Puma sustainability score: 44/100
Better than 65% of Apparel (Durable / Outdoor)
Making progress starts at 46. The highest score on SINK is 71.
PUMA designs and sells sports footwear, apparel and accessories under the PUMA and Cobra Golf brands, through retailers and its own shops and websites; footwear was 56.4% of sales in 2025. PUMA SE is a European company registered in Herzogenaurach, Germany.
More about Puma
The Pinault family's Artémis held 29.1% of its shares at 31 December 2025. It employed 18,503 people on average and had €7,296.2 million in sales in 2025.
Head office Herzogenaurach, GermanyStaff ~18,503 (2025 annual average)Revenue ~€7.30B sales (2025)Website ↗
PUMA's footprint was 1,520,806 tCO2e in 2025, almost all in its supply chain, and it fell 13% on 2024. Sales fell 13.1% in the same year and emissions per euro of revenue rose 4.8%, so the fall tracks lower volume. Its own sites' renewable electricity rests mostly on unbundled certificates, its core supplier factories were at 32.3%, and the 2025 coal-boiler phase-out was missed. Its SBTi-approved targets cut Scope 1 and 2 by 90% and its main supply-chain emissions by 33% by 2030 from 2017. Secondary materials rose to 41.7% of material weight, but apparel water use per piece rose 220.6%. Stand.earth criticised it in 2023 for labelling biomass energy carbon neutral.
Puma scores 44/100 (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 Puma joint 306th of 1,023 companies scored, and joint 19th of 58 in Apparel (Durable / Outdoor).
What is Puma doing well, and where does it fall short?
Strongest on Carbon Footprint: Operations and Transparency & Accountability (8/10, 8/10). Weakest on Emissions Trajectory and Energy Source (5/10, 5/10).
Where Puma 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 a year-on-year fall in its total emissions.
- How clean its energy isShow at least half its energy is renewable, with a transition plan.
- Its effect on natureMeasure its effect on nature and have it independently verified.
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 chain7/10No full value-chain map or supplier engagement programme.
- Whether its emissions are falling5/10No evidence of a year-on-year fall in its total emissions.
- 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 water5/10No measured water footprint with reduction targets.
- Its climate targets7/10Its targets aren't validated by the Science Based Targets initiative.
- How openly it reports8/10No mission-locked structure, such as B Corp certification.
- Its record on controversies7/10Points 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 Puma's SINK score calculated?
Same ten questions for every company. No private weighting.
SINK = (0.3 × Base + 0.7 × Performance) × ScaleHas Puma's score changed?
Puma's score has moved from 42 to 44 across 2 recorded reviews, up 2 points.
- 42 → 44+25 November 2026
Re-scored on v2.5 (brand batch: sportswear, 2026-11-05); pre-v2.5 record
- Scored 424 April 2026
Initial score at platform launch
What evidence is Puma's score based on?
16 sources used in this assessment. All publicly available. Each row shows which of the ten questions it informed.
44% of them were published by Puma itself; the rest come from independent sources.
9 of 16 sources are independent of the company.
“Our market-based Scope 2 GHG emissions increased by 20%”
“We have conducted a limited assurance engagement on the Group Sustainability Statement”
“PUMA’s total water withdrawals in the upstream value chain reached 6.4 million m³, with 57.9% coming from areas classified by WRI Aqueduct”
“Source all bovine leather from deforestation-free sources 4 ■□□ PUMA □ 99.3%”
“Secondary materials (%) 41.7% 34.4%”
“links parts of the variable remuneration of its Management Board as well as the bonus agreements of eligible employees to the achievement of sustainability targets”
“The shareholding of Artémis S.A.S. amounted to 29.1% of the share capital on December 31, 2025”
“Total annual average 18,503 18,668”
“Only two companies —H&M Group and Puma—were awarded more than 50/100”
“Planet 4 out of 5 People 4 out of 5 Animals 3 out of 5 Overall rating: Good”
“accuses companies – including Uniqlo owner Fast Retailing, Gap, H&M, Zara owner Inditex, Nike and Puma – of misleadingly labelling biomass as “carbon neutral””
“Mammut (C) Puma (C) Nike (C)”
“only Levi’s, Puma and H&M are currently on track to reduce manufacturing emissions by at least 55 percent by 2030 compared to 2018 levels”
“when it comes to the Sustainable Materials that Puma uses, the brand has not performed so well”
“led to the desired noticeable increase in average selling prices in the e-commerce and full-price business”
“Among high-street clothing and sports brands, Puma also performs reasonably well when it comes to the climate.”
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 Puma compare with other apparel (durable / outdoor) companies?
Where Puma sits among apparel (durable / outdoor) peers.
Among the 58 major apparel (durable / outdoor) brands we've scored, Puma is tied =19th of 58, with 2 others.
Who scores higher in Apparel (Durable / Outdoor)?
The 3 companies in the sector scoring nearest above Puma.
Ralph Lauren achieved strong near-term emissions reductions and 100% renewable electricity in own operations, but abandoned its 2040 net-zero target without replacement, signaling weakened long-term ambition.
See the breakdown →Superdry has decent carbon disclosure and SBTi targets, but emissions reductions are clouded by severe business contraction—revenue collapsed 40% in one year.
See the breakdown →Rapanui operates a genuinely circular apparel model with owned renewable energy and closed-loop manufacturing, but lacks formal emissions accounting and science-based targets.
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.