H&M scores 7 points higher than Primark on SINK.
H&M is more sustainable according to SINK's scores, scoring 44/100 vs Primark's 37/100, a difference of 7 points.
H&M scores 44/100 on SINK (Below expectations). H&M's footprint fell 12.5% in 2025 to 6.86 MtCO2e, and its supply-chain emissions are 35% below 2019, though they rose in 2024. 95% of its electricity is renewable, half through new power purchase agreements, its targets are SBTi-approved, and supplier factories with coal boilers fell from 118 to 10. But only 26% of its supply-chain data is measured, a 2024 Earthsight report linked its suppliers' cotton to deforestation in Brazil, and in 2022 it paid €500,000 to sustainability causes to close a Dutch regulator's case over its 'Conscious' labels.
Primark scores 37/100 on SINK (Below expectations). Primark has cut operational emissions 71% since 2018/19 but supply-chain reductions lag: total emissions fell only 5.7% in six years, and purchased-goods emissions remain 2% above baseline. The Dutch advertising code committee ruled its '50% CO2 reduction' posters misleading, and Deutsche Umwelthilfe has criticised its self-made 'Primark Cares' label.
Both companies are rated on the same 10-question SINK rubric: Scope 1/2/3 carbon footprint, energy source, nature and biodiversity, resource use, water, emissions trajectory, science-based targets, transparency, and controversies. Scores are 0–100, based on public data, and fully reproducible.
See the full leaderboard: 1,023 companies ranked.
View the full leaderboard →