Lush Cosmetics sustainability score: 42/100
Better than 75% of FMCG / Consumer Goods
Making progress starts at 46. The highest score on SINK is 71.
Lush makes and sells fresh handmade cosmetics. At 30 June 2025 the brand traded through 869 shops in 50 countries and made products in 6 countries, through subsidiaries, associates and licensees.
More about Lush Cosmetics
Lush Cosmetics Limited, registered in Poole, is the head-office company of the group. Its directors say there is no ultimate controlling party, and 10% of its shares are held for staff in an Employee Benefit Trust. In the year to 30 June 2025 the group reported turnover of £727.1M and employed a monthly average of 13,333 people.
Founded 2001Head office Poole, United KingdomStaff ~13,333 (group monthly average, year to 30 June 2025)Revenue ~£727.1M (group turnover to third parties, year to 30 June 2025)Website ↗
Lush last printed group tonnes for FY24: 197,627 t, made up of 3,730 t of Scope 1, 8,569 t of location-based Scope 2 and 185,328 t of Scope 3. FY25 prints percentages only and admits a significant increase, which it puts down to better data and calculation, including a corrected FY24 error. Freight also rose 27%, largely from air freight. Its 100% renewable electricity claim fell to about 97.5% in FY25, and 52.5% is brown power with certificates, which earn no credit. No external assurance was found, and no water total is published. SBTi lists validated targets for its Vancouver subsidiary; the group accounts do not present them.
Lush Cosmetics scores 42/100 (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 November 2026.
That places Lush Cosmetics joint 362nd of 1,023 companies scored, and joint 13th of 57 in FMCG / Consumer Goods.
What is Lush Cosmetics doing well, and where does it fall short?
Strongest on Controversies & Red Flags and Carbon Footprint: Operations (8/10, 6/10). Weakest on Emissions Trajectory and Water Impact (0/10, 3/10).
Where Lush Cosmetics 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
- Whether its emissions are fallingShow its emissions are falling.
- Its effect on waterMonitor its water use and take measures to reduce it.
- How clean its energy isShow at least half its energy is renewable, with a transition plan.
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 chain6/10No full value-chain map or supplier engagement programme.
- Whether its emissions are falling0/10No evidence its emissions are falling.
- How clean its energy is5/10Less than half its energy shown to be renewable, or no transition plan.
- Its effect on nature5/10Its effect on nature isn't measured or independently verified.
- How it uses materials and handles waste6/10No verified figures for reuse and recycling across the business.
- Its effect on water3/10No monitoring of water use, or no measures to reduce it.
- Its climate targets6/10Its targets aren't validated by the Science Based Targets initiative.
- How openly it reports6/10No annual impact report, or no pay linked to climate targets.
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 Lush Cosmetics's SINK score calculated?
Same ten questions for every company. No private weighting.
SINK = (0.3 × Base + 0.7 × Performance) × ScaleHas Lush Cosmetics's score changed?
Lush Cosmetics's score has moved from 48 to 42 across 2 recorded reviews, down 6 points.
- 48 → 42-67 November 2026
Re-scored under the current method. It last printed group tonnes for FY24, and says FY25 shows a significant increase.
- Scored 4811 April 2026
Initial score at platform launch
What evidence is Lush Cosmetics's score based on?
15 sources used in this assessment. All publicly available. Each row shows which of the ten questions it informed.
40% of them were published by Lush Cosmetics itself; the rest come from independent sources.
9 of 15 sources are independent of the company.
“1 Gas 2,455.8 1.2%”
“Emissions have been calculated in accordance with the Greenhouse Gas Protocol”
“Annual report and consolidated”
“In FY 2025 this value dropped to approximately 97.5%”
“we are still trending downwards with a 13% absolute reduction since FY 2022”
“We've had a total of 10.8 million items returned since the Bring it Back relaunch in 2021”
“found that Scope 3 accounts for 93.8% of emissions”
“does not currently use certified palm oil for its remaining palm-based products”
“published a comprehensive environmental sourcing policy for palm oil”
“Lush Handmade Cosmetics commits to reduce absolute scope 1 and 2 GHG emissions 75% by FY2030 from a FY2019 base year.”
“losses before tax had grown from £28.1m in 2023 to £42.6m in the year to June 30, 2024”
“not a member of any key advocacy organizations that are blocking climate policy”
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 Lush Cosmetics compare with other fmcg / consumer goods companies?
Where Lush Cosmetics sits among fmcg / consumer goods peers.
Among the 57 major fmcg / consumer goods brands we've scored, Lush Cosmetics is tied =13th of 57, with 2 others.
Who scores higher in FMCG / Consumer Goods?
The 3 companies in the sector scoring nearest above Lush Cosmetics.
Hasbro reports emissions with limited assurance and has cut Scope 1 and 2, partly through office closures.
See the breakdown →Imperial Brands discloses substantial carbon reductions in operations (72% S1+S2) and has SBTi-validated net-zero targets, but structural harms persist: tobacco farming drives deforestation and water contamination, 4.5 trillion cigarette butts remain unaddressed, and the company actively lobbies against tobacco regulation while greenwashing via ESG awards.
See the breakdown →Natracare reports its first comprehensive carbon footprint (2,664 tCO2e, 99% Scope 3) but the Scope 3 calculation is internally inconsistent, missing end-of-life and downstream transport.
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.