The Best Non-Toxic Nonstick Skillets of 2026
16 of the 18 nonstick skillets PFAS Authority has graded score below its 70 point pass mark for PFAS and other toxins, 88.9% of the category, as of October 2026, leaving 2 that pass. The highest graded is GreenPan Rio Ceramic Nonstick Frypan at 70 out of 100.
Every grade below is built from published materials, ingredient lists, certifications and brand disclosures, scored on one public rubric and ranked best-graded first. Each score links to the full breakdown of what earned it, and the numbers across the whole dataset are published too.
Are nonstick skillets non-toxic?
2 of the 18 nonstick skillets we graded clear our screen and 16 do not. Non-toxic is not a defined or regulated term, so what we can tell you is what our graders recorded. Beyond PFAS, the hazards found or left unruled-out on nonstick skillets in this category are microplastics, aluminium leaching, VOCs and off-gassing, artificial dyes, undisclosed ingredients. The highest graded here is GreenPan Rio Ceramic Nonstick Frypan at 70 out of 100.
Quick picks
Brand states its position
GreenPan Rio Ceramic SetThe brand has published a PFAS statement we can quote
70 Good
Why GreenPan Rio Ceramic Nonstick Frypan wins, and what it beats
Every grade on this page is one sum. A category starts from a baseline, each disclosed material or coating adds risk points, and each thing the brand or a third party has published takes them away. Below is that sum for the winner, then for 3 products it beats, so you can see exactly where the 55 points between the top and the bottom of this nonstick skillets ranking come from.
The winner
Made of ceramic nonstick coating.
- +30Category baseline. The starting point for this type of product, before anything specific to this product is counted.
- +10Disclosed non-fluorinated coating. Coating is named and the brand states it is made without PFAS.
- -10Brand-stated PFAS-free. The brand states this product is PFAS-free. We have not verified the claim.
30risk points in total, which is a grade of 70
What the grade does not fix. It still carries one risk factor, Disclosed non-fluorinated coating, and our graders recorded 3 other hazards on it. See the full breakdown.
What it beats, and why
What puts it behind. No PFAS disclosure, +15 points. No public statement from the brand about PFAS in this product. The winner carries no such factor.
Made of anodized aluminum (hard-coat anodic oxidation).
- +30Category baseline
- +15No PFAS disclosure
- -10Base material not linked to PFAS. The main material recorded for this product is not one associated with PFAS.
35risk points, a grade of 65
What puts it behind. Non-stick, chemistry undisclosed, +40 points. Marketed as non-stick without stating the coating chemistry. The winner carries no such factor.
Made of ceramic nonstick coating.
- +40Non-stick, chemistry undisclosed
- +30Category baseline
- +15No PFAS disclosure. No public statement from the brand about PFAS in this product.
85risk points, a grade of 15
What puts it behind. Non-stick, chemistry undisclosed, +40 points. Marketed as non-stick without stating the coating chemistry. The winner carries no such factor.
Made of Ceramic nonstick coating (proprietary formulation, type unspecified).
- +40Non-stick, chemistry undisclosed
- +30Category baseline
- +15Vague safety claims only. Uses vague language ("eco-friendly", "clean") without a specific PFAS statement.
85risk points, a grade of 15
No product on this page was physically tested by us. Every number above comes from published materials, ingredient and coating disclosures, certifications and brand statements, scored on one public rubric. Formulations change without notice, so check the current product listing before buying.
What to watch for in nonstick skillets
Beyond the PFAS grade, these are the things our graders recorded on the 18 nonstick skillets in this category. We assess from materials, brand statements and published research. We do not lab-test.
- Microplastics
Plastic fragments small enough to shed from a product into food, water or air without anyone seeing it.
Found on 4 of these nonstick skillets. EPA
- Aluminium leaching
Aluminium migrating out of cookware, bakeware or an antiperspirant into food or skin.
Found on 1 of these nonstick skillets. Plausible but unconfirmed on 7 more, meaning nobody has ruled it out. ATSDR
- VOCs and off-gassing
Volatile compounds that evaporate out of a material at room temperature, which is what a new product smell is.
Plausible but unconfirmed on 7 more, meaning nobody has ruled it out. EPA
- Artificial dyes
Synthetic colours added to food, cosmetics and textiles, most of them petroleum derived.
Plausible but unconfirmed on 1 more, meaning nobody has ruled it out. FDA
- Undisclosed ingredients
Not a chemical. The absence of one, where we found no statement from the brand about what it uses.
Found on 3 of these nonstick skillets. FTC
The safest nonstick skillets we graded, lowest PFAS risk first
- 1
Highest grade here
- ceramic nonstick coating
- The brand calls it PFAS-free, which we have not verified
- Coating degradation and particulate release
3 hazards checked on this product, all on its full breakdown.
- 2
- ceramic non-stick coating
- The brand calls it PFAS-free, which we have not verified
- Coating degradation and aluminum leaching
3 hazards checked on this product, all on its full breakdown.
What the evidence says about PFAS in nonstick skillets
Many nonstick pans are coated with PTFE, a fluoropolymer that Minnesota’s cookware ban treats as a PFAS. Minnesota has banned cookware with intentionally added PFAS since January 2025, Colorado and Maine followed in January 2026, and more states follow through 2028. The US FDA authorizes PFAS in nonstick coatings and says only negligible amounts migrate to food, while Washington’s health department warns that pans that get too hot can release PFAS into the air. A PFOA-free label does not mean a pan is PFAS-free.
- Regulatory filingMinnesota has banned cookware with intentionally added PFAS since January 1, 2025, and its pollution control agency says Teflon, as a PFAS, is prohibited from use in cookware. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency ↗
- Regulatory filingColorado bans the sale of cookware with intentionally added PFAS from January 1, 2026. Colorado General Assembly ↗
- Regulatory filingMaine’s ban on selling cookware with intentionally added PFAS took effect on January 1, 2026. Maine Legislature ↗
- Regulatory filingRhode Island bans covered products with intentionally added PFAS, including cookware, from January 1, 2027. Rhode Island General Assembly ↗
- Regulatory filingConnecticut requires labels on cookware with intentionally added PFAS from July 2026 and bans it from January 1, 2028. Connecticut DEEP ↗
- Regulatory filingCalifornia has required cookware makers to disclose intentionally added chemicals from the state’s designated list online since 2023 and on labels since 2024. California Legislature ↗
- Regulatory filingA 2025 California bill to ban PFAS in cookware, SB 682, was vetoed over concerns about the availability of affordable cooking products. California Legislature ↗
- Regulatory filingThe US FDA lists nonstick coatings among the authorized uses of PFAS in food contact, and says studies show negligible amounts of PFAS in these coatings migrate to food. US FDA ↗
- Regulatory filingThe FDA says that, of these authorized uses, only paper and paperboard grease-proofing agents may result in dietary exposure to PFAS that could be a safety concern. US FDA ↗
- Independent testIn the Ecology Center’s 2020 testing, 79 percent of the cooking pans and 20 percent of the baking pans were coated with PTFE. Ecology Center ↗
- Independent testThe Ecology Center’s 2020 cookware testing found that PFOA-free does not mean PFAS-free, and that most pans labelled PFOA-free were coated with PTFE without clearly saying so. Ecology Center ↗
- Regulatory filingMinnesota’s health department says a PFOA free claim may mean a product contains trace PFOA and any amount of other PFAS. Minnesota Department of Health ↗
- Regulatory filingColorado prohibits cookware makers from claiming a product is free of PFAS unless no individual PFAS is intentionally added. Colorado General Assembly ↗
- Regulatory filingWashington’s health department says PFAS can escape from pans that are too hot and get into the air in your home. Washington State Department of Health ↗
Sources checked September 14, 2026. A brand statement is the company’s own claim, which we report but have not verified. Our grades are model-based estimates, not lab tests.
Questions people ask about nonstick skillets
The verdict on nonstick skillets
GreenPan Rio Ceramic Nonstick Frypan grades 70 out of 100, the highest here. It is ceramic nonstick coating. The brand calls it PFAS-free, which we have not verified.
Choose GreenPan Rio Ceramic Set instead if you want a second option at 70 out of 100, ceramic non-stick coating.
We hold no price data, so nothing here is a budget recommendation. Grades are model-based assessments from published materials and disclosures, not laboratory tests.
The nonstick skillets we would skip
Lowest scoring in this category, worst first, with the reason.
- 15Calphalon Ceramic Nonstick Frying Pan 12"Bad
Ceramic coating degradation and flaking
- 15Calphalon Premier Ceramic Nonstick Frying Pan with LidBad
Ceramic coating degradation and barrier loss
- 15Cuisinart Chef's Classic Stainless Nonstick Skillet Set of 2Bad
Teflon-type coating fume risk (nonstick coating thermal decomposition)
What we check on nonstick skillets
- Heavy metals. Lead, cadmium, arsenic and others that accumulate in the body. FDA
- Lead. A heavy metal with no safe exposure level, especially for children. ATSDR
- Cadmium. A toxic heavy metal found in some glazes, pigments, and batteries. ATSDR
Full point-by-point rubric on the methodology page.
The nonstick skillets brands we found no PFAS statement from
We found no PFAS statement from 2 of the brands here. That is our research, not proof a brand has never said anything, and it is not evidence of harm. It is why none of them score well on disclosure.
Rachael Ray, Scanpan.
The brands that have published something, and what each of them actually said, are in our record of what every brand has said about PFAS.
Common questions about PFAS in nonstick skillets
Are nonstick skillets PFAS free?
16 of the 18 nonstick skillets PFAS Authority has graded score below its 70 point pass mark for PFAS and other toxins, 88.9% of the category, as of October 2026, leaving 2 that pass. The highest graded is GreenPan Rio Ceramic Nonstick Frypan at 70 out of 100. The lowest graded is Calphalon Ceramic Nonstick Frying Pan 12" at 15 out of 100.
Are nonstick skillets non-toxic?
2 of the 18 nonstick skillets we graded clear our screen and 16 do not. Non-toxic is not a defined or regulated term, so what we can tell you is what our graders recorded. Beyond PFAS, the hazards found or left unruled-out on nonstick skillets in this category are microplastics, aluminium leaching, VOCs and off-gassing, artificial dyes, undisclosed ingredients. The highest graded here is GreenPan Rio Ceramic Nonstick Frypan at 70 out of 100.
Which are the safest nonstick skillets to buy?
On our grades, GreenPan Rio Ceramic Nonstick Frypan at 70 out of 100, which we band as Good. Then GreenPan Rio Ceramic Set at 70. These are model-based assessments from published materials, ingredient lists, certifications and disclosures, not laboratory tests, so treat them as the lowest risk we can evidence rather than a safety guarantee.
Which nonstick skillets grade best for PFAS?
GreenPan Rio Ceramic Nonstick Frypan, at 70 out of 100, which we band as Good. It is ceramic nonstick coating. The runner up is GreenPan Rio Ceramic Set at 70.
Which nonstick skillets should I avoid?
The three lowest scoring we hold are Calphalon Ceramic Nonstick Frying Pan 12" at 15, Calphalon Premier Ceramic Nonstick Frying Pan with Lid at 15, Cuisinart Chef's Classic Stainless Nonstick Skillet Set of 2 at 15. The problem with the first is that ceramic non-stick coating of unstated chemistry, and no PFAS statement from the brand.
How can you tell if nonstick skillets contain PFAS?
In this category we check for heavy metals, lead, cadmium. Lead, cadmium, arsenic and others that accumulate in the body. Language like stain resistant, water repellent or easy release usually means fluorinated chemistry even when PFAS is never printed on the box.
Which nonstick skillets brands have not published a PFAS statement?
We found no PFAS statement from 2 of the brands we scored in this category, including Rachael Ray, Scanpan. That is what our research turned up, not proof a brand has never said anything, and a missing statement is not evidence of harm. It is the reason those brands cannot score well on disclosure.
Do you lab test nonstick skillets?
No. We score from published ingredient lists, materials, certifications, disclosures and third party lab results where they exist. Where a product has been independently tested we use that result and say so.
More kitchen and cooking categories we have graded
Same rubric, same scale. These are the categories closest to nonstick skillets.
Get the graded list, free.
The products we score each week, and the best-graded alternative in every category.
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Does a particular brand of nonstick skillets have PFAS?
Brands we grade across the catalogue
Everything we have scored from these brands, not just nonstick skillets.
We also wrote this up at length. PFAS in Nonstick Skillets, Why "Ceramic" on the Box Isn't a Shortcut
Want to filter the whole category yourself? Browse all 18 nonstick skillets.