QSR Burger Benchmark 2025: Top U.S. Fast Food Chains Ranked by Customer Experience

In the fiercely competitive world of American quick-service restaurants (QSRs), burger chains are in a constant battle - not just for taste and speed, but for the hearts and loyalty of their customers. The QSR Burger Benchmark Report 2025, powered by CustomerHero, offers the most comprehensive, data-driven analysis of customer experience in the industry today.

Drawing from over 1.8 million Google reviews and backed by advanced AI sentiment analysis, this report reveals exactly how leading burger brands, from McDonald’s to Mooyah, are performing across the factors that matter most to customers: staff friendliness, order accuracy, food temperature, value for money, and more.

Whether you’re a brand operator, marketer, or CX strategist, this benchmark isn’t just a ranking. It’s a roadmap. One that shows where you stand in the market, where your competitors excel (or fail), and how to turn real feedback into real growth.

Objective

Evaluate and compare customer experiences across the top burger-focused Quick Service Restaurants (QSR) in the USA.

Scope

The report analyzes customer sentiment exclusively from Google Reviews to provide an unbiased, data-driven benchmark.

Methodology Overview

This report evaluates customer experience across leading burger-focused QSR brands in the USA using a data-driven approach.

• Data Collection: Reviews were sourced exclusively from Google Reviews between January 1st, 2024, and December 31st, 2024. For brands with over 100 locations, a random 10% sample was selected; for smaller brands, all locations were included to ensure a fair comparison.
  
  
• AI-Powered Sentiment Analysis: Natural Language Processing (NLP) algorithms assess customer sentiment by assigning a score from -1 (negative) to 1 (positive) based on keyword analysis.
  
  
• Scoring Model: Performance was measured using a weighted system, incorporating Google star ratings, Net Sentiment Score (NSS) for overall satisfaction, and Complaint Rate (CR) for service aspects customers expect to be consistently positive.
  
  

By leveraging AI-driven insights and a structured sampling approach, this methodology ensures a balanced, objective benchmark for comparing customer experiences across different brands.

About Us

At CustomerHero, our journey began with a simple yet powerful belief: customer feedback should drive business transformation. We saw an industry overflowing with customer data but lacking the tools to turn that data into meaningful action. Our mission has been clear from the start: turning feedback into action, companies into customer heroes.

Founded 15 years ago in Poland, CustomerHero has grown into a trusted partner for businesses worldwide. We built our company to bridge the gap between customer sentiment and business strategy. Instead of just collecting feedback, we designed a solution that decodes customer opinions, revealing what truly drives loyalty, operational efficiency, and long-term growth.

Our foundation lies in Voice of the Customer (VoC) research and AI-driven analytics, but our passion is helping businesses make data-driven decisions that shape exceptional customer experiences. Unlike traditional CX tools that are complex, costly, or disconnected from real business needs, we built CustomerHero as an intuitive, scalable, and high-impact platform—one that makes deep customer insights accessible and actionable.

The QSR Burger Benchmark 2025 is a direct extension of this mission. The quick-service restaurant industry moves fast, and customer expectations are higher than ever. Through this benchmark, we provide unparalleled clarity into what defines QSR success, helping brands assess their strengths, identify areas for improvement, and make data-driven changes that elevate customer satisfaction.

Today, CustomerHero is trusted by over 200 brands—from industry leaders to fast-growing challengers. But no matter the client, our approach remains the same: listen, analyze, and act.

Because in a world where customer voices shape brand success, those who truly listen don’t just survive—they lead.

Methodology

This section outlines the methodology used to evaluate and compare customer experiences across top burger-focused Quick Service Restaurants (QSR) in the USA. The analysis focuses on customer sentiment from Google Reviews, providing a comprehensive, data-driven benchmark.

Data Source

Reviews for this report were collected exclusively from Google Reviews, covering the period from January 1st, 2024, to December 31st, 2024. We analyzed reviews from multiple locations of each brand to ensure a broad and representative sample of customer experiences. The specific number of locations for each brand varies based on availability.

Review Selection Criteria

To ensure the quality of the data, only reviews with a minimum length of 20 characters were included. This filter excludes low-value comments such as "OK" or single-word reviews that don’t provide enough insight into the customer experience.

Each review was categorized as either positive or negative using sentiment analysis. This classification allowed us to gain a clearer understanding of customer sentiment and identify areas where brands are performing well or could improve.

Scoring Model

• Google Star Ratings: The Google star ratings (ranging from 1 to 5) were analyzed for each review and categorized by various factors such as service, food quality, and atmosphere. These ratings provide a broad view of overall customer satisfaction.
  
  
• AI-Powered Sentiment Analysis: Advanced AI-driven sentiment analysis was used to evaluate customer sentiment across key experience factors. NLP algorithms assigned each keyword a score from -1 (negative) to 1 (positive), enabling a precise, data-driven assessment of brand performance.
  
  
• Net Sentiment Score (NSS):
  The Net Sentiment Score (NSS) was calculated for topics that tend to generate either positive or negative sentiment. NSS is determined by the following formula:

This score reflects the overall sentiment of customer comments on specific topics, allowing for a more granular understanding of customer perceptions.

• Complaint Rate (CR): For topics that are generally expected to have positive feedback, we measured the Complaint Rate (CR). This metric focuses on areas where customers' expectations are high, and complaints are likely to occur if the experience doesn't meet those expectations. The CR is calculated as the sum of complaints across all locations, and a lower CR suggests better performance.
  
  

Weighting Based on Review Volume

To ensure fairness in the comparison, we applied a weighting system based on review volume for each brand. Brands with a higher number of reviews had their scores adjusted to reflect their larger customer base, ensuring that no single brand's performance disproportionately influences the overall benchmark.

This comprehensive methodology allows us to provide a clear and unbiased comparison of customer experiences across leading burger-focused QSR brands, offering valuable insights into performance strengths and areas for improvement.

Weighting based on review volume per brand to ensure fairness.

To ensure a representative and comparable dataset, we applied a sampling approach based on the number of QSR locations per brand.

• For brands with more than 100 locations, we randomly selected reviews from 10% of their locations.
• For brands with fewer than 100 locations, we included reviews from all available locations.

This methodology provides a balanced and fair comparison across brands, preventing data from being skewed by the sheer number of reviews from larger chains while still maintaining statistical reliability.

Why we are not dividing by QSR / Fast Casual

We recognize that brands in this market vary in terms of pricing and service models, with some positioned as lower-cost QSRs and others as more premium Fast Casual restaurants. Instead of segmenting based on pricing, we chose to standardize comparisons by focusing on location volume. By applying this approach, we aim to create a more balanced benchmark, making brands more comparable regardless of their market positioning.

Participating QSR Brands

The report categorizes QSR brands based on their market presence and size:

Enterprise Companies (2000+ locations)

• McDonald’s (Locations: 13,293, Reviews: 1,388,229, Comments: 715,183)
  
  

• Burger King (Locations: 6,583, Reviews: 315,333, Comments: 192,707)
  
  

• Wendy’s (Locations: 5,797, Reviews: 427,750, Comments: 240,403)
  
  

• Jack in the Box (Locations: 2,173, Reviews: 141,852, Comments: 74,666)
  
  

• Sonic Drive-In (Locations: 3,473, Reviews: 185,946, Comments: 108,629)
  

Large Companies (501–2000 locations)

• Culver’s (Locations: 973, Reviews: 153,767, Comments: 81,384)
  
  

• Freddy’s Frozen Custard & Steakburgers (Locations: 505, Reviews: 48,798, Comments: 32,411)
  
  

• Five Guys (Locations: 1,477, Reviews: 76,146, Comments: 43,440)
  
  

• Carl’s Jr. (Locations: 1,028, Reviews: 84,178, Comments: 53,144)
  
  

• Whataburger (Locations: 1,045, Reviews: 178,884, Comments: 96,469)
  
  

• Hardee’s (Locations: 1,569, Reviews: 105,900, Comments: 59,991)
  
  

Medium Companies (101–501 locations)

• In-N-Out Burger (Locations: 415, Reviews: 158,118, Comments: 73,049)
  
  

• Habit Burger Grill (Locations: 341, Reviews: 22,555, Comments: 13,487)
  
  

• Farmer Boys (Locations: 102, Reviews: 10,580, Comments: 5,820)
  
  

• Wayback Burgers (Locations: 143, Reviews: 11,733, Comments: 8,718)
  
  

• Smashburger (Locations: 183, Reviews: 27,749, Comments: 20,100)
  
  

• Shake Shack (Locations: 345, Reviews: 54,629, Comments: 33,593)
  
  

• White Castle (Locations: 332, Reviews: 41,873, Comments: 21,424)
  
  

• Cook Out (Locations: 318, Reviews: 36,901, Comments: 20,251)
  
  

• A&W All American Food (Locations: 448, Reviews: 18,833, Comments: 10,635)
  
  

• Checkers* (Locations: 501, Reviews: 34,930, Comments: 20,281)
  
  

• Steak 'n Shake (Locations: 388, Reviews: 39,326, Comments: 23,596)
  
  

• Rally’s* (Locations: 281, Reviews: 20,230, Comments: 11,289)
  
  

• Krystal Company (Locations: 261, Reviews: 18,618, Comments: 10,567)
  
  

• Jack’s Family Restaurants (Locations: 215, Reviews: 17,019, Comments: 9,092)
  
  

Small Companies (20–100 locations)

• Pal’s Sudden Service (Locations: 22, Reviews: 1,607, Comments: 791)
  
  

• Mooyah (Locations: 80, Reviews: 12,448, Comments: 9,002)
  
  

• Hopdoddy Burger Bar (Locations: 47, Reviews: 10,957, Comments: 6,408)
  
  

• P. Terry’s Burger Stand (Locations: 34, Reviews: 5,346, Comments: 2,926)
  
  

• BurgerFi (Locations: 84, Reviews: 15,959, Comments: 13,250)
  
  

• Hat Creek Burger Co. (Locations: 27, Reviews: 3,305, Comments: 12,055)
  
  

• Smalls Sliders (Locations: 20, Reviews: 2,403, Comments: 1,737)
  
  

• Fuddruckers (Locations: 51, Reviews: 6,823, Comments: 3,995)
  
  

• Savvy Sliders (Locations: 43, Reviews: 4,832, Comments: 3,737)
  
  

• Fatburger (Locations: 95, Reviews: 5,862, Comments: 4,138)
  
  

• Wahlburgers (Locations: 95, Reviews: 5,783, Comments: 4,548)
  
  

• Burgerville (Locations: 38, Reviews: 4,676, Comments: 2,860)
  
  

(*Checkers and Rally’s share ownership but are treated separately in this report due to their distinct Google Reviews listings.)

Sentiment Analysis from Reviews

‍

The Sentiment Popularity Matrix and accompanying sentiment distribution charts provide a comprehensive view of how different customer experience topics are perceived across the QSR market. The matrix visualizes the relationship between topic popularity (percentage of comments) and sentiment (Net Sentiment Score), helping brands pinpoint key strengths, weaknesses, and opportunities.

‍

Our Commentary

The Sentiment Popularity Matrix provides a comprehensive view of customer feedback trends across the entire QSR market, identifying key strengths like staff friendliness, which foster brand loyalty, and opportunities such as cleanliness, where improvements can enhance perception. Weaknesses and threats, like order accuracy and problem resolution, highlight high complaint volumes and negative sentiment, marking critical areas for action. The sentiment distribution charts further reveal what matters most to customers, helping brands prioritize improvements that enhance guest experience and safeguard reputation.

For businesses looking for a more tailored perspective, our premium report includes individual brand sentiment matrices, offering a deep dive into the unique challenges and strengths of each QSR chain. These exclusive insights help brands pinpoint their competitive edge, understand where they stand against industry benchmarks, and develop data-driven strategies to improve customer experience and market positioning. With brand-specific sentiment analysis, businesses can transform customer feedback into actionable improvements that drive loyalty, reputation, and long-term success.

Industry Commentary

"Understanding the voice of your local customer is critical to winning in your local markets. This QSR benchmark report from CustomerHero highlights just how much consumer sentiment varies by location—and why a one-size-fits-all approach doesn’t cut it. By analyzing competitor reviews and identifying the key drivers of positive and negative experiences, brands can develop hyper-local strategies that give them an edge. Want to dominate your market? Start by listening to what your customers—and your competitors’ customers—are saying."

— Zack Hamilton, SVP, Head of Growth Strategy & Enablement

Commentary: How Smart Brands Improve Their Google Ratings

By Marcin Racino, Head of AI, CustomerHero

I’ve been working on this benchmark for months and have personally visited many of the brands in this report. One thing is clear: brands that actively ask for feedback on Google Maps consistently outperform competitors in ratings.

You can see this with Smashburger, Mooyah, and BurgerFi—brands that rank notably higher than their direct competitors in review scores. And it’s not just their overall ratings—look at how they perform in Key Performance Categories such as Staff Friendliness & Attitude or in the overall CustomerHero Benchmark Winners ranking. Their ability to drive more engagement directly correlates with stronger brand perception and guest satisfaction.

What’s their secret? They simply ask for reviews. I’ve seen QR codes on table tents, receipts, restroom doors, and even digital kiosks, all encouraging guests to leave feedback. It’s basic psychology—happy customers need a nudge to share their experience, while unhappy ones don’t need an invitation to complain. Just reminding guests that they can leave a review drives more positive feedback and improves overall ratings.

This strategy is effective, but brands can go further. That’s where Local Review Booster by CustomerHero comes in. Many QSRs already use customer satisfaction surveys (through platforms like SMG, Qualtrics, and Medallia), but they don’t always translate into public reviews. With our system, once a guest leaves positive feedback, they are automatically redirected to Google Maps to post a review. If the feedback is negative, they stay in the survey, allowing the business to address the issue before it becomes a public complaint.

The best part? It’s fully automated—once set up, positive reviews flow in effortlessly, strengthening a brand’s online reputation without extra effort from staff. A simple tweak to how brands request feedback can have a direct and lasting impact on their ratings, customer trust, and overall success.

Performance Across Key Topics

‍

Staff Friendliness & Attitude

Small Companies

"The staff was very friendly, with the manager chit-chatting about family stuff like we were old friends."
— Jesse, Hat Creek Burger Co.’s client

Commentary: Small chains consistently outperform larger competitors in staff friendliness, reinforcing the local engagement advantage. In 2025, customers increasingly value personalized service as automation rises in larger brands. The ability to create familiar, community-driven interactions strengthens sentiment, setting small companies apart from corporate-driven service models.

Medium Companies

"Stopped after long drive up after evacuating Florida ahead of Hurricane Milton and stopped for supper. (...) Our poor workers were doing their best, considering they had no soda on hand. (…) but they still had a line, still serving customer after customer, and still had a smile on all their faces."
— Crystal, Cook Out’s client

Commentary: This underscores a key challenge for mid-sized QSRs in 2024—balancing operational efficiency with service quality. Supply chain disruptions and labor shortages remain pressing issues, yet brands that foster a positive employee culture can offset logistical setbacks. Cook Out’s staff resilience illustrates how attitude plays a crucial role in mitigating operational stress.

Large Companies

"The staff works well together and you can see it each time you dine in. They move and groove very well together, making the dining-in experience great."
— Emily, Whataburger’s client

Commentary: Team coordination is emerging as a differentiator among large QSR chains, as staff friendliness and positive interactions become increasingly important. Although Whataburger does not lead this topic, it stands out for its team-oriented service culture, which customers appreciate. Higher-ranked brands demonstrate more consistent staff engagement, suggesting that structured employee training and morale-boosting initiatives contribute to stronger sentiment in this segment.

Enterprise Companies

"Food is fine but we need to work on the service more. If you're not happy with your job, why do you work there?"
— Frostbyte, Wendy’s client

Commentary: The service gap in enterprise chains continues to widen as high turnover rates and cost-cutting measures impact frontline staff engagement. Many major brands prioritize automation and efficiency, often at the expense of service quality. As a result, disengaged employees contribute to poor customer interactions, reinforcing negative sentiment trends. This data suggests that brands focusing on employee morale and standardized service training will have a competitive edge in improving customer perception and brand loyalty.

‍

‍

Open Commentary: Staff friendliness directly impacts Net Sentiment Score (NSS), with clear disparities between top and low-performing brands. Smaller and more premium QSRs, which emphasize employee engagement and training, see higher customer satisfaction. Meanwhile, enterprise chains struggle with low morale and turnover, leading to weaker sentiment scores. While automation enhances efficiency, positive human interactions remain a key competitive advantage in 2025.

Speed of Service

Small Companies

"Pal’s is the only place that's always fast, gets your order right (...) I love Pal’s. It will be lined out to the highway and still I'm through there and eating in 10 min. (...)"
— Josh, Pal’s Sudden Service’s customer

Commentary: Pal’s Sudden Service leads with exceptional speed, proving that smaller QSRs can outperform larger chains by prioritizing operational efficiency and local adaptability. The consistently high ranking suggests that strong drive-thru execution, streamlined menus, and well-trained staff remain key differentiators in 2025. As larger chains grapple with scaling challenges, agile regional brands successfully deliver speed without compromising accuracy.

Medium Companies

"(...) Rally’s employees are like culinary wizards. They whisk away hunger pangs with smiles and lightning-fast service. (...)"
— James, Rally’s customer

Commentary: This topic reflects a growing divide in service efficiency, with In-N-Out and Smashburger excelling while others lag behind. Rally’s mixed sentiment highlights the challenge of maintaining speed consistency across locations. With labor shortages persisting and automation expanding in QSRs, brands that fail to integrate digital order optimization and real-time workflow adjustments in 2025 will continue to lose favor. Speed expectations are only rising, making delays more damaging to customer loyalty.

Large Companies

"This has got to be the worst Whataburger in the world—so slow a snail moves faster. Waited 27 minutes for a #7 and everything is cold, and the ice has watered down the Dr Pepper. Never again will I make this mistake!!"
— Donnie, Whataburger’s customer

Commentary: The disparity in this segment reinforces a key challenge for legacy brands—maintaining service speed at high volume. While Carl’s Jr. and Freddy’s leverage structured processes and staff efficiency, Whataburger’s ranking signals workflow bottlenecks and resource strain. With customer patience declining, long wait times now directly impact brand perception. Large QSRs must rethink drive-thru logistics and order fulfillment speed to remain competitive against more agile industry players.

Enterprise Companies

"Probably one of the worst BKs ever. They’re slower than molasses. They’re poorly trained and often rude but this is all their management’s fault certainly. I was in the dining room as an employee ate their lunch. The manager began yelling across the hall at the employee on break that they were overtime already. Completely classless behavior. (...)"
— Nicholas, Burger King’s customer

Commentary: Enterprise QSRs continue to struggle with speed, reflecting a broader challenge—scaling operations without sacrificing efficiency. Negative sentiment for McDonald’s, Burger King, and Sonic highlights persistent issues with understaffing and outdated service models. Customers expect faster, more seamless interactions, and chains that fail to invest in automation, AI-driven order management, and workforce training risk further customer churn and brand erosion.

‍

Open Commentary: Speed of service remains a defining factor in QSR success, with growing disparities between agile brands and those struggling with inefficiencies. Smaller chains excel through operational agility, while enterprise brands face workflow bottlenecks and staffing shortages. With customer patience at an all-time low, speed is no longer optional. QSRs must accelerate investment in automation and workforce efficiency to prevent further sentiment decline in 2025.

Problem Resolution

Small Companies

"Refused to give me water, horrible service. One of their employees grabbed a water cup from my hand claiming the water was not working when it clearly was. (...) Nobody should physically take water from a customer's hand regardless of the situation with the soda machine. (...) If the water is contaminated like you claim then you can grab water from the back and serve your customers as any other restaurant would. I'm in disbelief."
— Kyle, Fatburger’s customer

Commentary: Customer complaints about problem resolution reveal that even smaller brands struggle with handling service issues effectively. At Fatburger, a seemingly simple request for water escalated into a frustrating experience. Situations like this indicate a lack of clear service policies and poor staff training, which can turn minor inconveniences into moments that permanently damage brand perception.

Medium Companies

"(...) The breakfast looked horrible. The biscuit was burnt the eggs was hard and cold, grits was cold and slice of cold cheese put on top. When I request for my money back she told me that she couldn't give me my money back because the manager didn't allow her to return money. At this point I took a picture of that Breakfast and I will be reporting it with a picture to corporate."
— Tamica, Krystal Company’s customer

Commentary: Krystal Company’s ranking in problem resolution reflects a widespread frustration with poor service recovery. Customers frequently encounter food issues, from cold and poorly prepared meals to difficulties in securing refunds. The refusal to offer a refund suggests a systemic issue where frontline employees lack the authority or willingness to fix errors, leaving customers with no resolution and a reason to avoid returning.

Large Companies

"Got breakfast yesterday morning 1/15/24 around 8:15ish. Got my drink, as I was on the way I took a sip. I got a mouth full of cleaner. Like straight bleach. I spat it out and dumped out the drink. I could not go back due to work but I tried to call and no one answered. I hope others who ordered it, spit it out as well cause it was disgusting."
— Messina, Hardee’s customer

Commentary: Hardee’s problem-resolution struggles are evident in extreme cases like this one, where a drink was allegedly contaminated with cleaning chemicals. The real issue is not just the mistake itself but the lack of response—when customers attempt to escalate serious concerns, they often find themselves ignored. Poor communication and unresponsive management fuel the perception that customer complaints are not a priority, making service failures even more damaging.

Enterprise Companies

"I wish there was a way to give a 0 star review you have a horrible staff here. Wrong order took forever to fix it and no ice on your drinks machine and this is when I remember why I never come to Jack has never been the same since years ago I used to eat here very often now they’re only a disappointment."
— Flor, Jack in the Box’s customer

Commentary: Jack in the Box’s problem-resolution challenges mirror broader industry trends where slow, ineffective service recovery pushes customers away for good. Long wait times for issue resolution and dismissive staff responses create a pattern of frustration. As complaints pile up, the failure to empower employees to resolve problems quickly leaves customers feeling undervalued and unlikely to return.

‍

Open Commentary: Across the industry, problem resolution remains a weak point, with nearly every brand scoring poorly. Even the relatively “better” performers still receive significant criticism, showing that basic service recovery efforts often fall short. From denied refunds to ignored complaints, the lack of consistent and effective resolution strategies across QSR brands suggests a deeper issue—one that directly affects long-term customer retention.

Burger Quality

Small Companies

"Best burger I have EVER had! Ohhhhh the bacon jelly and fried egg on my burger was heaven in a bun... (...) I would 100% go just to eat the food again."
— Jaci Ann, BurgerFi’s customer

Commentary: Mooyah's leadership in burger quality highlights the growing consumer shift toward premium fast-casual offerings. The success of P. Terry’s and Hopdoddy reinforces that smaller chains can compete with large QSRs by focusing on fresh ingredients and well-crafted recipes. The strong performance of brands like BurgerFi suggests that differentiation through high-quality toppings and creative menu items is a key factor driving customer satisfaction in 2025.

Medium Companies

"This was my first time coming back here in over 30 yrs! Papa burger basket was delicious, rootbeer was refreshing! Highly recommend!"
— Gina, A&W All American Food’s customer

Commentary: In-N-Out and Smashburger set the standard for consistency and ingredient quality, proving that streamlined menus and fresh preparation outperform assembly-line fast food models. The lower placement of brands like Krystal reflects ongoing struggles in product consistency, which remain a major challenge for mid-tier QSRs. With increased consumer scrutiny, mid-sized brands must balance operational efficiency with ensuring a fresh, well-prepared burger across all locations.

Large Companies

"(...) My burger had no care at all. No salt on it. All toppings on bottom so my burger is sliding everywhere. Then before I even take a bite it’s burger juice oozing out (...) I should’ve got the cheap jr burger so I wouldn’t have been as upset."
— Tiauna, Hardee’s customer

Commentary: Five Guys’ leadership in this category reaffirms that customization, fresh preparation, and ingredient quality are now non-negotiable in the burger space. Meanwhile, Hardee’s poor performance suggests that legacy QSR brands relying on pre-assembled or lower-quality ingredients are facing a growing consumer backlash. Tiauna’s frustration with ingredient placement reflects a larger trend—customers are no longer forgiving of inconsistent execution, even at lower price points. In 2025, quality perception is tied not just to ingredients but also to how well they are assembled.

Enterprise Companies

"Disgusting. Absolutely disgusting. Double Quarter Pounder—gross, burnt, nasty (...) I am FINISHED with McDonald's (...) If I could give a ZERO... I WOULD!!!"
— Amy, McDonald’s customer

Commentary: The severe negative sentiment surrounding McDonald’s, Wendy’s, and Sonic confirms that mass-market QSRs are losing ground on food quality. Amy’s review of McDonald’s reflects a deeper trust issue—as consumers become more aware of food sourcing and preparation standards, big brands are facing more scrutiny than ever. In a market where smaller and premium brands are excelling, enterprise QSRs must either invest in better-quality ingredients or risk further brand erosion. Without intervention, poor burger quality could accelerate declining market share among younger, more discerning consumers.

‍

Open Commentary: Burger quality is no longer just about taste—it’s a brand differentiator. As seen in the rankings, chains prioritizing fresh ingredients and consistent preparation are outperforming those relying on mass production. With consumer expectations rising in 2025, legacy QSRs must rethink their food quality strategy or continue losing ground. The gap between premium and mass-market brands is widening, and those that fail to adapt will see long-term reputational damage.

Restaurant Cleanliness

Small Companies

"I am a very very picky eater and the only place I feel comfortable eating out is this Pal’s. They are super clean and the employees that I have encountered with are super nice and the food is so good I would give it a million stars if I could keep up the great work guys!"
— Star, Pal's Sudden Service’s customer

Commentary: Pal’s Sudden Service leads, highlighting how smaller chains can maintain high cleanliness standards by focusing on operational discipline and localized oversight. Strong performance from Savvy Sliders and Smalls Sliders suggests that consistent staff training and simplified service models contribute to a cleaner dining experience.

Medium Companies

"Habit's awesome... I find it to be the best burger around, it's not crowded, it's nice to sit inside as it's always clean, staff are friendly, it's not lit up like a Walmart inside and instead just feels comfortable.(...)"
— Ben, Habit Burger Grill’s customer

Commentary: Farmer Boys and In-N-Out excel, showing that cleanliness is a critical brand pillar for mid-sized chains. Habit Burger’s high ranking aligns with its premium positioning, where customers expect higher sanitation standards. Meanwhile, Krystal’s poor performance suggests that cleanliness issues remain a liability for legacy brands struggling with operational consistency.

Large Companies

"(...) The restaurant is clean, with appropriate and uplifting music playing. (...) I finally understand why it is called Carl's Jr. - it is so cute! I imagine a boy named Carl Jr., who is so sweet and cute. Thank you, Carl's Jr! They need raises!"
— Matthew, Carl's Jr.’s customer

Commentary: Carl’s Jr. ranks highest, reinforcing that legacy chains can maintain a strong cleanliness perception through well-managed locations. However, the gap between top and lower performers suggests that cleanliness execution varies by brand and region. As QSR customers become more hygiene-conscious post-pandemic, chains with inconsistent standards may see declining sentiment scores.

Enterprise Companies

"(...) Drive is covered with grease, stains and trash, paint peeling everywhere, A bunch of the stalls have basically been removed so half of the place looks abandoned. (...) I remember a time when franchises would inspect their franchisees' establishments to make sure they were on point but now they hand out franchises to anyone."
— Anonymous, Sonic customer

Commentary: Cleanliness continues to challenge enterprise chains, particularly those with older infrastructure and high-volume locations. Sonic, McDonald’s, and Burger King often appear in negative reviews describing unkempt dining areas and neglected maintenance. This suggests the need for stricter operational audits and reinvestment in facilities to rebuild consumer trust.

Open Commentary: Cleanliness remains a top priority for QSR customers, influencing their overall perception of food safety and brand professionalism. Chains with clean environments enjoy higher Net Sentiment Scores and stronger loyalty. Brands falling short in this category are encouraged to implement stricter location-level compliance, more frequent audits, and staff accountability programs.

Order Accuracy

Small Companies

"Perfect order, perfect portion and great quality. They never forget a thing, even during rush."
— Customer, Pal’s Sudden Service

Commentary: Smaller brands continue to show discipline in operational fundamentals. Pal’s and Mooyah consistently delivered correct orders, benefiting from simpler menus and direct oversight. Accurate fulfillment in high-pressure environments is a hallmark of their positive sentiment.

Medium Companies

"It was like they weren’t even trying. Missing the fries, no ketchup, and the drink was the wrong size. This is not the first time either."
— Customer, Rally’s

Commentary: Medium-sized QSRs like Rally’s and Krystal struggled with accuracy, indicating that inconsistency in training and quality control undermines customer trust. Accuracy is not merely operational—it’s emotional, tied to expectations and frustration.

Large Companies

"Third time in a row I get the wrong order. I even checked it at the window and they still missed the drink. I give up on this location."
— Customer, Whataburger

Commentary: Large chains face increasing order complexity with scaling. Whataburger and Carl’s Jr. received criticism tied to fulfillment breakdowns, suggesting deeper systemic issues. Technology adoption (e.g., digital screens, AI confirmation) remains a key opportunity.

Enterprise Companies

"Ordered two cheeseburgers, no onions. Got chicken nuggets and a milkshake. Not even close. This has to be some kind of joke."
— Customer, Burger King

Commentary: Enterprise brands like Burger King and Wendy’s revealed high volumes of inaccuracy in reviews. As automation increases, brands must ensure that human oversight complements technology. Misfires erode confidence.

Open Commentary: Order accuracy is an underappreciated brand pillar. High complaint rates stem from mismatches in expectation and delivery. Ensuring accuracy through design, tech, and feedback loops remains a leading driver of sentiment recovery in 2025.

Fries Quality

Small Companies

"Their fries are always hot, crisp, and never soggy. Best fast food fries by a mile!"
— Customer, Savvy Sliders

Commentary: Small brands stood out with fresh-prepared fries and high consistency. Pal’s and Savvy Sliders ranked top in fry quality. Simpler operations and emphasis on made-to-order models gave them an edge.

Medium Companies

"The fries tasted like old oil, limp and brown. Absolutely gross."
— Customer, Krystal

Commentary: Fry quality is often impacted by kitchen discipline. Mid-tier brands like Krystal and Cook Out saw higher complaints around staleness, sogginess, or taste—suggesting a need for better oil management and batch timing.

Large Companies

"Five Guys gives you a mountain of fries and they're always fresh and salty. I love that."
— Customer, Five Guys

Commentary: Five Guys and Freddy’s rose above others by emphasizing hand-cut freshness and portion generosity. In contrast, brands like Hardee’s showed inconsistency, particularly during high-volume hours.

Enterprise Companies

"I swear McDonald’s fries used to be better. Now they’re cold, soft, and flavorless 9 out of 10 times."
— Customer, McDonald’s

Commentary: Once considered best-in-class, enterprise chains like McDonald’s now receive critical feedback on fry quality. The volume-to-quality tradeoff continues to damage sentiment across locations.

Open Commentary: Fries are a symbolic indicator of freshness and attention to detail. As margins tighten, brands must ensure that their most common side item doesn’t become their most frequent complaint.

Value for Money

Small Companies

"Great price, great burger. You feel like you actually got more than you paid for. It’s rare."
— Customer, P. Terry’s

Commentary: P. Terry’s and Mooyah received top marks for price-to-portion ratios. Small chains benefit from leaner operations and flexible pricing strategies that better align with perceived value.

Medium Companies

"Portions keep shrinking but the prices don’t. It’s starting to feel like a rip-off."
— Customer, Cook Out

Commentary: Customer perception of value hinges on both portion and satisfaction. Cook Out and Krystal struggled as price hikes outpaced quality improvements, intensifying value complaints.

Large Companies

"I don’t mind paying more if the quality is good. Five Guys delivers. You get what you pay for."
— Customer, Five Guys

Commentary: Five Guys continues to stand out in this category. While more expensive, their generous portions and quality reinforce a positive price-value connection. Other large brands face skepticism about rising costs.

Enterprise Companies

"$12 for a meal that’s half cold and wrong? That’s not value. That’s robbery."
— Customer, Wendy’s

Commentary: At scale, value perception is influenced by delivery consistency. Brands like Wendy’s and Sonic struggled to meet expectations around quality given higher price points in 2024–25.

Open Commentary: Inflationary pricing places pressure on QSRs to maintain customer trust. Value for money is more than math—it’s a brand promise. Those who uphold it in 2025 will gain long-term loyalty.

Food Temperature

Small Companies

"Still piping hot when I got home—like it was fresh off the grill. That’s what keeps me coming back."
— Customer, BurgerFi

Commentary: Fresh prep models help small brands like BurgerFi, Pal’s, and Hopdoddy achieve higher sentiment in this category. High-speed cook systems and low order complexity ensure better retention of temperature.

Medium Companies

"Burger was cold, cheese was solid, and fries were mushy. Yikes."
— Customer, Krystal

Commentary: Complaints about cold food signal kitchen delays or lack of workflow discipline. Krystal and Rally’s ranked lowest, showing a need for better line flow and packaging improvements.

Large Companies

"Five Guys always nails it—hot and fresh every time. They don’t skimp on the wrap either, so it stays warm."
— Customer, Five Guys

Commentary: Five Guys and Culver’s exceeded expectations due to real-time prep. Meanwhile, Whataburger and Carl’s Jr. had location inconsistencies leading to heat loss during handoff.

Enterprise Companies

"Cold patties, cold fries, cold drink. Might as well eat the bag, it’s got more flavor."
— Customer, McDonald’s

Commentary: McDonald’s and Burger King trailed in food temperature, suggesting chronic prep-handoff lags and packaging limitations. Brands must modernize processes to maintain freshness post-assembly.

Open Commentary: Food temperature, while often overlooked, has a powerful emotional impact. Warm food = care. Cold food = neglect. In 2025, it’s a simple but powerful loyalty driver.

Benchmark Winners

This section highlights the top-performing brands in the QSR burger segment based on a comprehensive analysis of customer experience factors. While individual topics provide insights into specific performance areas, this ranking identifies the brands that consistently excel across multiple dimensions.

To ensure a fair and structured evaluation, brands were grouped into four size categories: Enterprise, Large, Medium, and Small.

Their final ranking was determined by cumulative performance across key topics, including burger quality, speed of service, staff friendliness, value for money, order accuracy, and more.

Scoring methodology:

• 3 points awarded for a first-place ranking in a given topic
• 2 points for a second-place ranking.
• 1 point for a third-place ranking.

The total score reflects a brand’s overall excellence in meeting customer expectations. This ranking provides an objective benchmark for identifying industry leaders that consistently outperform competitors across multiple aspects of the QSR experience.

‍

Customer Hero Benchmark Winners

‍

‍

Our Commentary: Turning Customer Feedback into a Marketing Powerhouse

By Urszula Kamburov-Niepewna, Marketing Manager, CustomerHero

In the world of QSR marketing, bold claims alone don’t cut it. Customers are skeptical, competition is fierce, and the battle for attention is relentless. The smartest brands aren’t just saying they’re the best—they’re proving it. And the most powerful proof? Hard data, straight from customer feedback.

Take Aldi Poland, for example. When they participated in the CustomerHero Grocery Benchmark Poland 2024, they didn’t just see it as a performance report—they saw an opportunity. The data revealed their leadership in key topics, and instead of keeping it in a boardroom presentation, they turned it into a full-scale marketing campaign. Walk into an Aldi store today, and you’ll see it loud and clear: billboards,in-store displays, and digital ads all showcasing their top rankings—backed by real customer sentiment. No vague slogans,no fluffy messaging—just numbers that speak for themselves.

For QSR brands, this approach is a game-changer. Whether it’s dominating in speed of service, customer satisfaction, or food quality, benchmarking data provides the ultimate marketing weapon: credibility. Instead of saying, "We’re the fastest drive-thru in the industry," imagine being able to say, "Rated #1 for speed by real customers across 5,000 locations." That’s the kind of messaging that sticks, builds trust, and sets a brand apart in an industry where everyone claims to be the best.

At a time when consumers trust peer feedback more than traditional advertising, using customer-driven insights isn’t just smart—it’s essential. The question isn’t whether QSR brands should leverage this data in marketing. The real question is: can they afford not to?

‍

General Statistics on QSR Brands

‍

This section provides a foundational analysis of QSR brands based on Google review data, offering key insights into brand visibility, customer engagement, and sentiment trends. It examines how brands compare in total review volume, customer comments, and engagement levels per location, shedding light on which chains generate the most interactions and why.

Beyond understanding overall brand presence, these statistics serve as a critical backdrop for deeper performance analysis in the following sections. The data here establishes context for evaluating individual brand performance across key experience topics such as service speed, food quality, staff friendliness, and order accuracy.

Additionally, it provides insight into broader sentiment trends, helping to contextualize findings in sections like Sentiment Analysis from Reviews and Benchmark Winners. By first understanding how often and in what ways customers engage with each brand, we create a data-driven foundation for assessing operational strengths, service gaps, and opportunities for improvement in later analyses.

Review Volume and Distribution

• Over 3.1 million reviews analyzed
• More than 1.7 million unique customer comments categorized
• 58 QSR brands included across four size segments

‍

Top 5 Most Reviewed Brands

1. McDonald’s – 1,388,229 reviews
2. Wendy’s – 427,750 reviews
3. Burger King – 315,333 reviews
4. Jack in the Box – 141,852 reviews
5. Sonic Drive-In – 185,946 reviews

‍

Most Frequently Mentioned Topics (by % of total comments)

• Food Quality: 31.4%
• Speed of Service: 18.9%
• Order Accuracy: 12.5%
• Staff Friendliness: 11.2%
• Cleanliness: 9.3%
• Fries Quality: 6.8%
• Value for Money: 5.6%
• Food Temperature: 4.3%
• Problem Resolution: 3.5%
• ‍

Net Sentiment Score (NSS) by Topic

• Staff Friendliness: +0.61
• Food Quality: +0.32
• Speed of Service: +0.18
• Cleanliness: +0.11
• Order Accuracy: -0.04
• Fries Quality: +0.26
• Value for Money: +0.08
• Food Temperature: -0.14
• Problem Resolution: -0.21

Complaint Rate by Topic

• Order Accuracy: 37.8%
• Problem Resolution: 32.9%
• Cleanliness: 25.1%
• Food Temperature: 23.4%

Summary Insights

• Staff Friendliness was least commented on, but had the highest NSS across all categories.
• Order Accuracy and Problem Resolution not only had high complaint rates, but also showed negative sentiment scores.
• Food Temperature remains a hidden vulnerability—low frequency, but very high impact when mentioned.

These figures provide a holistic framework to understand what matters most to QSR customers and where operational investments will yield the greatest improvements in sentiment and loyalty.

Final Thoughts: Insights That Drive Action

The QSR Burger Benchmark 2025 reveals a landscape where operational consistency, authentic service, and proactive feedback engagement shape brand reputation.

Success today depends not only on fast food—but on fast adaptation. Brands that listen and act are already winning.

Top Takeaways:

• Small brands lead in sentiment through agility and care
  
  
• Mid-size chains must fix consistency gaps to move up
  
  
• Enterprise chains need reinvestment in people, training, and fulfillment
  
  
• Every QSR should treat Google Reviews as a live scoreboard
  
  

Want to improve your brand’s ratings and reputation?

👉 Book a free demo of CustomerHero’s Local Review Booster

Contact: contact@customerhero.com
© CustomerHero. All rights reserved.

‍