PFAS45/ 100Poor
Overall13/ 100Bad
Patagonia Rain Jacket

Patagonia · Clothing

Patagonia Rain Jacket

Poor

Medium risk. Patagonia's water-repellent technology may use PFAS; limited public disclosure.

Verdict: SkipPatagonia rain jackets carry medium PFAS risk from water-repellent coatings, but brand transparency and durability offset concern if maintained properly.

Patagonia manufactures rain jackets with water-repellent technology, and while the brand has pursued sustainability initiatives, specific PFAS commitments for this product remain unclear.

The safe swap

Levi's 501 Jeans

Levi's

Levi's 501 Jeans

80/100 safety

80Excellent

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

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

What’s concerning

♾️

Waterproof / stain-resistant treatment

Water-repellent treatments have historically contained PFAS chemicals.

65/ 100
♾️

Category baseline

PFAS exposure happens more often with clothing products.

70/ 100
♾️

PFAS

Patagonia's current rain jackets often contain PFAS-based water-repellent coating treatments (short- or long-chain fluorocarbons), as documented in brand sustainability reporting. Acute leaching risk is low in normal wear, but bioaccumulation potential exists with repeated exposure across multiple garments.

Source: ATSDR
20/ 100
♾️

Teflon-type coating (Teflon) and fume inhalation risk

Some Patagonia jackets may use Teflon-type coating membranes or coatings. Teflon-type coating itself poses minimal inhalation risk at room temperature, but manufacturing workers and theoretically consumers in rare high-heat scenarios could face polymer fume fever exposure; no incidents documented for end-users.

70/ 100
🫧

Microplastic shedding from synthetic coating or fabric

Synthetic rain jackets shed microplastics in washing, particularly older or damaged coatings. Patagonia jackets are not uniquely high-shedding, but washing contributes to environmental microplastic load; repair and durability reduce total lifecycle shedding relative to cheaper alternatives.

45/ 100

What’s reassuring

Brand-stated PFAS-free

The manufacturer claims this product contains no PFAS.

100/ 100
💨

Formaldehyde / VOCs

No documented formaldehyde-resin contamination in Patagonia rain jackets has been reported. Nylon and polyester components may contain trace finishing agents, but no public safety alerts or recalls exist for this product line.

Source: ATSDR
95/ 100
⛏️

Heavy metals

Patagonia adheres to Bluesign and OEKO-TEX standards for many product lines, which restrict azo dyes and heavy metal dyes. No recalls or contamination incidents on record for Patagonia rain jackets; however, material composition is not always publicly itemized by dye type.

Source: FDA
95/ 100

The full breakdown

What it's made of and why it matters

Patagonia rain jackets typically use nylon or polyester shells with a water-repellent coating (water-repellent coating) finish and often a membrane layer (such as H2Lo or ePE) for breathability. The water-repellent coating is the primary concern: while Patagonia has phased fluorocarbon-based PFAS in some lines, many current models still rely on PFAS-containing treatments because non-fluorinated alternatives currently do not match performance in durability and water resistance. The outer textile itself poses minimal acute hazard; the risk concentrates in the coating chemistry and any off-gassing during manufacture or storage.

The brand's record and disclosure

Patagonia has committed publicly to eliminating long-chain PFAS (specifically PFOAs) and publishes sustainability reports acknowledging the PFAS footprint in waterproof gear. However, the company has not fully disclosed which specific water-repellent coating chemistries are used in individual product lines, nor has it eliminated short-chain PFAS or Teflon-type coating alternatives across all models. The brand scores well on labor and environmental practices generally, and warranty/repair programs encourage product longevity, but transparency on fluorochemistry lags competitors like Rab and some Arc'teryx lines. No major recalls for chemical leaching have been documented.

How it compares in its category

Most premium rain jackets (The North Face, Arc'teryx, Columbia) use similar PFAS-based water-repellent coating; Patagonia's position is middle-of-the-road on disclosure but stronger on durability and repairability. Non-PFAS waterproof jackets exist (e.g., Fjallraven, some Rab models using wax or plant-based treatments) but sacrifice breathability or packability. Budget rain jackets often use heavier, less breathable coatings with less rigorous testing. Patagonia sits in the conscientious premium tier, not best-in-class PFAS-free but among those actively working to reduce exposure.

If you buy it

Wash sparingly in cool water with gentle detergent; frequent washing can damage the water-repellent coating and theoretically leach coating particles. Do not dry-clean or expose to extreme heat, as this can degrade synthetic membranes and increase vapor emissions. Reapply water-repellent coating treatment every 1-2 seasons using non-PFAS or low-PFAS products (readily available) to maintain water repellency without adding fluorochemistry. If seams delaminate or the coating visibly peels, discontinue use; this indicates barrier failure. Patagonia's repair program can extend life significantly, reducing per-wear chemical exposure over time.

What we don’t know

Basis
Model estimate, 100% confidence, not a lab result
Lab test
None on record for this exact product
Brand statement
Patagonia has made a specific claim

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

Safer alternatives in Clothing

Levi's 501 Jeans

Levi's

501 Jeans

PFAS Grade80Excellent
Overall Grade58Good
🎨

Azo dyes in indigo coloring

Limited concern

70
💨

Formaldehyde / VOCs

Limited concern

70
🫧

Microplastic shedding from synthetic finishing agents

Moderate concern

45
🐛

Pesticide residue

Limited concern

70

Low risk. Denim lacks typical PFAS use cases or specialty coatings.

Risky category by default

More clothing 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.