PFAS40/ 100Poor
Overall18/ 100Bad
Wilson Men's Rain Gloves

Wilson · Golf Balls & Equipment

Wilson Men's Rain Gloves

Poor

Rain gloves use water-repellent coating. Wilson silent on PFAS composition.

Verdict · SkipWilson rain gloves carry unknown PFAS risk from water-repellent coating plus typical textile hazards; brand transparency absent. Purchase acceptable with informed use and care.

Rain gloves typically receive water-repellent coating finish, often PFAS-based. Wilson provides no public disclosure of coating chemistry or PFAS.

The better-graded swap

Volvik Marvel 2.0 Gift Set Golf Balls

Volvik

Volvik Marvel 2.0 Gift Set 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

synthetic fabric with water-repellent coating

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
♾️

PFAS

Wilson does not disclose water-repellent coating chemistry. Conventional water-repellent coating coatings often contain PFAS; newer fluorine-free alternatives exist but are not confirmed here. Risk level depends on unknown coating formulation and degree of skin contact during wear.

Source, ATSDR
70/ 100
💨

Formaldehyde / VOCs

Polyester and nylon blends may contain formaldehyde-based resins used in wrinkle resistance or shrink control during manufacturing. Levels in finished gloves are typically low, but off-gassing during initial use is possible, especially with higher humidity and skin warmth.

Source, ATSDR
70/ 100
🎨

Azo dyes in coloring

If gloves are dyed (e.g., black, navy), conventional azo dyes may be present. Some azo dyes can cleave into aromatic amines under sweat and friction, though risk is generally low for apparel with minimal dye-to-skin contact. No specific testing on Wilson gloves is available.

70/ 100
🫧

Coating degradation and microparticle shedding

Water-repellent coatings can flake or shed microparticles with wear and washing. While not classified as microplastics per se, these coating fragments are inhaled or ingested in trace amounts. Long-term health impacts are not established, but minimizing shedding through gentle care is prudent.

45/ 100

What’s reassuring

Antimony in polyester fiber

Polyester production may involve antimony trioxide as a catalyst. Trace antimony can remain in fibers, though documented health risk from wearing polyester apparel is not established. Direct skin contact via gloves is minimal exposure pathway.

95/ 100

The full breakdown

What it's made of and why it matters

Wilson rain gloves use synthetic fabric (likely polyester or nylon blend) treated with a water-repellent coating (water-repellent coating) coating to shed moisture. water-repellent coating coatings historically relied on PFAS "forever chemicals" (PFAS) for water-shedding performance, though some manufacturers have transitioned to fluorine-free alternatives. The base synthetic fabric itself is stable, but the coating's chemical composition and durability are critical to understanding long-term leaching and wear patterns. Without material disclosure from Wilson, the specific water-repellent coating chemistry remains unknown.

The brand's record and disclosure

Wilson, a sporting goods company owned by Amer Sports, does not publicly disclose water-repellent coating chemistry or confirm PFAS-free status on rain gloves or other water-resistant apparel. The brand has not achieved major third-party certifications for textile chemical safety (e.g., Bluesign, OEKO-TEX) that would signal stricter supply chain controls. No major safety recalls or public controversies specific to Wilson rain gloves have been documented, but the lack of transparency on PFAS composition reflects a broader industry pattern of silent reliance on conventional treatments.

How it compares in its category

Rain gloves occupy a niche within water-resistant apparel; most competitors in this space (e.g., Under Armour, adidas, generic brands) similarly decline PFAS disclosure. Higher-end outdoor brands (e.g., Patagonia, Arc'teryx) increasingly advertise PFAS-free water-repellent coating or third-party textile certifications, making them more transparent alternatives. Wilson's positioning is middle-market with conventional water-repellent coating treatment, neither better nor worse than typical sports-brand rain gloves but less transparent than premium competitors.

If you buy it

Wash gloves separately before first use to reduce surface residue and shed excess coating material. Avoid high-heat drying (air dry preferred) as heat can accelerate coating degradation and potential leaching of coating components. Replace gloves when water begins to bead unevenly or soak into fabric, signaling water-repellent coating breakdown (typically 1-2 seasons of regular use). Store dry to prevent mold and bacterial growth in synthetic fibers; mold can produce allergens and odors independent of coating chemistry.

What we don’t know

Basis
Model estimate, 45% confidence, not a lab result
Lab test
None on record for this exact product
Brand statement
Wilson 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.