PFAS20/ 100Bad
Overall12/ 100Bad
The North Face Women's Etip Indi Gloves

The North Face · Waterproof Winter Gloves

The North Face Women's Etip Indi Gloves

Bad

Moderate PFAS risk from waterproofing; The North Face has not disclosed coating chemistry.

Verdict: SkipModerate PFAS risk from water-repellent coating; no known non-PFAS hazards documented. Safe with proper care and awareness of waterproofing chemistry uncertainty.

The North Face Etip Indi Gloves use water-repellent coating-treated nylon for water resistance, historically linked to PFAS finishes. The brand does not publicly reveal whether treatment uses PFAS or PFAS-free options. No independent lab testing is publicly available.

The safe swap

Patagonia R4 Yulex Regulator Three Finger Mitts

Patagonia

Patagonia R4 Yulex Regulator Three Finger Mitts

90/100 safety

90Excellent

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

Nylon with water-repellent coating (water-repellent coating) coating

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.

65/ 100
♾️

Category baseline

PFAS exposure happens more often with clothing products.

70/ 100
♾️

No PFAS disclosure

The company has not publicly discussed PFAS in this product.

85/ 100
♾️

PFAS

While nylon does not inherently leach, the water-repellent coating finish chemistry is undisclosed. If older PFAS formulations are used, dermal contact during wet conditions and subsequent hand washing could introduce trace PFAS into skin and wastewater; newer short-chain PFAS carry similar persistence concerns.

Source: ATSDR
70/ 100
🫧

Microplastics

Nylon gloves shed microfibers during repeated washing and abrasion; this is inherent to synthetic textiles and not specific to this brand, but contributes to cumulative microplastic load in wastewater.

Source: EPA
70/ 100

What’s reassuring

Azo dyes and colorfast agents in nylon fabric

No specific recalls or warnings for The North Face gloves exist. Nylon is typically low-risk for azo dye migration, but black or dark-colored gloves require azo-free dyes in responsible manufacturing; The North Face does not publish dye restrictions or third-party testing.

95/ 100
💨

Formaldehyde / VOCs

No formaldehyde-based finishing agents are commonly documented in nylon winter gloves or The North Face products. Standard nylon does not require formaldehyde curing, but the water-repellent coating process chemistry is undisclosed.

Source: ATSDR
95/ 100

The full breakdown

What it's made of and why it matters

The Etip Indi Gloves are constructed from nylon with a water-repellent coating (water-repellent coating) coating applied to the shell. water-repellent coating treatments historically relied on long-chain PFAS compounds (PFOA, PFOS) but the industry has partially shifted to shorter-chain alternatives, which remain persistent in the environment and bioaccumulative. The North Face has not disclosed whether this glove uses legacy PFAS, newer PFAS, or truly PFAS-free chemistry. Nylon itself is chemically stable and does not leach hazardous compounds under normal wear conditions.

The brand's record and disclosure

The North Face (owned by VF Corporation) has not made public commitments to eliminate PFAS from apparel or disclosed coating chemistry for individual products. VF Corporation signed the ZDHC Gateway commitment (2020) pledging phase-out of legacy PFAS by 2025, but enforcement and product-level transparency remain limited. The North Face does not provide third-party testing results or material safety data sheets for consumer products. No formal recalls or safety violations specific to this glove line have been reported in public records.

How it compares in its category

Winter glove water-repellent coating treatments are nearly universal in the outdoor category; avoiding them entirely means accepting reduced water resistance. Some competitors (Patagonia, Arc'teryx) have begun disclosing or transitioning to fluorine-free water repellents, though availability is limited. The Etip Indi sits in the mainstream performance segment where PFAS-free alternatives exist but are less common and often more expensive. This glove is not an outlier in its use of water-repellent coating but represents the industry standard of non-transparent coating chemistry.

If you buy it

Wash gloves separately by hand in cool water and mild detergent to minimize any potential leaching of coating chemicals into wastewater; avoid dry cleaning. water-repellent coating coatings degrade after 30-50 washes; do not attempt to restore with spray-on PFAS treatments (replace coating or glove instead). Store in a breathable bag to prevent mold and off-gassing in sealed plastic. If PFAS exposure is a personal concern, request The North Face technical support to confirm the exact water-repellent coating chemistry before purchase or consider purchasing from brands with published PFAS-free certifications.

What we don’t know

Basis
Model estimate, 55% confidence, not a lab result
Lab test
None on record for this exact product
Brand statement
The North Face 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

Patagonia

R4 Yulex Regulator Three Finger Mitts

Yulex (synthetic rubber), neoprene-free alternative

PFAS Grade90Excellent
Overall Grade82Excellent

Coating degradation and water-repellency loss

Limited concern

70
⚠️

Allergen potential from Yulex itself

Limited concern

70

Lower PFAS concern; Yulex is a known PFAS-reduction choice, independent verification absent.

Risky category by default

Better Sweater Gloves Patagonia Women's

Patagonia

Better Sweater Gloves Patagonia Women's

Polyester fleece (recycled)

PFAS Grade65Good
Good

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.