PFAS in Softshell Jackets, Which Brands Grade Best and Worst

Softshell jackets rely on durable water repellent (DWR) finishes and laminated membranes to shed rain and wind, and those finishes are one of the most common places PFAS ("forever chemicals") show up in outdoor apparel. Based on available materials and data, no softshell jacket in our database currently earns a strong safety grade. Among the fourteen models we reviewed, the least concerning options are Patagonia's Nano-Air Light Hybrid Hoody and R2 TechFace Hoody and R2 TechFace Jacket, each landing at a "Poor" grade with a 45/100 model-based safety score. Every other jacket we graded in this category, including models from Arc'teryx, Salomon, Columbia, and The North Face, scored "Bad" at 20/100.

That framing matters. Patagonia's softshells are not "PFAS-free" and not "safe" in any lab-verified sense, they simply score meaningfully higher than the rest of the field based on our model's read of disclosed materials and public data. If you need a softshell jacket today and want the lowest relative concern among tested options, the Patagonia TechFace and Nano-Air lines are the pragmatic pick. If you can wait or substitute a different garment type, our broader clothing category guide and the PFAS product finder can help you compare across categories where genuinely low-PFAS options exist.

Summary comparison

Product	PFAS grade (model estimate)	Verdict
Patagonia Men's Nano-Air Light Hybrid Hoody	Poor, 45/100	Least-bad of reviewed softshells, still notable PFAS concern
Patagonia Men's R2 TechFace Hoody	Poor, 45/100	Same tier as above, relative improvement only
Patagonia Men's R2 TechFace Jacket	Poor, 45/100	Same tier as above, relative improvement only
Arc'teryx Gamma Lightweight Hoody Men's	Bad, 20/100	High relative concern, avoid if alternatives exist
Arc'teryx Gamma Lightweight Jacket Men's	Bad, 20/100	High relative concern, avoid if alternatives exist
Arc'teryx Beta SL Jacket for Men	Bad, 20/100	High relative concern, avoid if alternatives exist
Salomon Men's RS Softshell Jacket	Bad, 20/100	High relative concern, avoid if alternatives exist
Salomon Outpeak Softshell Hooded Jacket	Bad, 20/100	High relative concern, avoid if alternatives exist
Salomon Men's Equipe Softshell Jacket	Bad, 20/100	High relative concern, avoid if alternatives exist
Salomon Sense Aero Wind Jacket	Bad, 20/100	High relative concern, avoid if alternatives exist
Salomon Men's Mountain Flex Hybrid Jacket	Bad, 20/100	High relative concern, avoid if alternatives exist
Salomon Men's Shkout Fly Windbreaker	Bad, 20/100	High relative concern, avoid if alternatives exist
Columbia Men's Ascender Softshell Jacket	Bad, 20/100	High relative concern, avoid if alternatives exist
The North Face Men's Alta Vista Jacket	Bad, 20/100	High relative concern, avoid if alternatives exist

How we're reading these grades

Every score in the table above is a model-based estimate built from materials lists, brand disclosures, and public data on finishing chemistry, not a laboratory test of the specific jacket you would receive. A "Poor" grade at 45/100 is still a low score in absolute terms, it simply beats "Bad" at 20/100. None of these products should be described as "PFAS-free" or "safe" based on the information available to us. Where a brand markets a jacket as using a "PFAS-free DWR" or similar language, we note that explicitly as a brand claim below, distinct from any third-party verified testing, because we have not seen independent lab confirmation for these specific SKUs.

Patagonia Nano-Air Light Hybrid Hoody and R2 TechFace line

Materials, These jackets combine a woven softshell face fabric with a brushed grid fleece backer (R2 TechFace) or a lightly insulated hybrid shell (Nano-Air Light Hybrid), finished with a durable water repellent coating on the face fabric to resist light rain and wind-driven moisture.

Brand claims, Patagonia has publicly committed to moving its DWR finishes away from long-chain PFC chemistry across much of its line, and the company publishes a fairly detailed supply-chain and chemicals policy. That is a brand-stated commitment, not a per-product, third-party verified lab result for the exact hoody or jacket you would buy.

Pros,

• Highest score among the softshell jackets we've graded in this category, based on available materials and data
• Brand has a documented, publicly tracked chemicals-management program, which supports somewhat higher confidence than brands with no disclosure
• Durable, repairable construction that reduces how often you need to replace the garment

Cons,

• Still grades "Poor," meaning meaningful PFAS-related concern remains based on our model
• No lab certificate or third-party test result tied to this specific SKU is included in our review
• Brand transition timelines for finishing chemistry vary by product line and year of manufacture, so an older or newer production run could differ from what our estimate reflects

Arc'teryx Gamma and Beta SL lines

Materials, The Gamma Lightweight Hoody Gamma Lightweight Jacket, and Beta SL Jacket all use tightly woven, wind- and weather-resistant face fabrics with a DWR finish, and the Beta SL adds a waterproof-breathable membrane for full shell protection.

Brand claims, Arc'teryx has discussed reducing PFC use in some product categories, but the company has not published the kind of granular, per-style disclosure that would let us verify PFAS status for these specific jackets. Based on available materials and data, that gap in disclosure is itself a contributing factor to the lower score.

Pros,

• Well-regarded weather performance and build quality from a technical apparel maker
• Long track record of durability, which can reduce overall consumption and replacement frequency

Cons,

• Grades "Bad" at 20/100 based on our model's read of materials and public disclosure
• Limited public, style-specific chemical disclosure compared to some competitors
• No evidence of PFAS-free reformulation found in reviewed sources for these particular styles

Salomon softshell and windshell lineup

Materials, Salomon's RS Softshell Jacket Outpeak Softshell Hooded Jacket Equipe Softshell Jacket Sense Aero Wind Jacket Mountain Flex Hybrid Jacket, and Shkout Fly Windbreaker span running-oriented windshells to insulated hybrid softshells, but they share a common thread, stretch-woven or bonded face fabrics finished with a water- and wind-resistant treatment.

Brand claims, Salomon's parent company has made broader sustainability statements, but we found no product-specific, third-party verified PFAS-free claims for these six styles in the sources available to us. Absence of a claim is not the same as confirmed presence of PFAS, but it does limit how much credit our model can assign.

Pros,

• Wide range of use cases covered, from trail running wind protection to resort-oriented softshell insulation
• Consistent, mainstream availability and sizing across the lineup

Cons,

• All six styles grade "Bad" at 20/100 based on our model-based estimate from materials and public disclosure
• No specific PFAS-free reformulation language found for these jackets in reviewed sources
• Represents the largest single block of "Bad"-graded products in this category, so shoppers loyal to the brand have limited lower-concern alternatives within it today

Columbia Ascender and The North Face Alta Vista

Materials, The Columbia Ascender Softshell Jacket uses a bonded softshell fabric with a brushed interior and a water-resistant face finish. The The North Face Alta Vista Jacket uses a similar bonded softshell construction aimed at everyday wind and light-moisture resistance.

Brand claims, Both companies have made broader corporate statements about reducing PFC-based DWR over time across parts of their catalogs. Neither claim, as documented in the sources we reviewed, is tied specifically and verifiably to these two jackets, so we treat it as a brand-level statement rather than a confirmed attribute of the product you'd actually buy.

Pros,

• Accessible price points relative to premium technical brands
• Functional wind and light-rain resistance for everyday use, according to brand marketing

Cons,

• Both grade "Bad" at 20/100 based on available materials and data
• No product-specific PFAS-free verification found in reviewed sources
• Bonded softshell construction can make it harder to identify exactly which layer carries the PFAS-related finish

What to avoid

Based on available materials and data, a few patterns showed up repeatedly among the "Bad"-graded jackets in this review.

• Vague or absent chemical disclosure. Jackets from brands that make only general corporate sustainability statements, without style-specific PFAS disclosure, consistently scored lower than jackets from brands publishing more granular chemicals-management data.
• Marketing language that implies but doesn't confirm. Terms like "eco DWR," "advanced water repellency," or "engineered performance fabric" are brand-stated descriptors, not verified PFAS-free claims. Treat them as marketing until you see a specific chemistry disclosure or third-party test result.
• Bonded, multi-layer softshell fabrics with no layer-by-layer transparency. When a brand doesn't specify which layer carries the water-repellent finish, it's harder for any model, ours included, to assign a confident, granular score.
• Assuming any outdoor brand is automatically low-concern. Reputation and price point did not track cleanly with PFAS grade in this category. Some premium technical brands graded "Bad" alongside mass-market brands.

If you're shopping outside softshell jackets specifically, the same disclosure patterns apply broadly. Our waterproof boots and swimwear guides cover other categories where DWR-style finishes are common, and the clothing category roundup is a good starting point if you want to compare softshells against other garment types before you buy.

Our pick

Based on available materials and data, Patagonia's R2 TechFace Jacket R2 TechFace Hoody, and Nano-Air Light Hybrid Hoody are the relatively lower-concern choices among the softshell jackets we've reviewed, each landing at "Poor" with a 45/100 model-based safety score rather than the "Bad," 20/100 result attached to every Arc'teryx, Salomon, Columbia, and The North Face softshell in this batch. That is a comparative statement, not a declaration that these jackets are free of PFAS or safe in an absolute sense. If minimizing PFAS exposure from clothing is a priority for you, consider pairing that purchase decision with scrutiny of your other gear, and use the PFAS product finder to check specific items across categories like waterproof boots swimwear, and everyday clothing before assuming any one purchase solves the broader exposure question.

Frequently asked questions

Is any softshell jacket in this review actually PFAS-free?

No. Based on available materials and data, every jacket we graded in this category scored either "Poor" or "Bad," and we found no third-party verified, product-specific PFAS-free confirmation for any of the fourteen jackets covered here. Brand-stated sustainability commitments exist for some companies, but those are corporate-level or category-level statements, not lab-confirmed results for these specific SKUs.

Does a higher score mean the jacket has no health risk?

No. A higher score, such as the 45/100 "Poor" result for Patagonia's TechFace and Nano-Air Light Hybrid jackets, means lower relative concern compared to other graded softshells, not an absence of risk. Research linking PFAS exposure to health effects reflects an association observed in studies, not a proven causal outcome for any individual product or wearer, and our scores are model-based estimates from materials and disclosure data rather than clinical or lab findings.

Why did premium brands like Arc'teryx grade worse than Patagonia?

Our model weighs the specificity and public availability of chemical disclosure alongside known finishing chemistry patterns. Based on available materials and data, Patagonia's more granular, publicly tracked chemicals-management disclosures gave our model more confidence to differentiate its products, while brands with more general or absent style-specific disclosure, including several premium technical brands, scored lower by default. Price and brand reputation did not correlate with PFAS grade in this review.