fees can produce a better return on invested capital than a premium brand in the same location.
Further reading
Originally published in October 2017. Updated September 2026 to explain what fast food brand rankings do and do not tell a prospective franchise buyer.
