Chuck Taylor All Star Cx Exp2 4.5 Men A07199C vs Comfortable Casual Non-Slip Wear-Resistant Low-Top Running Shoes Men Sneakers Black ARBS009-4 44⅓: which is safer?
Converse Chuck Taylor All Star Cx Exp2 4.5 Men A07199C is our pick: better on PFAS and on the overall hazard picture.
Our pick
Converse
Chuck Taylor All Star Cx Exp2 4.5 Men A07199C
PFAS grade
Good 65/100
Overall grade
Good 57/100
Verdict
Skip
Hazard flags
⚑ 2
Material
Canvas upper, rubber sole
Confidence
72%
PossibleAzo dyes in canvas
PossibleFormaldehyde resin finishing on canvas
Li-Ning
Comfortable Casual Non-Slip Wear-Resistant Low-Top Running Shoes Men Sneakers Black ARBS009-4 44⅓
PFAS grade
Good 65/100
Overall grade
Good 53/100
Verdict
Skip
Hazard flags
⚑ 3
Material
textile upper, rubber sole, synthetic components
Confidence
65%
PossibleFormaldehyde-releasing fabric finishes
PossibleAzo dyes in black colorway
PossibleSynthetic upper coating adhesion
Where these two actually differ
- We flag Azo dyes in canvas and Formaldehyde resin finishing on canvas on the Converse and not on the Li-Ning.
- We flag Formaldehyde-releasing fabric finishes, Azo dyes in black colorway and Synthetic upper coating adhesion on the Li-Ning and not on the Converse.
- The Converse is Canvas upper, rubber sole where the Li-Ning is textile upper, rubber sole, synthetic components, 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 running & athletic shoes: see the full ranking