Men's Iconic Essentials Wicking Boxer Briefs vs Women's Quarter Crew Socks (6 Pairs): which is safer?

Champion Men's Iconic Essentials Wicking Boxer Briefs is our pick: better on PFAS and on the overall hazard picture.

Our pick

Champion Men's Iconic Essentials Wicking Boxer Briefs

Champion

Men's Iconic Essentials Wicking Boxer Briefs

PFAS grade

Good 65/100

Overall grade

Good 53/100

Verdict

Skip

Hazard flags

⚑ 3

Material

polyester/elastane blend, moisture-wicking synthetic

Confidence

72%

PossibleAzo dyes and synthetic dye residues

PossibleAntimony in polyester catalyst residue

PossibleFormaldehyde in finish resins

PUMA Women's Quarter Crew Socks (6 Pairs)

Puma

Women's Quarter Crew Socks (6 Pairs)

PFAS grade

Good 65/100

Overall grade

Poor 47/100

Verdict

Skip

Hazard flags

⚑ 3

Material

Cotton/polyester blend socks, no waterproofing

Confidence

82%

PossibleAzo dyes

PossibleFormaldehyde resins (finishing agents)

ReportedMicroplastic shedding

Where these two actually differ

  • We flag Azo dyes and synthetic dye residues, Antimony in polyester catalyst residue and Formaldehyde in finish resins on the Champion and not on the Puma.
  • We flag Azo dyes, Formaldehyde resins (finishing agents) and Microplastic shedding on the Puma and not on the Champion.
  • The Champion is polyester/elastane blend, moisture-wicking synthetic where the Puma is Cotton/polyester blend socks, no waterproofing, which is most of the difference in these two grades.
  • These two are level, close enough that price and fit should decide it rather than our grade.

Both products run through the same public rubric: materials, coatings, brand disclosure, lab findings, and recalls, plus a beyond-PFAS hazard analysis. Grades are model-based estimates, not lab tests. How grades work →

More sports performance undergarments: see the full ranking