Unilever scores 1 point higher than The Procter & Gamble Company on SINK.
Unilever is more sustainable according to SINK's scores, scoring 29/100 vs The Procter & Gamble Company's 28/100, a difference of 1 points.
The Procter & Gamble Company scores 28/100 on SINK (Significant gaps). 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. Break Free From Plastic's 2023 audit named it among the top 10 global plastic polluters, and it dropped its no-degradation forest pledge in 2023.
Unilever scores 29/100 on SINK (Significant gaps). Unilever has reduced operational emissions 77% but Scope 3 is rising, missing 1.5°C targets by 45%. Plastic targets revised downward with 700kt annually still in use. Two regulatory greenwashing findings and a credible NGO report on insufficient climate ambition expose gaps between stated commitments and measurable outcomes.
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 →