PFAS40/ 100Poor
Overall10/ 100Bad
Cobra Premium Winter Mitts

Cobra · Golf Balls & Equipment

Cobra Premium Winter Mitts

Poor

Unknown waterproof treatment chemistry; skip until disclosed.

Verdict · SkipWaterproof treatment chemistry undisclosed; textile formaldehyde and dye risks present but manageable with proper washing. Avoid until PFAS transparency improves.

Winter mitts with textile and waterproof or water-resistant treatment, typically containing water-repellent coating that may include PFAS. Cobra provides no public disclosure of treatment type.

The better-graded swap

New Dunlop Tour Special 12 Pack - Golf Balls

Dunlop

New Dunlop Tour Special 12 Pack - Golf Balls

85/100 safety

85Excellent

Same rubric that flunked this product. The swap earned Excellent.

Still want this one anyway? Check the price on Amazon. We’d swap it.

Material

Textile with waterproof/water-resistant treatment

Brand disclosure

Brand is silent on PFAS

Lab data

No public lab test

What’s concerning

♾️

Category baseline

The starting point for this type of product, before anything specific to this product is counted.

90/ 100
♾️

No PFAS disclosure

No public statement from the brand about PFAS in this product.

85/ 100
♾️

Waterproof / stain-resistant treatment

Water-repellent coating treatments have historically used PFAS.

65/ 100
💨

Formaldehyde / VOCs

Synthetic textiles often use formaldehyde-based resin treatments for shape retention and wrinkle resistance. Winter mitts may contain residual formaldehyde from manufacturing; pre-washing reduces exposure but does not eliminate it entirely.

Source, ATSDR
70/ 100
🎨

Azo dyes and colorant allergens

Synthetic winter apparel commonly uses azo dyes for color fastness in darker shades typical of mitts. Certain azo dyes (e.g., those cleaved to anilines) can cause contact dermatitis or allergic reactions in sensitive individuals; no specific testing of Cobra mitts is on record.

70/ 100
🍳

Waterproof coating volatiles and skin irritation

Undisclosed waterproof treatment (likely Teflon-type coating, polyurethane, or fluorocarbon-based) may off-gas volatile organic compounds during initial wear or under warmth. Skin contact with coating residues can trigger irritation, particularly if the coating is degraded or worn areas expose untreated textile.

20/ 100
🫧

Microplastic shedding from coating wear

Polymer-based waterproof coatings degrade with friction and washing, potentially releasing microfibers and coating particles into wash water and the environment. No specific data on Cobra mitts exists, but synthetic textile coatings are known contributors to microplastic pollution.

70/ 100

What’s reassuring

Antimony in polyester base fabric

If the base textile is polyester (not confirmed), antimony trioxide may be present as a polymerization catalyst, typically at trace levels that do not migrate significantly during normal wear. Industry data shows this poses minimal skin contact risk under standard use conditions.

95/ 100

The full breakdown

What it's made of and why it matters

Cobra Premium Winter Mitts are textile gloves with a waterproof or water-resistant coating applied to the outer layer. The base textile is typically polyester or a polyester-synthetic blend common in winter sportswear; the waterproof treatment is the critical unknown, as brands typically use either Teflon-type coating-based coatings, polyurethane membranes, or fluorocarbon compounds (which may include PFAS). The coating's chemistry directly affects whether volatile compounds or leachable chemicals migrate into skin contact during wear or washing.

The brand's record and disclosure

Cobra's PFAS stance is not publicly disclosed in available product documentation or sustainability statements, and the company has not issued transparent guidance on waterproof treatment chemistry for this product line. No major recalls or safety alerts specific to Cobra winter mitts appear in consumer safety databases. Without certification marks (e.g., Bluesign, OEKO-TEX) or published material safety data, the brand's chemical transparency is below industry best practice for performance apparel.

How it compares in its category

Winter mitts with synthetic waterproofing are standard in the mid-tier performance segment; Cobra sits in typical territory without standout certification or verified lower-PFAS alternatives. Competitors with explicit PFAS-free or Bluesign-certified coatings (e.g., some Patagonia or Arc'teryx models) offer clearer chemical disclosure. Cobra's silence on waterproof chemistry makes it harder to evaluate relative to brands that publish treatment data.

If you buy it

Wash before first wear in cool water with mild detergent to reduce residual coating chemicals or dyes. Machine wash inside-out in cold water, air-dry completely; avoid heat drying or direct sunlight for extended periods, as this can degrade the waterproof layer and potentially release volatile compounds. Replace if the coating flakes, discolors unevenly, or loses water-repellency; degraded coatings may leach treatment chemicals more readily. Store in a dry, ventilated space to prevent mold and bacterial growth in the textile fibers.

What we don’t know

Basis
Model estimate, 35% confidence, not a lab result
Lab test
None on record for this exact product
Brand statement
Cobra has made none

Formulations change between production runs, so check the current label. How we grade.

Better-graded alternatives in Golf Balls & Equipment

Vice Drip Golf Balls

Vice Golf

Vice Drip Golf Balls

synthetic polymer core with urethane/elastomer cover

PFAS Grade85Excellent
Overall Grade85Excellent
Excellent

PFAS unlikely. Brand silent on composition details.

Brand says nothing about PFAS

Bridgestone Men's Pair Golf Gloves

Bridgestone

Men's Pair Golf Gloves

Leather, synthetic leather, or textile blend

PFAS Grade85Excellent
Overall Grade59Good
⚠️

Chromium in leather tanning residue

Limited concern

70
🎨

Azo dyes in colored leather or synthetic components

Limited concern

70
⛏️

Heavy metals

Limited concern

70

Lower PFAS concern, but brand provides no transparency.

Brand says nothing about PFAS

Bridgestone Lady Golf Glove

Bridgestone

Lady Golf Glove

Synthetic leather or leather with standard stitching

PFAS Grade85Excellent
Overall Grade59Good
💨

Formaldehyde / VOCs

Limited concern

70
🫧

Microplastic shedding from synthetic leather

Limited concern

70

Golf glove with typical materials, lower concern profile.

Brand says nothing about PFAS

More golf balls & equipment grades

How we score, every product runs through the same public 0-100 rubric based on materials, coatings, brand disclosure, lab findings, and recalls. See the full methodology → Spotted a mistake? Report an error.