Manchester United FC sustainability score: 25/100
Below expectations starts at 31. The highest score on SINK is 71.
Manchester United Football Club is a professional football club based in Manchester, England, founded in 1878. One of the world's most valuable sports franchises, it operates Old Trafford stadium (74,000 capacity) and Carrington training campus.
More about Manchester United FC
The club competes in the Premier League and has global commercial and broadcasting operations.
Founded 1878Head office GBStaff ~1,100Revenue ~£670MWebsite ↗
Manchester United operates with mandatory SECR reporting but no standalone sustainability disclosure. Scope 1&2 emissions are the Premier League's highest at 7,166 tCO2e; Scope 3 is unreported. No science-based targets, no renewable energy strategy, and no board-level environmental accountability. Ownership by INEOS petrochemicals creates credible sportswashing controversy.
Manchester United FC scores 25/100 (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 August 2026.
That places Manchester United FC joint 871st of 1,023 companies scored, and 19th of 22 in Professional Sports Clubs.
What is Manchester United FC doing well, and where does it fall short?
Strongest on Controversies & Red Flags and Carbon Footprint: Operations (6/10, 4/10). Weakest on Carbon Footprint: Supply Chain and Emissions Trajectory (2/10, 2/10).
Where Manchester United FC 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
- Emissions from its supply chainAssess where its supply-chain emissions come from.
- Whether its emissions are fallingShow its emissions are falling.
- Its climate targetsSet specific targets with dates.
Every question that lost points
- Emissions from its own operations4/10No full Scope 1 and 2 figures worked out to the GHG Protocol.
- 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 is3/10No renewable energy tariff or major efficiency investment shown.
- Its effect on nature3/10No assessment of its effect on nature, and no basic environmental policy.
- How it uses materials and handles waste4/10No measurable waste or recycling targets reported publicly.
- Its effect on water3/10No monitoring of water use, or no measures to reduce it.
- Its climate targets2/10No specific targets with dates.
- How openly it reports3/10No published sustainability data, or no one named as responsible for it.
- 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 Manchester United FC's SINK score calculated?
Same ten questions for every company. No private weighting.
SINK = (0.3 × Base + 0.7 × Performance) × ScaleWhat evidence is Manchester United FC'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 Manchester United FC itself; the rest come from independent sources.
“Manchester United led with the highest emissions of 7166 tonnes”
“Manchester United Football Club Limited, headquartered in Great Britain, currently does not have specific carbon emissions data available for the most recent year”
“six clubs have this dataset and currently publish their GHG emissions”
“Develop a greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions dataset (scope 1, 2 and 3) by the end of Season 2025/26”
“Manchester United ranked second, producing around 5,965 tCO2e”
“futuristic plans to create the world's most sustainable stadium include a vast, umbrella-like canopy”
“We have already installed rainwater harvesting and taken steps to manage our water use”
“criticised by campaigners for spending $400 million on various sport enterprises to establish an image”
“INEOS is a major producer of plastic, toxic pesticides and fossil fuels”
“Sir Jim Ratcliffe, who recently bought a stake in Manchester United, is the chairman and CEO of Ineos”
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 Manchester United FC compare with other professional sports clubs companies?
Where Manchester United FC sits among professional sports clubs peers.
Among the 22 major professional sports clubs brands we've scored, Manchester United FC sits 19th of 22.
Who scores higher in Professional Sports Clubs?
The 3 companies in the sector scoring nearest above Manchester United FC.
Nottingham Forest disclosed emissions for the first time in 2022/23, meeting UK SECR minimums but without verification or targets.
See the breakdown →Fulham FC has renewable energy in place and zero waste to landfill, but lacks public emissions data despite legal SECR obligations.
See the breakdown →Sunderland AFC has launched a credible renewable energy transition programme with named targets (net zero 2040, energy self-sufficiency 2028) but publishes no emissions data, waste figures, or water consumption.
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.