High Performance Cushion No Show Tab vs Women's Quarter Crew Socks (6 Pairs): which is safer?
Feetures High Performance Cushion No Show Tab is our pick, better on PFAS and on the overall hazard picture.
Our pick
Feetures
High Performance Cushion No Show Tab
PFAS grade
Good 65/100
Overall grade
Poor 49/100
Verdict
Skip
Hazard flags
⚑ 4
Material
Acrylic blend sock with no disclosed treatments
Confidence
72%
PossibleAzo dyes in synthetic fibers
PossibleFormaldehyde in fabric resins
PossibleMicrofiber shedding and inhalation
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 in synthetic fibers, Formaldehyde in fabric resins, Microfiber shedding and inhalation and Elastic and dye migration at moisture/sweat interface on the Feetures and not on the Puma.
- We flag Azo dyes, Formaldehyde resins (finishing agents) and Microplastic shedding on the Puma and not on the Feetures.
- The Feetures is Acrylic blend sock with no disclosed treatments 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, which covers 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