Columbia · Waterproof Winter Gloves
Columbia Men's Arctic Crest Gloves
Wait for Columbia to disclose water-repellent coating chemistry; silent stance on PFAS raises concern.
Columbia's Arctic Crest Gloves use a water-repellent coating finish typical of insulated winter gloves, but the brand does not publicly reveal chemical formulation. water-repellent coating coatings historically relied on PFAS. No lab data, PFAS claims, or certifications are publicly available.
The safe swap
Patagonia
Patagonia R4 Yulex Regulator Three Finger Mitts
90/100 safety
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
Synthetic textile with water-repellent coating water-repellent finish (unspecified)
Brand disclosure
Brand is silent on PFAS
Lab data
No public lab test
What’s concerning
Waterproof / stain-resistant treatment
Water-repellent treatments have historically contained PFAS chemicals.
Category baseline
PFAS exposure happens more often with clothing products.
No PFAS disclosure
The company has not publicly discussed PFAS in this product.
PFAS
Arctic Crest's water-repellent coating finish chemistry is undisclosed. Traditional formulations contain long-chain PFAS; modern alternatives may use short-chain PFAS or non-fluorinated compounds. Dermal absorption during wear is considered minimal; concern is primarily exposure during manufacturing, washing, and disposal.
Source: ATSDR ↗Synthetic textile degradation and microfiber shedding
Polyester or nylon blend gloves shed microfibers during normal wear and especially during washing. No product-specific shedding data is available, but risk is inherent to the material class and increases with mechanical stress (washing, friction).
What’s reassuring
Formaldehyde / VOCs
No formaldehyde-based finishes have been reported in Columbia Arctic Crest or similar modern synthetic winter gloves. water-repellent coating coatings themselves do not typically contain formaldehyde, unlike some cotton apparel treatments.
Source: ATSDR ↗Heavy metals
Arctic Crest uses synthetic materials that are typically dyed with disperse dyes rather than azo dyes; heavy metal pigment contamination is not a documented issue in Columbia's mainstream winter glove line.
Source: FDA ↗Antimony in polyester
Antimony is a catalyst used in some polyester production but is typically retained in the polymer matrix and does not migrate significantly during use or washing; no product-specific testing or recalls for Arctic Crest indicate this as a concern.
The full breakdown
What it's made of and why it matters
Columbia's Arctic Crest Gloves use synthetic textiles (likely polyester or nylon blend) with a water-repellent coating (water-repellent coating) finish applied to the outer shell. water-repellent coating coatings are the primary concern here: they are traditionally formulated with long-chain PFAS compounds to repel water and oil, though some manufacturers have shifted to shorter-chain or non-fluorinated alternatives. The specific chemistry of Columbia's water-repellent coating finish is not disclosed on product labels or the company's website, making it impossible to confirm whether PFAS-free formulations were used. The glove lining and insulation materials are not detailed in available product information.
The brand's record and disclosure
Columbia Sportswear has not published a comprehensive PFAS disclosure policy specific to apparel, unlike some outdoor brands (Patagonia, The North Face) that have committed to phasing out long-chain PFAS in water-repellent coating treatments. Columbia's website does not itemize chemical composition or certifications (such as GOTS, bluesign, or Cradle to Cradle) for most winter glove lines, including Arctic Crest. The brand has faced no major public safety recalls or controversies tied to this product line, but the absence of transparency on water-repellent coating chemistry is notable given industry awareness of PFAS concerns since the early 2010s.
How it compares in its category
Most waterproof winter gloves at Columbia's price point use water-repellent coating-coated synthetic shells; higher-end competitors (Hestra, Arc'teryx) often disclose their water-repellent coating formulations or offer PFAS-free certified options. Budget alternatives from mass-market brands typically use identical or less-transparent water-repellent coating chemistry. Gloves labeled with certifications (bluesign, OEKO-TEX) are rarer in winter sportswear and generally cost more. Arctic Crest's lack of transparency is fairly typical for the mid-market outdoor brand category, but not ideal from a precautionary standpoint.
If you buy it
Wash gloves by hand in lukewarm water with mild detergent to avoid accelerating water-repellent coating degradation; machine washing or hot water can reduce water repellency and potentially release coating particles. Do not dry clean or expose to temperatures above 140F (60C), as heat can compromise synthetic fibers and finishes. Reapply water-repellent coating treatment every 1-2 seasons if water no longer beads on the surface; use products labeled PFAS-free if available. If concerned about PFAS exposure, contact Columbia directly to request water-repellent coating chemistry information before purchase, or consider brands with published certifications.
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
- Columbia has made none
Formulations change between production runs, so check the current label. How we grade.
Safer alternatives in Waterproof Winter Gloves
Patagonia
R4 Yulex Regulator Three Finger Mitts
Yulex (synthetic rubber), neoprene-free alternative
Coating degradation and water-repellency loss
Limited concern
Allergen potential from Yulex itself
Limited concern
Lower PFAS concern; Yulex is a known PFAS-reduction choice, independent verification absent.
⚠Risky category by default
Patagonia
Better Sweater Gloves Patagonia Women's
Polyester fleece (recycled)
Lower PFAS concern; fleece gloves rarely need water-repellent coating, but Patagonia has not publicly disclosed PFAS policy.
⚠Risky category by default
More waterproof winter gloves 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.