We Re-Rated the 10 Most Searched Brands, and Here’s What We Found

As one of the largest fashion retailers in the world, Zara has an opportunity to lead the way into a more sustainable future. But while Zara has taken steps towards good supply chain management, such as the Closing the Loop program, its business model, based on an unsustainably high turnover rate, is unsustainable. Zara prides itself on giving consumers the “latest fashion trends” every 13 days. Promoting such rapid consumption is inherently harmful to both people and the planet. “Not Good Enough”.

See the rating.

Overall, we rate Nike “It’s a Start”, a rating that’s been consistent over the years. Though Nike has a few promising environmental measures in place, the company is not doing as much as it should. Most worryingly, the brand claims to have a program to improve wages, but there’s no evidence it ensures its workers are paid living wages in most of its supply chain. This year, Nike was also named in a new lawsuit, accusing the brand of deceiving consumers by falsely marketing its sportswear offerings as “sustainable”, and made with “sustainable materials”.

See the rating.

H&M is incontestably one of the main fast fashion giants and has long been the target of widespread concern about its impact on the environment and the workers who make its clothes.

While H&M has set science-based targets for its greenhouse gas emissions and made a little progress for the environment and the animals, the brand still needs to improve on many fronts, especially when it comes to protecting its workers and paying them a living wage.

Long story short, we updated our methodology and after years of being rated “It’s A Start”, H&M is now down to “Not Good Enough”, as it still operates under an unsustainable, fast fashion business model.

See the rating.

In a not-so-shocking revelation, SHEIN received, again, our lowest possible score of “We Avoid” overall. We found no evidence the brand has introduced initiatives to reduce its environmental impact, to empower its workers, or to pay a living wage. SHEIN is one of the worst fast fashion brands out there; it’s exploitative, regularly greenwashes and keeps promoting overconsumption at a rate that is truly unsustainable.

See the rating.

Adidas’ overall rating is now down to “Not Good Enough”, from “It’s A Start”. The sportswear giant was one of the highest scoring large brands—particularly on environmental and labour issues—but not anymore. Adidas isn’t making good on its existing promises and not keeping pace with industry-wide actions for people, the planet, and animals. In particular, it claims to have a program to improve wages, but we found no evidence it ensures its workers are paid living wages in most of its supply chain. It has also been linked to recent human rights violations in its supply chain, including ongoing cases of wage theft in Cambodia, which has impacted its labour score and overall score as a result.

See the rating.

Patagonia has kept its “Good” rating over the years. This brand lives up to the standards it set itself by pushing for sustainability across the board. We’re glad to see the brand improve over the years. To build on that great work we recommend that Patagonia looks at preventing deforestation, paying a living wage across all of its supply chain, and keep reducing the amount of animal-derived materials it uses. Patagonia is not perfect, but it is certainly a brand worth giving your support to.

See the rating.

Uniqlo’s ethics don’t quite hold up, and we rate Uniqlo “It’s a Start”, a rating that hasn’t changed from its previous one. While Uniqlo has set some decent environmental policies in place and has made a start for animals, there’s no evidence it’s providing living wages for its workers.

See the rating.

The Kering-owned brand has remained “It’s a Start”. Gucci is making some commendable progress, especially when it comes to minimising its impact on the environment and improving practices for its workers. Its use of some lower-impact materials and efforts to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions are good first steps. However, the Italian brand still has much to do regarding its impact on people and animals: Gucci needs to ensure it pays workers a living wage, and it should also use less animal-derived materials.

Gucci truly is a modern and exciting brand, and we’re happy to see a luxury brand committed to creating positive change for the planet and its inhabitants.

See the rating.

We’ve given Everlane an overall rating of “It’s a Start”, which hasn’t changed over the years. To its credit, Everlane focuses on timeless designs over short-lived trends and emphasises the high quality and craftsmanship of its products, and acknowledges that brands ought to be transparent. But there are essential ways in which Everlane fails to live up to its own hype, and further improvements are still needed across the board—though especially when it comes to workers’ rights—for the brand to see a higher score on our directory.

See the rating.

We’ve rated COS “It’s a Start” based on our own research. While there is some progress being made for people, the planet, and animals, there is still a way to go before COS can achieve a higher rating. It should focus on setting and achieving concrete goals to reduce its climate impact, ensuring payment of a living wage across its supply chain, and ensuring all animal products are recycled or replaced with more ethical alternatives.

See the rating.