PFAS70/ 100Good
Overall48/ 100Poor
Kotex Core Daily Wrapped Liners

Kotex · Panty Liners

Kotex Core Daily Wrapped Liners

Good

Lower PFAS concern; standard period-liner materials without disclosed water-resistance treatment.

Verdict: BuyCotton-rayon blend with standard adhesive carries minimal established hazards; brand transparency is weak but product safety profile is typical for category.

These liners use cotton and rayon without water-repellent coatings that typically require PFAS. The brand provides no PFAS information or third-party testing.

Check price on Amazon →

We flunk more products than we pass. This one earned its grade. How we grade

Material

cotton, rayon, adhesive (nonwoven blend)

Brand disclosure

Brand is silent on PFAS

Lab data

No public lab test

What’s concerning

♾️

Category baseline

PFAS exposure happens more often with clothing products.

75/ 100
♾️

No PFAS disclosure

The company has not publicly discussed PFAS in this product.

85/ 100
⛏️

Synthetic adhesive leachables

The backing adhesive is not chemically characterized in public materials for this product. Acrylate and rubber-based adhesives used in panty liners are generally considered stable under skin-contact conditions at body temperature, but data on migration into genital skin microbiome is limited.

70/ 100
⚠️

Fragrance allergens (if scented variant)

Kotex Core Daily is available in both scented and unscented versions. Scented variants carry typical fragrance-allergen risk (limonene, linalool, etc.) common to all scented period-care products; genital skin sensitivity is more common in this category than with unscented.

45/ 100
🫧

Microplastic shedding from nonwoven backing

Synthetic nonwoven backings can shed microfibers, though panty liners are single-use and brief-contact, minimizing dermal exposure compared to reusables. No quantified shedding data is publicly available for this specific product.

70/ 100
🏷️

PFAS

Kotex does not disclose whether water-resistant treatment is applied to Core Daily liners. Given the category assessment of lower PFAS concern (no heavy water-repellency claims), treatment is less likely than in premium or scented variants, but absence of statement means uncertain exposure.

Source: ATSDR
70/ 100

What’s reassuring

Safe base material

Made from ceramic, mineral, or natural fiber with no PFAS risk.

100/ 100
⛏️

Heavy metals

Rayon production uses sodium hydroxide and carbon disulfide, with potential trace formaldehyde or metal residues in finished fiber. No specific testing or recalls have been reported for Kotex panty liners; rayon safety in thin personal-care products is considered standard practice.

Source: FDA
95/ 100

The full breakdown

What it's made of and why it matters

Kotex Core Daily liners use a nonwoven blend of cotton and rayon (viscose) as the absorbent core, with synthetic adhesive on the backing for adherence to underwear. Cotton is a natural fiber with low chemical reactivity; rayon is regenerated cellulose and similarly stable when used in thin personal-care applications. The adhesive is the variable component and is typically a synthetic polymer (acrylate or rubber-based), which poses minimal leaching risk under normal body-temperature exposure in this low-moisture application.

The brand's record and disclosure

Kotex (Kimberly-Clark subsidiary) does not publicly disclose detailed material certifications, chemical testing, or supply-chain audits for this product line. The brand has faced no major recalls or contamination scandals specific to panty liners in recent public records. They have not made explicit statements about PFAS use or avoidance in period-care products, leaving water-resistance treatment status unclear. No third-party certifications (e.g., Oeko-Tex, Cradle to Cradle) are claimed for this product.

How it compares in its category

Panty liners as a category carry lower chemical-exposure risk than pads or tampons because absorbency demands are minimal and products are thinner. Kotex Core Daily is mainstream/conventional tier, positioned between budget brands and premium organic alternatives like Cora or Rael. Material composition (cotton-rayon blend) is industry standard and does not differentiate it significantly; the main variance in the category is PFAS water-resistance coatings, which are common in mass-market brands but often undisclosed. Pricing and accessibility suggest no premium safety investment relative to competitors.

If you buy it

No special storage or handling precautions are necessary; standard pantry-dry conditions are sufficient. Replace after each use as intended; liners are single-use disposable and degradation or adhesive failure is not a practical concern over hours. If you experience skin irritation, consider sensitivity to fragrance (if scented variant) or synthetic adhesive, and switch to unscented or hypoallergenic alternatives. Check ingredient/material lists on packaging if allergies to rayon or synthetic polymers are a concern, though reactions are rare.

What we don’t know

Basis
Model estimate, 72% confidence, not a lab result
Lab test
None on record for this exact product
Brand statement
Kotex has made none

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

More panty liners 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.