U.S. Medical Aesthetics
Market Report 2026
STOC Advisory  ·  Corporate Development Support Baltimore, MD  ·  Minneapolis, MN  ·  Nashville, TN  ·  Dallas, TX
2026
Disclaimer

This report has been prepared by STOC Advisory, LLC for informational and discussion purposes only. It is based on proprietary research, internal analysis, third-party sources believed to be reliable, and data available as of the date of preparation. While reasonable care has been taken in its preparation, STOC Advisory makes no representation or warranty, express or implied, as to the accuracy, completeness, or future reliability of any data, estimates, assumptions, or conclusions contained herein.

The views and findings in this report are intended to support strategic evaluation and do not constitute investment, legal, tax, accounting, or other professional advice, nor a recommendation to pursue or decline any transaction or course of action. Forward-looking statements and market views are inherently subject to uncertainty and may be affected by changes in market conditions, competitive dynamics, regulatory developments, data quality, and other factors beyond STOC Advisory's control.

This report may include proprietary frameworks, scoring models, and market intelligence developed by STOC Advisory for analytical purposes. Such methodologies are directional tools designed to inform prioritization and decision support and should not be relied upon as the sole basis for any decision. Recipients are expected to apply independent judgment and conduct their own diligence. This work may not be published, reproduced, or distributed without the explicit written permission of STOC Advisory.

Copyright © 2026 STOC Advisory, LLC. All rights reserved.
About STOC Advisory
STOC Advisory is a business advisory firm specializing in transaction advisory services, corporate development, growth enablement and Finance Data & Intelligence. We work alongside management teams and private equity sponsors through every stage of the acquisition lifecycle, bringing rigorous financial analysis and hands-on execution to each engagement.
Mission
To deliver tailored financial insights and strategic guidance that drive successful transactions and long-term growth.
Vision
To be the most trusted advisor for middle-market companies and private equity partners seeking disciplined, repeatable growth.
TAS
Transaction Advisory Services
Buy- and sell-side financial due diligence, Quality of Earnings, NWC mechanisms, deal structuring and integration & exit planning.
CDS
Corporate Development Support
Proprietary deal sourcing, outreach execution, pipeline management and NDA coordination embedded alongside your team.
GES
Growth Enablement Services
Operational and strategic support to accelerate organic growth, improve unit economics, and build platform scalability post-acquisition.
FDI
Finance Data & Intelligence
A data-led offering that supports underwriting, operational value creation, and exit readiness through sharper financial insight and decision support.
Corporate Development Support (CDS). Our CDS practice helps PE-backed and founder-led companies accelerate pipeline velocity through targeted lead generation, data-driven outreach, and CRM-integrated pipeline management. We partner alongside existing internal teams to build strategic pipelines that align with investment criteria, engage with aligned targets, and drive measurable deal outcomes.
01
Deal Sourcing and Outreach
Identify and contact targets through direct outreach and market mapping.
02
Target Screening and Fit
Evaluate opportunities against strategic, financial, and operational criteria.
03
CRM Management
Clean pipeline data, standardized stages, timely follow-up.
04
Diligence Coordination
Align stakeholders, gather materials, flag deal issues early.
05
Valuation Input
Compile financials, normalize EBITDA, provide bid context.
06
IC Reporting
Weekly updates and IC-ready materials delivered to sponsors.
07
Post-Close Handoff and Integration Oversight
Facilitate transition to integration or portfolio operations, documenting deal context, rationale, and ongoing commitments.
STOC Advisory, LLC
600 Baltimore Ave., Suite 205
Towson, Maryland 21204
www.stocadvisory.com
3
Contents
Dataset and Methodology
Dataset Architecture and Signal Methodology
5
Geographic Intelligence
Geographic Intelligence: 640 CBSAs Mapped
6
Market Typology: CBSA Classification by Density and Structure
7
Supply Analysis
Nearest Supply Analysis: Location Proximity and Supply Gap
8
Consolidation Landscape
PE Consolidation Landscape
9
Market Intelligence
CBSA Intelligence: Selected Market Profiles
10
Digital Intelligence
Digital Maturity Landscape: Signal Distribution by Region
11
Corporate Development
How CDS Translates Into Deals
12
4
Dataset Architecture & Methodology
Every metric in this document is produced by a live intelligence pipeline, not a static dataset.
Data vintage: Q1 2026; pipeline refreshed continuously. Generated from STOC's CDS intelligence layer. Each target is scored, classified, and refreshed continuously.
STOC's core dataset of 12,920 licensed medical spas sits within a broader universe of U.S. locations offering medical-grade aesthetic services. For context, the American Med Spa Association enumerates approximately 10,488 licensed medical spas (AmSpa, 2024). The difference is intentional. STOC maps all U.S. locations offering medical-grade aesthetic services under physician supervision, including standalone medical spas, cosmetic dermatology practices with aesthetic service lines, and plastic surgery clinics with non-surgical revenue. This broader scope reflects how PE platforms actually build acquisitions - routinely including adjacent practice types that operate economically as med spas regardless of licensure classification. The STOC score formula applies uniformly across all three practice types; subtype filtering is available in the CDS pipeline but not reflected in the scores shown here.
Dataset Scope
12,920
Tracked medical-aesthetics locations, Q1 2026 ²
Base universe: Ownership = Target AND MedSpa Y/N = Y. Excludes nail, hair, tattoo, IV/drip, sports/rehab, dental, massage, chiro. Broader than AmSpa's 10,488 (which uses a narrower definition). 640 CBSAs nationwide.
Outreach-ready targets4,863
Priority tier (STOC ≥70)5,898
Data points per target79
Outreach-ready = owner name present AND at least one confirmed email address. Confirmed = present in the dataset with valid syntax; delivery verification and data staleness are not guaranteed.
Digital Maturity Score
Directional index of 8 signals per Z1/Z2 target. Comparative screening only. Weights proprietary.
Zone ContextZ1 / Z2 filter - not a scored signal
Review CountGoogle review volume
Avg RatingGoogle star rating
Instagram FollowersFollower count
Posting FrequencyContent activity
Membership OptionRecurring revenue signal
Online BookingConversion enablement
Website QualityDigital infrastructure
YouTube PresenceVideo channel flag
STOC Score
Composite 0–100 acquisition readiness score. Clipped at both ends. Four additive components:
Geo Opportunity Index  0 – 50 pts
Proprietary supply-gap signal clipped to [-1, 1]. Contribution = (GOI + 1) × 25. Example: GOI 0.8 = 45 pts; GOI 0 = 25 pts. Inputs proprietary; directional only.
Target Neighbors  0 – 20 pts
Independent competitor count within zone radius. Formula: MIN(Target Neighbors, 10) × 2.
PE Neighbors Penalty  20 – 0 pts
PE-owned competitors within zone. MAX(0, 20 − 4 × PE Neighbors), capped at 5. Note: 4 neighbors = 4 pts; 5 neighbors = 0 pts (discrete cliff).
Cannibalization Risk  0 – 10 pts
Risk = TN + (1.5 × PE Neighbors). Bands: None=0, Low<3, Med<6, High≥6. Non-uniform steps intentional. Note: PE Neighbors also reduces PE Neighbors Penalty directly; PE pressure affects score through two components.
Score Tiers
Total clipped between 0 and 100. Higher = stronger opportunity, less competitive pressure.
70 – 100
Priority Tier  5,898 targets
Strong geo signal, low PE pressure, independent market.
50 – 69
Monitor Tier  2,137 targets
Moderate opportunity. Entry timing is sensitive.
< 50
Low Priority  4,851 targets
Weak geo signal or high PE saturation. Not actioned.
STOC Score: Component Breakdown
Component What It Measures Points Direction
Geo Opportunity Index Normalized supply-gap signal: (GOI + 1) × 25 0 – 50 GOI of 0.8 = 45 pts; GOI of 0 = 25 pts. A neutral market (GOI=0) contributes 25 pts by design.
Target Neighbors MIN(Target Neighbors, 10) × 2 0 – 20 More independents = higher score
PE Neighbors MAX(0, 20 − 4 × PE Neighbors), capped at 5 20 – 0 More PE = lower score (penalty)
Cannibalization Risk TN + (1.5 × PE Neighbors); None=0 / Low<3 / Med<6 / High≥6 0 – 10 None = 10  ·  Low = 7  ·  Med = 3  ·  High = 0
Denominators: 12,920 targets; 12,897 valid geo (P8); 12,886 scored (P5); 12,781 region-assigned (P6); 12,297 Zone 1+2 / DM (P11); 640 CBSAs; 14,079 PE penetration universe.     ¹ AmSpa 2024.     ² "Licensed medical spa" used colloquially; no uniform state licensing category exists.     Score tiers: 12,886 scored; 34 excluded for incomplete geo/pop data. Density tiers use all 12,920; scoring uses 12,886.
5
Geographic Intelligence: 640 CBSAs Mapped
12,920 Targets. 640 CBSAs. One dataset structured for acquisition screening and market prioritization.
12,920
Identified Med Spas, Q1 2026
8.2%
PE-Affiliated Location Penetration ⁴
640
CBSAs with Identified Targets ³
37.6%
Identified as Outreach-Ready
Regional Intelligence Breakdown
Figure 1   U.S. Medical Aesthetics Target Map: 640 CBSAs
Region filter:
Midwest
Northeast
South
West
How to Read
Dot size = target count
80
200
400
800
South
CBSAs
259
Targets
5,020
Share
38.9%
AVG STOC
63.1
PE RATE
7.5%
Largest CBSA by Target Count
Atlanta-Sandy Springs, GA
Priority CBSAs (Avg STOC ≥70, ≥25 targets): 7
Zero-PE CBSAs: 205
Midwest
CBSAs
192
Targets
2,444
Share
18.9%
AVG STOC
61.8
PE RATE
6.1%
Largest CBSA by Target Count
Chicago-Naperville-Elgin, IL
Priority CBSAs (Avg STOC ≥70, ≥25 targets): 0
Zero-PE CBSAs: 161
West
CBSAs
125
Targets
3,655
Share
28.3%
AVG STOC
57.4
PE RATE
8.0%
Largest CBSA by Target Count
Phoenix-Mesa-Chandler, AZ
Priority CBSAs (Avg STOC ≥70, ≥25 targets): 1
Zero-PE CBSAs: 85
Northeast
CBSAs
64
Targets
1,662
Share
12.9%
AVG STOC
55.8
PE RATE
14.1%
Largest CBSA by Target Count
Pittsburgh, PA
Priority CBSAs (Avg STOC ≥70, ≥25 targets): 1
Zero-PE CBSAs: 41
Detailed Regional Metrics
PE Rate = CBSA-level PE penetration. STOC score uses target-level PE Neighbors within zone radius - a different metric at a different scale.
Region CBSAs Targets % Total Avg STOC PE Rate Target Density 0% PE CBSAs
South 259 5,020 38.9% 63.1 7.5% 19.4 / CBSA 205
Midwest 192 2,444 18.9% 61.8 6.1% 12.7 / CBSA 161
West 125 3,655 28.3% 57.4 8.0% 29.2 / CBSA 85
Northeast 64 1,662 12.9% 55.8 14.1% 26.0 / CBSA 41
South Priority + Midwest Pipeline
57.8% ³ of tracked targets are in the South and Midwest combined. Applying the criteria Avg STOC ≥ 70 and at least 25 tracked targets at the individual CBSA level (not regional averages) to all 640 CBSAs yields 9 qualifying markets nationally; 7 are located in the South. ⁵ Relative to the West and Northeast, these regions show lower average PE rates and more zero-PE CBSAs, and together contain the largest independent acquisition pipeline in the dataset.
Northeast + West: Scored Entry Only
Northeast: highest CBSA-level PE rate in the dataset (14.1%); PE penetration is at or above the dominant threshold (≥15%) in 14 of 64 CBSAs. West: 3,655 targets; PE penetration is at or above the dominant threshold (≥15%) in 8 of 125 CBSAs. Both regions require CBSA-level selection rather than broad regional deployment. Note: PE rate figures on this page are CBSA-level averages; the STOC score uses target-level PE Neighbors within zone radius, which may differ from the CBSA-level rate.
Regional totals sum to 12,781. 139 targets unassigned to a Census region.     ³ 640 = CBSAs with at least one identified target; OMB 23-01 defines 925 total CBSAs. 57.8% uses 12,920 as denominator (full universe including 139 unassigned targets); as % of region-assigned targets only (12,781), the figure is 58.4%.     ⁴ PE-affiliated location penetration = 1,159 PE Owned locations / 14,079 combined locations (12,920 strict-medspa targets + 1,159 PE Owned, classified separately). Not directly comparable to AmSpa's ~3% direct PE ownership estimate, which uses a narrower definition.
⁵ The 9 qualifying CBSAs (Avg STOC ≥ 70, ≥ 25 tracked targets): South (7): Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Newport News VA-NC; Jacksonville FL; McAllen-Edinburg-Mission TX; Deltona-Daytona Beach FL; Lakeland-Winter Haven FL; Greensboro-High Point NC; Memphis TN-MS-AR. West (1): Ogden-Clearfield UT. Northeast (1): Pittsburgh PA.
6
Geographic Intelligence
PE Concentrated in Major Metros. Mid-Density Holds 7,156 Targets at 40% Lower PE Density.
PE capital is more concentrated in Dense Urban markets, while Mid-Density markets show lower average PE pressure in this dataset. Mid-Density targets score 8 points below Dense Urban on average and show approximately 40% fewer PE neighbors (0.79 vs. 1.32 PE-affiliated neighbors per target), indicating a larger set of markets that remain less consolidated. This report does not include transaction pricing or time-series entry data, so conclusions should be limited to current competitive density rather than inferred valuation movement.
Dense Urban  4,515 targets
Major metro and core urban markets. Population 50K+. Z1: 0-2 mi  ·  Z2: 2-5 mi  ·  Z3: 5-10 mi  ·  Z4: 10-15 mi. Max cap 15 miles applied to dense metros (NYC, Boston, DC, SF) to prevent overstatement of tuck-in range.
Mid-Density  7,156 targets
Secondary and mid-sized markets. Population 15K–50K (markets above 50K assigned to Dense Urban). Z1: 0-3 mi  ·  Z2: 3-7 mi  ·  Z3: 7-15 mi  ·  Z4: 15-25 mi. Radius assumptions best calibrated to actual competitive structure at this tier.
Suburban  1,249 targets
Smaller surrounding and non-core markets below 15K population. Z1: 0-5 mi  ·  Z2: 5-10 mi  ·  Z3: 10-20 mi  ·  Z4: 20-30 mi. Wider radius required to avoid misreading sparse supply as whitespace. Note: STOC scores are not directly cross-tier comparable - zone radii widen significantly across tiers (Dense Urban Z1=2mi vs. Suburban Z1=5mi), so Target Neighbor counts reflect different catchment sizes.
Figure 2
Avg STOC Score by Density Tier
Dense Urban
68.0
4,515 targets
Mid-Density
60.0
7,156 targets
Suburban
57.0
1,249 targets
Score scale 0-100. An 8-point gap separates Dense Urban from Mid-Density.
Avg PE Neighbors per Target: PE density by tier
Dense Urban
1.32
Most contested tier
Mid-Density
0.79
40% fewer PE neighbors than Dense Urban.
Suburban
1.04
Smallest target pool (1,249)
Dense Urban markets carry the highest PE concentration in the dataset (mean 1.32 PE-affiliated neighbors per target). Mid-Density: the same score profile, without the competitive pressure.
Dense Urban scored highest. PE concentration in this tier is the highest in the dataset (avg. 1.32 PE-affiliated neighbors per target).
Major metro markets score well because they have competition, volume, and digital maturity. PE recognized that and entered early. Dense Urban CBSAs in this dataset average 1.32 PE-affiliated neighbors per target - the highest of any density tier.
Mid-Density is where the score and the competition diverge. That divergence is where CDS operates.
Secondary cities and growing suburban markets score within 8 points of major metros. They hold 7,156 targets, 55% of the tracked universe. PE has averaged only 0.79 neighbors per target here - 40% fewer than Dense Urban. PE presence is lower in this tier than any other in the dataset. This reflects current competitive structure; the report does not measure rate of change. CDS identifies and sequences outreach into these markets.
7
Nearest Supply Analysis
52.5% of Targets Have a Competitor Within Half a Mile (all competitor types, including PE-owned).
Nearest supply measures the distance to the closest competitor for every target. Supply gap measures how many independent competitors exist nearby relative to PE consolidation. PE-owned locations are not counted as independent competitors in supply-gap or GOI calculations. Together they define market entry quality.
Nearest Competitor Distance
12,897 tracked targets with valid location data
Under 0.5 mi
52.5%  6,773 targets
0.5 - 1 mi
16.9%  2,183 targets
1 - 2 mi
14.8%  1,906 targets
2 - 5 mi
9.5%  1,219 targets
5 - 10 mi
2.7%  344 targets
10+ mi
3.7%  472 targets
69.4% of targets have a competitor within 1 mile.
Supply Gap Signal by Density Tier
Targets with 5+ independent neighbors and zero PE consolidation nearby
Dense Urban
995  22.0% of tier
Avg nearest: 0.62 mi  ·  Avg 17.8 ind. neighbors
Mid-Density
2,008  28.1% of tier
Avg nearest: 1.13 mi  ·  Avg 15.4 ind. neighbors
Suburban
249  19.9% of tier
Avg nearest: 4.54 mi  ·  Avg 18.6 ind. neighbors
Supply gap = demonstrated local demand (competitors operating) without consolidation. Mid-Density produces the largest absolute pool: 2,008 targets with 5+ independent neighbors and zero PE consolidation nearby, the largest supply-gap cohort of any density tier.
Average Distance to Nearest Competitor by Tier
0.93 mi
Dense Urban
74.5% have a competitor under 1 mi
1.72 mi
Mid-Density
69.7% have a competitor under 1 mi
6.10 mi
Suburban
49.4% have a competitor under 1 mi
What proximity and supply gap tell an acquirer together
A target with a competitor 0.3 miles away and 12 independent neighbors within zone radius is in a real, active market. If no platform has consolidated that market yet, the supply gap is structural, not an accident. That combination is what the STOC score is built to surface: proven consumer demand, fragmented supply, no incumbent pricing pressure.
Average Supply Gap by Region and Density Type  Geo Opportunity Index x 100. Regional averages; individual CBSA variance is substantial. Positive = demand exceeds local supply (undersupplied). Negative = oversupplied. Same scale used on page 10. Values shown are regional averages; individual CBSA-level scores may differ - 249 suburban CBSAs carry positive supply-gap signals at the CBSA level despite negative regional averages.
Region Dense Urban Mid-Density Suburban
South -16.7 +6.2 -56.6
Midwest +6.2 -40.9 -62.9
West +24.2 -6.7 -58.2
Northeast +29.4 -8.8 -59.3
Where consolidation has arrived
In 23.1% of tracked CBSAs (148 of 640), at least one PE-affiliated operator has been identified. (148 = 32 + 74 + 42 non-zero-PE CBSAs; the 15%+ bucket reflects 42 CBSAs following STOC's full PE ownership record classification, revised upward from an earlier count of 26 prior to complete data reconciliation.) In those markets, average nearest competitor distance is 0.46 miles, indicating tighter local competitive clustering than in zero-PE markets. This report does not include seller survey data, transaction-multiple evidence, or time-series entry velocity, so findings should be interpreted as current market structure rather than direct evidence of seller-awareness shifts or multiple compression.
What this means for entry timing
Proximity data confirms the market exists. The PE consolidation data on the next page shows how much of it remains uncontested and where that is changing. The two read together.
8
PE Consolidation Landscape
8.2% PE-affiliated location penetration across STOC's dataset. 76.9% of CBSAs untouched (18.9% of tracked targets are located in those zero-PE CBSAs).
Figure 3
PE Penetration Distribution: 640 CBSAs
All 640 CBSAs with identified targets are included. 492+32+74+42 = 640.
0 125 250 375 CBSAs 492 0% PE No PE presence 32 1-5% PE Early entry 74 6-15% PE Selective entry 42 15%+ PE Late stage
South
Midwest
West
Northeast
What the Distribution Means
PE Rate CBSAs % of 640 Avg. STOC Read
0% 492 76.9% 71.7 Full opportunity
1-5% 32 5.0% 55.8 Window open
6-15% 74 11.6% 58.3 Selective only
15%+ 42 6.6% 57.5 Late stage
Figure 4
STOC Score vs. PE Entry
0% penetration
71.7
1-5% penetration
55.8
6-15% penetration
58.3
15%+ penetration
57.5
76.9%
of CBSAs have zero PE presence (492 of 640); those CBSAs account for 18.9% of tracked targets (2,446 of 12,920).
Independent operators typically transact at 3–8x EBITDA. PE-backed platforms have transacted at 12–15x EBITDA. ⁴
-14 pts
Avg. STOC score drop, once PE arrives
Zero-PE CBSAs score 14.1 points higher than PE-entered markets overall (CBSA-level simple average; each CBSA weighted equally regardless of target count). Once PE enters, scores compress into the 55.8 to 58.3 range regardless of penetration level.
The Pre-Consolidation Window
These are markets with sufficient target density, verified supply gaps, and no incumbent PE pressure. Zero-PE CBSAs score 14.1 points higher than PE-entered markets on average (CBSA-weighted). De novo warrants consideration in these markets given verified supply gaps and low PE pressure.
First-Mover Implication
In 23.1% of tracked CBSAs (148 of 640), at least one PE-affiliated operator has established a presence. This analysis measures current PE penetration by market, not pace of entry over time.
Note: the 6–15% bucket (58.3) scores 2.5 pts above the 1–5% bucket (55.8), likely because moderately consolidated markets tend to be larger, higher-density geographies that attracted early PE interest. This does not indicate greater remaining opportunity; it reflects underlying market size.
⁴ Scope Research, Med Spa and Aesthetics Valuation Multiples and M&A Trends, 2025; HealthFMV, Med Spa and Aesthetics Valuation Guide, 2026; FOCUS Investment Banking, Medspa Valuation Multiples Dashboard, 2026.
9
CBSA Intelligence: Selected Market Profiles
20 CBSAs classified by what action they support: buy existing, open new, move quickly, or monitor.
STOC Score
High
≥ 80
Moderate
65 – 79
Low
< 65
Supply Gap
Strong
≥ +25%
Moderate
+10% to +24%
Low / Negative
< +10%
PE Penetration competitive context
Dominant
≥ 15%
Early / Minimal
1% to 14%
Zero
0%
Buy Existing
High STOC · Strong Gap · PE present but not dominant
· Strong scores confirm acquisition attractiveness
· Positive supply gap: demand outpaces capacity with room to grow post-close
· PE validates the market but has not consolidated: no dominant platform has established pricing pressure
Market
STOC
Gap
PE %
Targets
Greeley, CO
86.1
+61.9%
5.9%
16
Stockton, CA
81.3
+57.1%
5.9%
16
Lubbock, TX
80.5
+54.7%
7.7%
12
Bellingham, WA
85.8
+72.5%
11.1%
8
Kalamazoo-Portage, MI
80.6
+60.3%
12.5%
7
De Novo
High STOC · Strong Supply Gap
· High score confirms consumer demand and viable unit economics
· Strong supply gap: capacity is running below population-adjusted demand
· Under-served market: consumer demand is present and independent supply is fragmented
Market
STOC
Gap
PE %
Targets
Deltona-Daytona Beach, FL
81.4
+49.7%
0.0%
36
Killeen-Temple, TX
85.8
+64.4%
0.0%
16
Visalia, CA
82.5
+35.2%
0.0%
16
Florence, SC
81.1
+30.1%
0.0%
14
Green Bay, WI
81.1
+42.8%
0.0%
14
Buy Now
Moderate STOC · Moderate Gap · PE early or minimal
· Selected on a composite basis: STOC score, supply gap, and PE rate together. Borderline-Priority STOC scores (≥70) with elevated PE or moderate gaps may be placed here
· Enough gap headroom for an acquirer; not enough for de novo
· PE has arrived but has not consolidated; no dominant platform has established a presence
Market
STOC
Gap
PE %
Targets
Chicago-Naperville-Elgin, IL
67.6
+15.9%
8.5%
396
Charlotte-Concord-Gastonia, NC
69.3
+14.0%
6.5%
145
Riverside-San Bernardino, CA
68.1
+10.4%
10.8%
83
San Antonio-New Braunfels, TX
70.1
+24.3%
8.9%
51
Memphis, TN-MS-AR
70.4
+20.0%
4.3%
44
Monitor Only
Lower STOC or negative gap or high PE penetration. Note: Atlanta placed here on composite basis - large market size and PE clustering at sub-CBSA level offset positive headline figures.
· Economics do not clear current activation thresholds
· High PE rate or oversupplied conditions compress acquisition returns
· Flag for future review: conditions may improve as platforms exit
·
Market
STOC
Gap
PE %
Targets
New York-Newark, NY-NJ-PA
51.1
-23.2%
16.1%
677
Phoenix-Mesa-Chandler, AZ
55.6
-34.9%
5.6%
403
Atlanta-Sandy Springs, GA
64.2
+8.3%
8.0%
368
Miami-Fort Lauderdale, FL
59.0
-8.8%
13.0%
342
Los Angeles-Long Beach, CA
61.3
+0.3%
15.7%
321
CBSA names abbreviated for display. Full OMB designations available on request.
10
Digital Maturity Landscape
Most independent med spas are digitally invisible.
The Digital Maturity Score (DMS) is a composite of the eight signals below, measured across 12,297 tracked targets in Zone 1 and Zone 2 - the primary and secondary competitive radius for each market type. Zone assignment is derived from Market Type and Nearest Supply distance: Dense Urban Z1 ≤2 mi / Z2 ≤5 mi  ·  Mid-Density Z1 ≤3 mi / Z2 ≤7 mi  ·  Suburban Z1 ≤5 mi / Z2 ≤10 mi. A total of 623 targets are excluded from digital maturity scoring: 306 in Zone 3, 294 in Zone 4, and 23 with no assigned Target Zone. The 12,297 base is derived from 12,920 total strict-medspa targets, not the 12,886 scored subset (12,920 − 623 = 12,297).
Instagram Followers
66.9%
have under 500 followers or no account
No account
56.0%
Under 500
10.9%
500 to 2K
14.5%
2K and above
18.5%
Instagram Post Count
308
median lifetime posts per active account (cumulative, not a 90-day figure)
Under 25 posts
8.2%
25 to 100 posts
15.2%
100 to 300 posts
25.9%
300 and above
50.7%
Posting Frequency
3.0
median posts per week among the 25.3% of accounts with detectable posting activity
Across all tracked accounts, including the 74.7% that are inactive, median posting frequency is effectively 0.
Inactive (no posts 90d)
74.7%
1 to 3x per week
22.7%
Daily or above
2.6%
Membership Option
12.8%
of targets offer a recurring membership
Northeast
12.5%
West
17.5%
Midwest
10.7%
South
10.8%
Online Booking
33.9%
of targets have online booking enabled
Northeast
38.7%
West
48.5%
Midwest
29.5%
South
24.5%
Website Quality Score (1–5)
94.9%
of scored targets rate 4 or 5 on website quality (5,336 targets with website quality data)
Score 1
0.8%  43 targets
Score 2
0.5%  28 targets
Score 3
3.7%  200 targets
Score 4
63.6%  3,394 targets
Score 5
31.3%  1,671 targets
YouTube Presence
11.4%
of targets have a YouTube or video presence
No video presence
88.6%
YouTube channel
11.4%
Team Count
2
median staff per location (among the 30.2% of targets with staff data available)
1 to 2 staff
15.4%
3 to 5 staff
8.0%
6 to 10 staff
4.9%
10 and above
1.9%
No staff data (69.8% of targets)
69.8%
11
Corporate Development Support
How CDS Translates Into Deals
The STOC shortlist identifies the markets. CDS executes the process that converts a ranked target list into a contacted, qualified, NDA-executed pipeline. Three operational phases. Seven core deliverables.
1
Lead Identification
Investment criteria set. STOC dataset filtered by geography, density type, score, and PE status. Targets ranked before first contact.
Timeline
Week 1-2
Output
Scored target list
2
Outreach and Engagement
Custom messaging per target. Multi-touch outreach via email, phone, and direct contact. Every interaction logged in CRM.
Timeline
Week 2-6
Output
Engaged pipeline
3
Pipeline and NDA Execution
Qualified conversations tracked. NDAs coordinated. Financials requested and normalized. IC-ready summaries prepared.
Timeline
Day 30-60
Output
Executed NDA
Seven Core Deliverables
01
Deal Sourcing and Outreach
Identify and contact targets before they reach the broader market.
02
Target Screening and Fit
Evaluate each opportunity against strategic, financial, and operational criteria.
03
CRM Management
Clean pipeline data, standardized stages, timely follow-up on every contact.
04
Diligence Coordination
Stakeholders aligned, materials gathered, deal issues flagged early.
05
Valuation Input
Financials compiled, EBITDA normalized, bid context provided.
06
IC Reporting
Weekly summaries and IC-ready materials delivered to sponsors.
07
Post-Close Handoff
Deal context documented, transition to integration team coordinated.
Deal Closed.
Full pipeline visibility maintained throughout every stage.
Engagement Timeline ACTIVITY WEEK 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12+ Target Identification Target and market analysis Lead identification Data collection and contact enrichment CRM Platform Setup and plan the implementation Design and migrate data into CRM Integration and workflows Email outreach and KPI analysis Corp. Development Support Review of responses and processes Collaboration with management Cold calling Other Services (TAS / Financial Analysis / Quality of Earnings)
12
The Window Is Open.
The Question Is Whether
You Are Moving Through It.
STOC Advisory builds and executes acquisition pipelines for PE-backed platforms entering the U.S. medical aesthetics market.
76.9% of CBSAs have no PE presence (18.9% of tracked targets are located in those markets). The 12,920 targets in this dataset are scored, ranked, and filterable by geography, density type, and sector. Zero-PE CBSAs score 14.1 points higher than PE-entered markets on average. CDS targets outreach activation within two weeks of engagement.
Key Contacts at STOC Advisory
Lucius Burch
Vice President
Business Development
Nashville, TN
lburch@stocadvisory.com
(615) 516-2362
Peyton Evans
Associate
Business Development
Philadelphia, PA
pevans@stocadvisory.com
(610) 767-5791
Srushti Kulkarni
Market Research
Analyst
Baltimore, MD
skulkarni@stocadvisory.com
(585) 981-0926
Ready to build your acquisition pipeline?
CDS delivers scored, outreach-ready targets with confirmed contact data within two weeks.
Reach out to any of the contacts above or visit www.stocadvisory.com
Start the Conversation
STOC Advisory, LLC
600 Baltimore Ave., Suite 205, Towson, Maryland 21204    www.stocadvisory.com
Baltimore  ·  Nashville  ·  Dallas  ·  Philadelphia
© 2026 STOC Advisory, LLC. For informational purposes only.