Cardinal Health sustainability score: 37/100
Better than 10% of Healthcare / Pharmaceuticals
Making progress starts at 46. The highest score on SINK is 71.
Cardinal Health is a US healthcare distributor and medical-products manufacturer headquartered in Dublin, Ohio. It supplies pharmaceuticals, medical devices, gloves and sterile products, and runs a device-reprocessing business.
More about Cardinal Health
It had about 63,900 employees and $254.2 billion in FY2026 revenue.
Head office Dublin, Ohio, United StatesStaff ~63,900 (FY2026)Revenue $254,248M revenue (FY2026)Website ↗
Cardinal Health reports Scope 1, 2 and 3 emissions with third-party assurance, but its Scope 1 and 2 are only 17% below FY2019 against a 50% cut targeted for FY2030. Renewable energy is about 4% of its energy use. It has an SBTi-validated near-term target, but its Scope 3 target is supplier engagement only, and it publishes no nature-impact disclosure. Personal-injury suits over ethylene oxide from a subsidiary's sterilisation plant, now closing, are pending with no ruling.
Cardinal Health scores 37/100 (Below expectations) on SINK's independent climate assessment, scored from public data only. Scores are free. Nobody can pay to change a score, speed it up or hide it. Last verified October 2026.
That places Cardinal Health joint 507th of 1,023 companies scored, and joint 17th of 21 in Healthcare / Pharmaceuticals.
What is Cardinal Health doing well, and where does it fall short?
Strongest on Carbon Footprint: Operations and Carbon Footprint: Supply Chain (8/10, 8/10). Weakest on Nature & Biodiversity Impact and Energy Source (2/10, 3/10).
Where Cardinal Health lost points
For each question that lost points, the evidence our public rubric looks for that we didn't find.
What would raise this score
- Its effect on natureAssess its effect on nature and publish a basic environmental policy.
- How clean its energy isMove to a renewable energy tariff or make a major efficiency investment.
- Its effect on waterMeasure its water footprint and set reduction targets.
Every question that lost points
- Emissions from its own operations8/10No verified figures published with their method and a falling trend.
- Emissions from its supply chain8/10Its Scope 3 emissions aren't fully verified or falling year on year.
- Whether its emissions are falling5/10No evidence of a year-on-year fall in its total emissions.
- How clean its energy is3/10No renewable energy tariff or major efficiency investment shown.
- Its effect on nature2/10No assessment of its effect on nature, and no basic environmental policy.
- How it uses materials and handles waste6/10No verified figures for reuse and recycling across the business.
- Its effect on water4/10No measured water footprint with reduction targets.
- Its climate targets7/10Its targets aren't validated by the Science Based Targets initiative.
- How openly it reports7/10No annual impact report, or no pay linked to climate targets.
- Its record on controversies6/10Points deducted for controversies or its business model. The finding is under question 10.
A score changes when the evidence does. We use new published evidence at the next rescore. Anyone can send us new evidence, free. How to send it.
How is Cardinal Health's SINK score calculated?
Same ten questions for every company. No private weighting.
SINK = (0.3 × Base + 0.7 × Performance) × ScaleWhat evidence is Cardinal Health's score based on?
10 sources used in this assessment. All publicly available. Each row shows which of the ten questions it informed.
20% of them were published by Cardinal Health itself; the rest come from independent sources.
“154,395 mtCOe”
“we have been named as a defendant in several lawsuits alleging personal injury as a result of EtO emissions.”
“The Governance and Sustainability Committee provides oversight of our policies and practices regarding political and lobbying activities”
“Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi) has approved Cardinal Health’s near-term science-based greenhouse gas emissions reduction targets.”
“science-based targets by fiscal 2028.”
“Nearly two dozen people who have lived in the Augusta, Ga. area are suing Cardinal Health subsidiary Kendall Patient Recovery U.S. over ethylene oxide emissions”
“KPR, a subsidiary of Ohio-based Cardinal Health, manufactures and sterilizes medical gauze, foam gauze, alcohol wipes and other products”
“Jason Hollar is chief executive officer of Cardinal Health”
“the company created the new position of ESG VP and hired Megan Maltenfort”
“KPR sterilizes its products using ethylene oxide as a replacement for steam.”
If you believe a source has been misread or a newer version exists, submit a challenge.
Is this your company? Claim this profile (free)
Use this score in tenders
Send the link, or the one-page score sheet. It links back to this page and every source. Free.
Open the score sheet →Send new evidence, free
Scored low because little is published? Publish what you do and send us the link, free. If it holds up, your score changes, and the change is logged on your page.
How to send evidence →Put your score on your website, free
It shows the current band, sector rank and score, and links to this page, so it changes when the score does.
Track this score
Bidding for a public contract? Check if you need a Carbon Reduction Plan, free →
Want your own page like this?
Free, independent, every source shown. Send it to any buyer who asks about your sustainability.
How does Cardinal Health compare with other healthcare / pharmaceuticals companies?
Where Cardinal Health sits among healthcare / pharmaceuticals peers.
Among the 21 major healthcare / pharmaceuticals brands we've scored, Cardinal Health is tied =17th of 21, with 2 others.
Who scores higher in Healthcare / Pharmaceuticals?
The 3 companies in the sector scoring nearest above Cardinal Health.
Merck reports emissions via GHG Protocol with third-party assurance, but buries specific figures in CDP filings.
See the breakdown →Pfizer discloses robust climate data with GHG Protocol alignment and SBTi validation, but progress is dire: only 15% of its 46% emissions reduction target achieved by 2024, renewable energy stuck at 14% despite RE100 membership, and hazardous waste flat since 2022.
See the breakdown →J&J's Scope 1 and 2 emissions fell 38% from 2021, mostly through renewable electricity instruments including unbundled certificates; Scope 1 itself fell only about 3% from 2023 to 2025.
See the breakdown →Which companies moved this week, and why.
One email, every Sunday. Score changes, new research, the stories behind the numbers. Free.
We'll send one email to confirm. No spam. Unsubscribe in one click.
Checking a company?
Search free →Asked to prove you're sustainable?
Get your business scored, free →Been scored?
Find your page and claim it, free →Scores are free. Nobody can pay to change a score, speed it up or hide it.