PFAS in Sleeping Bags, Fourteen Grade the Same and None of Them Well

We graded fifteen sleeping bags from The North Face, REI Co-op, Coleman, Patagonia, Mountain Hardwear and Therm-a-Rest. Fourteen of them score 20 out of 100, because every shell in the set is a nylon or polyester fabric carrying a durable water-repellent finish and none of those makers says anything about PFAS. The one exception is the Patagonia Fitz Roy Down Sleeping Bag, which has the same kind of finish but grades 45, because Patagonia says 100% of its new products from Spring 2025 are made without intentionally added PFAS, a brand claim we have not verified.

There is no top pick in this guide. Fourteen bags are tied, and the fifteenth is separated only by a brand statement and still sits in our Poor band, so naming a winner would mean inventing more distinction than our data contains, and we are not going to do that to make the page look more useful.

Summary comparison table

Product	PFAS grade	Shell as recorded
The North Face Wawona Bed Double	Bad, 20/100	Polyester shell with DWR water-repellent finish
The North Face Universal One Bag	Bad, 20/100	Nylon and polyester, DWR coating, type unspecified
The North Face Wasatch Pro 40	Bad, 20/100	Nylon ripstop, DWR treatment, composition unspecified
Patagonia Fitz Roy Down	Poor, 45/100	Down fill, nylon or polyester shell with DWR treatment
Mountain Hardwear Phantom 30F	Bad, 20/100	Nylon ripstop shell, DWR-treated fabric
Therm-a-Rest Polar Ranger	Bad, 20/100	Synthetic insulation, nylon shell with DWR treatment
REI Co-op Trailmade 25	Bad, 20/100	Polyester shell with DWR treatment
REI Co-op Siesta Hooded 20	Bad, 20/100	Nylon ripstop with DWR water-repellent treatment
REI Co-op Campwell 30	Bad, 20/100	Nylon ripstop shell with DWR coating
Coleman Palmetto	Bad, 20/100	Polyester shell with waterproof coating
Coleman Flatlands 40°F	Bad, 20/100	Polyester shell with DWR water-resistant coating
Coleman Sun Ridge	Bad, 20/100	Polyester with DWR water-repellent finish
Coleman Arch Bay 30	Bad, 20/100	Polyester shell with DWR coating
Coleman Flatlands	Bad, 20/100	Polyester shell with durable water-repellent finish
Coleman Brazos	Bad, 20/100	Polyester shell with DWR water-repellent finish

How we graded these

Every grade here is a model-based estimate built from publicly available materials disclosures and brand documentation, not a lab test performed by our team. A high score means lower concern based on reviewed sources, never PFAS-free and never safe. No sleeping bag in this set carried published independent lab data. The recorded concerns were PFAS in the DWR finish, coating degradation over time, DWR treatment chemistry, and fluorocarbon coating composition. Cross-reference any specific bag in our PFAS product finder.

A near-complete tie is itself the finding

Most categories on this site produce a spread. Our hiking pants guide found two untreated pairs among fifteen, our woks guide found carbon steel sitting above the coated pans. Here the only spread comes from one brand statement.

The reason is that water repellency is not an optional feature on a sleeping bag the way it is on trousers. A bag that soaks up condensation loses its loft and stops insulating, which is a genuine safety matter at low temperatures, not a comfort preference. So every manufacturer treats the shell, from a 25 dollar Coleman to a Therm-a-Rest built for polar use. The result is fifteen products with the same construction decision, and fourteen with the same grade.

That makes this guide different from the others. We cannot tell you which one to buy, because our data barely distinguishes them. What we can tell you is what the grade is actually about.

Where the finish sits matters

The DWR is on the outer shell, the surface facing the weather. It is not the lining your face is against for eight hours, and it is not the insulation. That is a real distinction and it works in the reader's favor, so we will state it rather than leave the grade to imply direct skin contact.

What we cannot tell you is how much that separates you from it in practice, because a sleeping bag is compressed, unpacked, stuffed into a sack, dragged over ground and slept in, and none of our sources measure transfer from a treated shell to the person inside. We are not going to fill that gap with a guess in either direction.

The one differently worded record

Fourteen bags are recorded with a DWR or durable water-repellent finish. The Coleman Palmetto is recorded as a polyester shell with a waterproof coating, which is a different phrase for what may or may not be a different thing. It grades the same 20. We are flagging the wording rather than building an argument on it, because a difference in how a listing is written is not evidence of a difference in chemistry.

Patagonia at 45

The Patagonia Fitz Roy Down Sleeping Bag carries a DWR-treated shell like every other bag here, and our model counts that treatment. It grades 25 points higher because Patagonia says 100% of its new products from Spring 2025 are made without intentionally added PFAS. That earns a brand claim credit and removes the penalty for saying nothing about PFAS. It is Patagonia's own statement, not a test or a certification, and it covers new products, so an older Fitz Roy bought on clearance or secondhand may predate it. An earlier version of this guide graded it 20 with the rest, and we updated it on 17 September 2026.

What to avoid

• Paying a premium expecting the expensive bag to have solved this. Therm-a-Rest and Mountain Hardwear grade identically to a Coleman Brazos, and Patagonia's Fitz Roy is still treated and reaches only 45 on a brand statement.
• Reapplying an aftermarket water-repellent spray without reading what is in it. Our stain guard spray category covers the aftermarket treatments, and some of them are exactly the chemistry people buy a new bag to avoid.
• Reading 20 out of 100 as proof a bag contains PFAS. It reflects a water-repellent finish whose composition the manufacturer does not name, on fourteen of the bags we graded.
• Assuming an untreated sleeping bag is the obvious answer. A shell that wets out and collapses is a cold-weather hazard in its own right, and that trade-off is real.

The same finish runs through the rest of a camping kit. Our backpacks guide found thirteen of fifteen packs at 20 for the same reason, rain jackets and camping gear cover the shelters, and the PFAS hazard page explains why durable water-repellent finishes draw scrutiny.

Why there is no top pick

Fourteen products share one grade, and the fifteenth, the Patagonia Fitz Roy at 45, is lifted only by an unverified brand statement. Naming a best sleeping bag here would mean ranking them on something other than what we measured, which is exactly the move this site exists to avoid. If you are choosing between these bags, choose on temperature rating, weight, shape and price, because those are real differences and PFAS grading barely separates these bags. If avoiding a treated shell is your priority, our data does not currently contain a sleeping bag that meets it, and we would rather say that than manufacture a winner. These grades are estimates built from disclosed materials, not laboratory proof, and nothing here is being called PFAS-free or safe by us.

FAQ

Do sleeping bags contain PFAS?

All fifteen bags we graded carry a durable water-repellent finish on the shell, and none of the manufacturers names what that finish is made of. Patagonia is the only one with a PFAS statement, saying its new products from Spring 2025 are made without intentionally added PFAS. DWR finishes have historically often been fluorochemical based, which is why they grade poorly in our model, and many brands have been moving to non-fluorinated alternatives. Without disclosure we cannot confirm which is on any given bag.

Is a PFAS-free sleeping bag available?

Not one we can confirm. The closest is the Patagonia Fitz Roy Down Sleeping Bag, which grades 45 because Patagonia says its new products from Spring 2025 are made without intentionally added PFAS. That is the brand's statement rather than a test, and the bag still carries a water-repellent finish our model counts. The other fourteen makers disclosed nothing about PFAS.

Does the DWR on a sleeping bag touch my skin?

The finish is applied to the outer shell, not the lining or the insulation, so it is not the surface against you while you sleep. How much that matters in practice is not something our sources measure, and we are not going to estimate it.

Why do fourteen sleeping bags have the same score?

Because they share the same construction. Every shell is nylon or polyester with a water-repellent treatment of undisclosed composition, and none of those makers says anything about PFAS, so our model sees the same inputs and returns the same output. The Patagonia bag has the same construction but a brand PFAS statement, which is why it grades 45. The tie is a real finding about the category rather than a gap in the data.