Ecover sustainability score: 26/100
Better than 14% of FMCG / Consumer Goods
Below expectations starts at 31. The highest score on SINK is 71.
Ecover makes plant-based cleaning and laundry products at its factory in Malle, Belgium. This record scores People Against Dirty Holdings Limited, the UK company that owns the Ecover and Method brands and is itself owned by SC Johnson.
More about Ecover
Its revenue of €125.8m (2025) includes Method, with about 230 employees.
Founded 2015Head office Camberley, United KingdomStaff ~230 (2025)Revenue €125.8m (EUR, FY to 27 Jun 2025, People Against Dirty Holdings group, includes Method)Website ↗
Ecover's owner publishes only Scope 1 and 2 emissions for its factory and UK office, with no Scope 3 at all, and those emissions rose in 2025 on a location basis. It has no SBTi target, and its palm oil relies mostly on mass-balance certification. Its refill scheme and factory waste diversion are genuine strengths, but its packaging targets are out of date.
Ecover scores 26/100 (Significant gaps) 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 November 2026.
That places Ecover joint 847th of 1,023 companies scored, and 49th of 57 in FMCG / Consumer Goods.
What is Ecover doing well, and where does it fall short?
Strongest on Controversies & Red Flags and Carbon Footprint: Operations (8/10, 6/10). Weakest on Targets & Commitments and Carbon Footprint: Supply Chain (1/10, 2/10).
Where Ecover 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 climate targetsSet emissions reduction targets.
- Emissions from its supply chainAssess where its supply-chain emissions come from.
- Whether its emissions are fallingShow its emissions are falling.
Every question that lost points
- Emissions from its own operations6/10Its own emissions aren't independently verified or tracked over several years.
- Emissions from its supply chain2/10No assessment of where its supply-chain emissions come from.
- Whether its emissions are falling2/10No evidence its emissions are falling.
- How clean its energy is6/10Less than 90% of its energy shown to be renewable.
- Its effect on nature3/10No 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 targets1/10No emissions reduction targets.
- How openly it reports3/10No published sustainability data, or no one named as responsible for it.
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 Ecover's SINK score calculated?
Same ten questions for every company. No private weighting.
SINK = (0.3 × Base + 0.7 × Performance) × ScaleHas Ecover's score changed?
Ecover's score has moved from 34 to 26 across 2 recorded reviews, down 8 points.
- 34 → 26-87 November 2026
Re-scored under the current method as People Against Dirty Holdings Limited, the SC Johnson company that owns Ecover and Method. It publishes no Scope 3, so the 0.70x step applies.
- Scored 345 April 2026
Initial score at platform launch
What evidence is Ecover's score based on?
13 sources used in this assessment. All publicly available. Each row shows which of the ten questions it informed.
8% of them were published by Ecover itself; the rest come from independent sources.
This record scores People Against Dirty Holdings Limited (Companies House 09876184), which owns the Ecover and Method brands; its figures include Method. SC Johnson's own group reports earn it no credit (owner ruling 2026-11-07).
12 of 13 sources are independent of the company.
“Scope 2: Purchased Energy 301.8”
“Intensity Ratio (CO2e tonnes/€1m) allowing for purchased renewable 1.88 1.3”
“Group of companies accounts made up to 27 June 2025”
“we purchase RSPO certified palm oil and palm kernel oil to account for all palm oil used in our products”
“Nearly all of this is certified under mass-balance.”
“Sedum roof for insulation, minimizing the need for extra heating or cooling”
“There is no published brand-level Scope 1, 2, 3 emissions accounting.”
“Its annual reports leave out scope 3”
“There was moderate evidence for this policy, and it has been regarded as somewhat successful.”
“The capsules are also the first Ecover product to be CarbonNeutral® certified, excluding product use phase”
“Our research highlights several ethical issues with Ecover, including packaging, workers’ rights and tax avoidance.”
“The Advertising Standards Authority investigated four matters raised by Ecover and its parent company, People Against Dirty Holdings.”
“The insights are also being submitted to a parliamentary enquiry into mobilising sustainable behaviour change.”
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 Ecover compare with other fmcg / consumer goods companies?
Where Ecover sits among fmcg / consumer goods peers.
Among the 57 major fmcg / consumer goods brands we've scored, Ecover sits 49th of 57.
Who scores higher in FMCG / Consumer Goods?
The 3 companies in the sector scoring nearest above Ecover.
ABF discloses operational emissions clearly but refuses to publish group-level Scope 3, the dominant carbon source across sugar, cotton, and soya supply chains.
See the breakdown →P&G has cut its own Scope 1 and 2 emissions, but its Scope 3, mostly from consumers using its products, keeps rising, and its supply-chain targets are per unit, not absolute.
See the breakdown →Spin Master's record is weak across the board.
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.