Men's Trailfarer Shorts vs Men's Athlete Speed Shorts: which is safer?

Reebok Men's Athlete Speed Shorts is our pick: better on PFAS and on the overall hazard picture.

Patagonia Men's Trailfarer Shorts

Patagonia

Men's Trailfarer Shorts

PFAS grade

Poor 45/100

Overall grade

Poor 37/100

Verdict

Skip

Hazard flags

⚑ 2

Material

nylon and polyester blend with water-repellent coating treatment

Confidence

72%

PossiblePolyester microfiber shedding during laundering

Possiblewater-repellent coating degradation and reapplication products

Our pick

Reebok Men's Athlete Speed Shorts

Reebok

Men's Athlete Speed Shorts

PFAS grade

Good 65/100

Overall grade

Poor 47/100

Verdict

Skip

Hazard flags

⚑ 3

Material

Polyester mesh and nylon blend, standard athletic construction

Confidence

72%

PossibleFormaldehyde resins in finishing

PossibleAntimony in polyester

ReportedMicroplastic shedding

Where these two actually differ

  • We flag Polyester microfiber shedding during laundering and DWR coating degradation and reapplication products on the Patagonia and not on the Reebok.
  • We flag Formaldehyde resins in finishing, Antimony in polyester and Microplastic shedding on the Reebok and not on the Patagonia.
  • The Patagonia is nylon and polyester blend with DWR treatment where the Reebok is Polyester mesh and nylon blend, standard athletic construction, which is most of the difference in these two grades.

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 waterproof sports gear: see the full ranking