How Transparent Are Water Bottle Brands About Chemical Safety?
By
Jeremiah Kowalski
Human-written
Written by a human.No AI was used to write this article or create its product photography.Read our no-AI policy →
Table of contents10 sections
I reviewed what 150 reusable water bottle brands publicly say about BPA, PFAS, lead and other chemicals.
The result is a searchable table where you can check what your brand claims, what those claims actually apply to, and what evidence it makes public.
I am still expanding and updating this database, so bookmark this page and come back whenever you are thinking about buying a new bottle.
One thing became clear very quickly: brands talk about safety a lot more than they show the evidence behind it.
What I found
The clearest pattern was easy to spot.
BPA-free language is everywhere. Broader chemical transparency is not.
Among the 150 brands I checked:
118 brands publicly said that at least some of their products were BPA-free.
24 brands publicly said that at least some of their products were BPS-free.
9 brands publicly said that at least some of their products were BPF-free.
Only 2 brands made a public claim covering a wider group of bisphenols.
Only 5 of 150 brands publicly said that a reusable bottle or bottle range was PFAS-free. That tells us what brands claim publicly — not what independent lab testing would find.
23 brands publicly described at least some of their bottles, materials or components as lead-free.
22 brands referred to third-party testing, but I could not find a single full public lab report showing the bottle-material test results.
The part that bothered me most
I reviewed 150 water bottle brands. Only 22 referred to third-party testing, and I could not find a single full public lab report showing the bottle-material test results.
So even among the brands that actively tell customers their products are tested, I still could not see the actual evidence behind those claims.
That does not mean the testing never happened. These companies may have detailed reports internally, and the absence of a public report does not mean a bottle is unsafe.
But it does mean that customers are often being asked to trust phrases like “third-party tested”, “lead safe” or “BPA-free” without being able to see exactly what was tested, which parts of the bottle were included, or what the results actually showed.
And that matters because we have already seen cases where reassuring safety claims were followed by real problems.
Bindle advertised its bottles as “100% BPA-free.” Consumer Reports tested three bottles and found BPA on the outside of two. Testing also found very high levels of lead at an exposed soldering point in the lower storage compartment. The bottles were later recalled because of the lead exposure risk.
Green Sprouts said some stainless-steel children’s bottles and cups had been “tested to the highest global standards and passed testing.” Those products were later recalled after a lead-containing solder dot could become exposed if the bottom base broke off.
These examples do not mean testing is useless, and they do not mean the brands in this database are unsafe.
They show something much simpler: a safety claim is only as useful as the evidence behind it.
If a company tells me a bottle is independently tested, I want to know what was tested, who tested it, which parts were covered, and what the results were.
“Third-party tested” should not be the end of the conversation. It should be the beginning of the evidence.
Check what your water bottle brand actually says
Search below by brand, chemical, claim type or evidence. Each entry shows what the brand says, which products it applies to, the source and date checked, and a WBA Chemical Transparency Score. The score measures public transparency, not product safety.
More filters
150 brands
Brand
Chemical Transparency Score
Chemical / topic
Claim type
Evidence I found
Details
24Bottles
32
Claims found for 4 of 12 topics
Several types of claims
Brand statement
24Bottles
WBA Chemical Transparency Score: 32/100
This score measures how much public chemical information a brand provides and how well it documents it. It is not a safety score.
Disclosure Coverage10.24/35
Evidence & Documentation1.50/45
Claim Clarity10.00/10
Source Transparency9.88/10
12-topic overview
BPAFree-from statement
BPSFree-from statement
BPFNo public claim found
Bisphenols / all-bisphenol claimsNo public claim found
PhthalatesFree-from statement
PFASFree-from statement
LeadNo public claim found
CadmiumNo public claim found
Other heavy metalsNo public claim found
PVC / vinylNo public claim found
LatexNo public claim found
Microplastics / plastic sheddingNo public claim found
Brand claims and sources
BPA
Status
Free-from statement
What the brand says
BPA-free
How broad the wording is
Single named compound
What it applies to
Single Product; Bottle / product materials as limited by source; Specific product; Specific product; US / global as page states
Second-pass review: official FAQ answers whether air up contains microplastics, then states trace levels can occur generally and that products are designed/tested to food-safety standards. It gives no product-specific result, method, or threshold; retained as ambiguous, not a microplastic-free or testing claim. This record remains unresolved after source review.
Amphipod
22
Claims found for 1 of 12 topics
Several types of claims
Brand statement
Amphipod
WBA Chemical Transparency Score: 22/100
This score measures how much public chemical information a brand provides and how well it documents it. It is not a safety score.
Disclosure Coverage1.20/35
Evidence & Documentation1.50/45
Claim Clarity9.80/10
Source Transparency9.88/10
12-topic overview
BPAFree-from statement
BPSNo public claim found
BPFNo public claim found
Bisphenols / all-bisphenol claimsNo public claim found
PhthalatesNo public claim found
PFASNo public claim found
LeadNo public claim found
CadmiumNo public claim found
Other heavy metalsNo public claim found
PVC / vinylNo public claim found
LatexNo public claim found
Microplastics / plastic sheddingNo public claim found
Brand claims and sources
BPA
Status
Free-from statement
What the brand says
BPA-Free.
How broad the wording is
Single named compound
What it applies to
Single Product; As scoped in claim wording/source; Specific product; Specific product; As page states
FAQ references test reports but does not link them; record is manufacturer-reported testing, not WBA-reviewed lab evidence. Heavy metals is generic, not a specific cadmium result.
Phthalates
Status
Free-from statement
What the brand says
All b.box products are free from BPA, Phthalates and PVC.
How broad the wording is
Chemical subclass
What it applies to
All b.box products; Product materials; Brand products; Brand-wide; Australia / English
FAQ references test reports but does not link them; record is manufacturer-reported testing, not WBA-reviewed lab evidence. Heavy metals is generic, not a specific cadmium result.
Lead
Status
Tested — not detected
What the brand says
Test reports confirm that there are no traces of BPA, Phthalates, PVC, lead or heavy metals detected in our products.
How broad the wording is
Single named compound
What it applies to
All b.box products; Product materials and components; Brand products; Brand-wide; Australia / English
FAQ references test reports but does not link them; record is manufacturer-reported testing, not WBA-reviewed lab evidence. Heavy metals is generic, not a specific cadmium result.
Other heavy metals
Status
Tested — not detected
What the brand says
Test reports confirm that there are no traces of BPA, Phthalates, PVC, lead or heavy metals detected in our products.
How broad the wording is
General material or category wording
What it applies to
All b.box products; Product materials and components; Brand products; Brand-wide; Australia / English
FAQ references test reports but does not link them; record is manufacturer-reported testing, not WBA-reviewed lab evidence. Heavy metals is generic, not a specific cadmium result.
PVC / vinyl
Status
Free-from statement
What the brand says
All b.box products are free from BPA, Phthalates and PVC.
How broad the wording is
General material or category wording
What it applies to
All b.box products; Product materials; Brand products; Brand-wide; Australia / English
FAQ references test reports but does not link them; record is manufacturer-reported testing, not WBA-reviewed lab evidence. Heavy metals is generic, not a specific cadmium result.
Bentgo
37
Claims found for 5 of 12 topics
Several types of claims
Brand statement
Bentgo
WBA Chemical Transparency Score: 37/100
This score measures how much public chemical information a brand provides and how well it documents it. It is not a safety score.
Disclosure Coverage13.83/35
Evidence & Documentation3.00/45
Claim Clarity9.80/10
Source Transparency9.88/10
12-topic overview
BPAFree-from statement
BPSNo public claim found
BPFNo public claim found
Bisphenols / all-bisphenol claimsNo public claim found
PhthalatesFree-from statement
PFASFree-from statement
LeadFree-from statement
CadmiumNo public claim found
Other heavy metalsNo public claim found
PVC / vinylFree-from statement
LatexNo public claim found
Microplastics / plastic sheddingNo public claim found
Brand claims and sources
BPA
Status
Free-from statement
What the brand says
They’re BPA-free and made without PVC, phthalates, lead or vinyl.
How broad the wording is
Single named compound
What it applies to
Bentgo FAQs: Products & Materials; As stated in source; Specific product; Brand-wide; United States
Manufacturer reports testing every new silicone color/material; no public lab report linked.
PFAS
Status
PFAS-free wording; no-added-PFAS qualifier
What the brand says
PFAS-free — all components, accessories and packaging tested negative. Independent labs have confirmed that all our bottle components, accessories and packaging have no added PFAS.
How broad the wording is
Full named chemical class
What it applies to
Our Impact; Bottle components, accessories, packaging; Product family; Bottle range; United States
PFAS claim classification
Full-class PFAS-free wording; source also uses explicit PFAS-free wording and states no added PFAS
The official source explicitly uses “PFAS-free” wording and says components, accessories and packaging tested negative; it also says independent labs confirmed no added PFAS. Both statements are retained as a qualified manufacturer claim. No public lab report is linked, so this is not independent verification of absolute absence or migration.
Lead
Status
Free-from statement
What the brand says
100% lead free
How broad the wording is
Single named compound
What it applies to
Our Impact; Bottle and water-contact components; Product family; Bottle range; United States
This record concerns a filter, partner, or other non-bottle target. It is shown for transparency but excluded from bottle-relevant summaries and evidence filters. Separate performance claim about removing BPA from water; never merge with BPA-free product material claim.
Evidence relevance
Partner / non-bottle evidence — not bottle material evidence
PFAS
Status
Material statement
What the brand says
Brita Elite filters reduce certain PFAS compounds like PFOA and PFOS, but they are not certified to reduce all PFAS.
How broad the wording is
Multiple named substances
What it applies to
Brita Elite filters; Filtered water; PFOA/PFOS specifically; Filter or partner product; Product family; US
This record concerns a filter, partner, or other non-bottle target. It is shown for transparency but excluded from bottle-relevant summaries and evidence filters. Explicitly limited claim. PFOA/PFOS reduction does not mean PFAS-free.
Evidence relevance
Partner / non-bottle evidence — not bottle material evidence
This record concerns a filter, partner, or other non-bottle target. It is shown for transparency but excluded from bottle-relevant summaries and evidence filters. Public performance data sheet and NSF/ANSI methods/certification; water treatment result, not lead-free bottle material.
Evidence relevance
Partner / non-bottle evidence — not bottle material evidence
This record concerns a filter, partner, or other non-bottle target. It is shown for transparency but excluded from bottle-relevant summaries and evidence filters. Public performance data sheet; filtration performance, not cadmium-free product material.
Evidence relevance
Partner / non-bottle evidence — not bottle material evidence
This record concerns a filter, partner, or other non-bottle target. It is shown for transparency but excluded from bottle-relevant summaries and evidence filters. Public performance data sheet; specific named heavy metal and filtration result.
Evidence relevance
Partner / non-bottle evidence — not bottle material evidence
This record concerns a filter, partner, or other non-bottle target. It is shown for transparency but excluded from bottle-relevant summaries and evidence filters. Public microplastic testing/performance result; not a microplastic-free bottle claim. Brita Hub also has a separate 99.9% result.
Evidence relevance
Partner / non-bottle evidence — not bottle material evidence
This record concerns a filter, partner, or other non-bottle target. It is shown for transparency but excluded from bottle-relevant summaries and evidence filters. Separate product/system and result from Elite; preserve as a second claim record.
Evidence relevance
Partner / non-bottle evidence — not bottle material evidence
BrüMate
23
Claims found for 4 of 12 topics
Several types of claims
Brand statement
BrüMate
WBA Chemical Transparency Score: 23/100
This score measures how much public chemical information a brand provides and how well it documents it. It is not a safety score.
Disclosure Coverage3.06/35
Evidence & Documentation1.50/45
Claim Clarity9.25/10
Source Transparency9.22/10
12-topic overview
BPAFree-from statement
BPSFree-from statement
BPFFree-from statement
Bisphenols / all-bisphenol claimsNo public claim found
PhthalatesNo public claim found
PFASNo public claim found
LeadNo public claim found
CadmiumNo public claim found
Other heavy metalsNo public claim found
PVC / vinylNo public claim found
LatexFree-from statement
Microplastics / plastic sheddingNo public claim found
Brand claims and sources
BPA
Status
Free-from statement
What the brand says
the gaskets … are latex, BPA, BPS, and BPF-free. Our lids are also made from BPA, BPS, and BPA-free recycled material.
How broad the wording is
Single named compound
What it applies to
All BrüMate drinkware products; Gaskets and lids; Product component; Broad drinkware range; Canada / English
FAQ distinguishes stainless product bodies from gaskets and lids. The lid wording includes an apparent duplicated BPA term; BPF claim restricted to gaskets.
BPS
Status
Free-from statement
What the brand says
the gaskets … are latex, BPA, BPS, and BPF-free. Our lids are also made from BPA, BPS, and BPA-free recycled material.
How broad the wording is
Single named compound
What it applies to
Gaskets and lids; Plastic/recycled lid material; Product component; Product family; Canada / English
FAQ distinguishes stainless product bodies from gaskets and lids. The lid wording includes an apparent duplicated BPA term; BPF claim restricted to gaskets.
BPF
Status
Free-from statement
What the brand says
The gaskets that create the suction effect do have some plastic and rubberized material and are latex, BPA, BPS, and BPF-free.
FAQ distinguishes stainless product bodies from gaskets and lids. The lid wording includes an apparent duplicated BPA term; BPF claim restricted to gaskets.
Latex
Status
Free-from statement
What the brand says
The gaskets that create the suction effect do have some plastic and rubberized material and are latex, BPA, BPS, and BPF-free.
FAQ distinguishes stainless product bodies from gaskets and lids. The lid wording includes an apparent duplicated BPA term; BPF claim restricted to gaskets.
Bubba
26
Claims found for 2 of 12 topics
Several types of claims
Brand statement
Bubba
WBA Chemical Transparency Score: 26/100
This score measures how much public chemical information a brand provides and how well it documents it. It is not a safety score.
Disclosure Coverage3.74/35
Evidence & Documentation3.00/45
Claim Clarity9.40/10
Source Transparency9.56/10
12-topic overview
BPAFree-from statement
BPSNo public claim found
BPFNo public claim found
Bisphenols / all-bisphenol claimsNo public claim found
PhthalatesNo public claim found
PFASNo public claim found
LeadFree-from statement
CadmiumNo public claim found
Other heavy metalsNo public claim found
PVC / vinylNo public claim found
LatexNo public claim found
Microplastics / plastic sheddingNo public claim found
Brand claims and sources
BPA
Status
Free-from statement
What the brand says
Yes! All bubbas are BPA free!
How broad the wording is
Single named compound
What it applies to
Bubba FAQs; As explicitly scoped in source; Specific product; Brand-wide; United States
Current bottle catalog feature applies to the bottle line, not every Bubba product.
CamelBak
53
Claims found for 10 of 12 topics
Several types of claims
Brand statement, Policy or compliance document, Public test results, Technical or policy documents, Testing or certification mentioned
CamelBak
WBA Chemical Transparency Score: 53/100
This score measures how much public chemical information a brand provides and how well it documents it. It is not a safety score.
Disclosure Coverage11.86/35
Evidence & Documentation22.50/45
Claim Clarity9.12/10
Source Transparency9.23/10
12-topic overview
BPAProhibited by policy; Free-from statement
BPSProhibited by policy; Free-from statement
BPFProhibited by policy; Free-from statement
Bisphenols / all-bisphenol claimsProhibited by policy
PhthalatesPolicy or compliance evidence
PFASRestricted by policy
LeadPolicy or compliance evidence; Lead-safe or component-access disclosure; Tested — not detected
CadmiumPolicy or compliance evidence
Other heavy metalsPolicy or compliance evidence
PVC / vinylPhaseout or process commitment
LatexNo public claim found
Microplastics / plastic sheddingNo public claim found
Brand claims and sources
BPA
Status
Prohibited by policy
What the brand says
“Camelbak prohibits the use of any bisphenol substance in our products or in the factories that manufacture our products. We test our products regularly to ensure that these chemicals are never in our products.”
How broad the wording is
Full named chemical class
What it applies to
CamelBak products and manufacturing factories; All bisphenol substances; Brand products; Brand-wide; Global
Explicit first-party product claim plus manufacturing prohibition; broader than named BPA alone. Underlying lab reports are not public in this source. Dated 2021 official RSL wording; continuing policy status after later V4 is not confirmed. Source is the official September 2021 V3 RSL; whether it remains the current policy is unconfirmed.
Status
Free-from statement
What the brand says
“free of BPA, BPS, and BPF.”
How broad the wording is
Multiple named substances
What it applies to
Chute Mag 20oz Bottle with Tritan Renew; Bottle materials; Specific product; Specific product; US / English
Exact language covers any bisphenol, not merely BPS. Dated 2021 official RSL wording; continuing policy status after later V4 is not confirmed. Source is the official September 2021 V3 RSL; whether it remains the current policy is unconfirmed.
Status
Free-from statement
What the brand says
“free of BPA, BPS, and BPF.”
How broad the wording is
Multiple named substances
What it applies to
Chute Mag 20oz Bottle with Tritan Renew; Bottle materials; Specific product; Specific product; US / English
Exact language covers any bisphenol, not merely BPF. Dated 2021 official RSL wording; continuing policy status after later V4 is not confirmed. Source is the official September 2021 V3 RSL; whether it remains the current policy is unconfirmed.
Status
Free-from statement
What the brand says
“free of BPA, BPS, and BPF.”
How broad the wording is
Multiple named substances
What it applies to
Chute Mag 20oz Bottle with Tritan Renew; Bottle materials; Specific product; Specific product; US / English
Explicit broad class claim; retain the separate BPA/BPS/BPF records as mapped core-topic records. Dated 2021 official RSL wording; continuing policy status after later V4 is not confirmed. Source is the official September 2021 V3 RSL; whether it remains the current policy is unconfirmed.
Phthalates
Status
Policy or compliance evidence
What the brand says
BBP (benzylbutyl phthalate) 0.1% content in plastic; DBP (dibutyl phthalate) 0.1% content in plastic; DEHP (di-(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate) 0.1% content in plastic; DIDP (di-iso-decyl phthalate) 0.1% content in plastic; DINP (di-iso-nonyl phthalate) 0.1% content in plastic; DNOP (di-n-octyl phthalate) 0.1% content in plastic.
How broad the wording is
Chemical subclass
What it applies to
Applicable CamelBak materials/components/products/packaging; Named phthalates in RSL; Supplier requirement; Policy only; Global
Maximum limits and compliance requirements only; not phthalate-free. Dated 2021 official RSL wording; continuing policy status after later V4 is not confirmed. Source is the official September 2021 V3 RSL; whether it remains the current policy is unconfirmed.
PFAS
Status
Restricted by policy
What the brand says
“CamelBak prohibits the use of water repellent treatments (DWRs) made from long-chain perfluoroalkyl substances. These substances include PFOS, PFOA, and others with 8 or more Carbon atoms (also known collectively as C8).”
How broad the wording is
Chemical subclass
What it applies to
DWR treatments used in applicable products; Long-chain PFAS; named PFOS/PFOA/C8; Supplier requirement; Policy only; Global
Not a claim that all products are PFAS-free; the same source says it is working toward eliminating need for fluorinated compounds. Dated 2021 official RSL wording; continuing policy status after later V4 is not confirmed. Source is the official September 2021 V3 RSL; whether it remains the current policy is unconfirmed.
Lead
Status
Policy or compliance evidence
What the brand says
“Lead” with extraction/content limits and test methods in the RSL.
How broad the wording is
Chemical scope unclear
What it applies to
Applicable CamelBak materials/components/products/packaging; Lead; Supplier requirement; Policy only; Global
RSL threshold evidence only; not lead-free. Dated 2021 official RSL wording; continuing policy status after later V4 is not confirmed. Source is the official September 2021 V3 RSL; whether it remains the current policy is unconfirmed.
Status
Lead-safe or component-access disclosure
What the brand says
“No CamelBak-manufactured bottles have lead components that would come in contact with a liquid, or with a product user. Some bottles have a solder point on an exterior wall and that solder does contain lead, but the solder is enclosed under a protective cover and is inaccessible by design.”
How broad the wording is
Single named compound
What it applies to
CamelBak bottles with covered base solder; Exterior solder encapsulated under stainless-steel cover; Product component; Product family; UK / English
FAQ separately describes third-party testing and reports lead not detected in tested vessel/paint/cap components; that testing result is captured separately. This access/encapsulation claim is not lead-free.
Status
Tested — not detected
What the brand says
Additionally, we performed third-party testing of components of the bottle that could contact a liquid or the user. This includes testing of the steel vessel, paint and plastic cap, which have all shown that lead is not detected in the product.
How broad the wording is
Single named compound
What it applies to
CamelBak-manufactured bottles; tested vessel, paint, and plastic cap; Steel vessel, paint, and plastic cap; lead; Product family; Product family; UK / English
Official FAQ references third-party component testing and no detection, but does not publish a report or detection limit. Does not prove every component or bottle is lead-free.
Cadmium
Status
Policy or compliance evidence
What the brand says
“Cadmium” with content/migration limits and test methods in the RSL.
How broad the wording is
Chemical scope unclear
What it applies to
Applicable CamelBak materials/components/products/packaging; Cadmium; Supplier requirement; Policy only; Global
RSL threshold evidence only; not cadmium-free. Dated 2021 official RSL wording; continuing policy status after later V4 is not confirmed. Source is the official September 2021 V3 RSL; whether it remains the current policy is unconfirmed.
Other heavy metals
Status
Policy or compliance evidence
What the brand says
RSL entries include antimony, arsenic, barium, chromium, cobalt, copper, mercury, nickel and other metals with material-specific limits and methods.
How broad the wording is
Chemical subclass
What it applies to
Applicable CamelBak materials/components/products/packaging; Named metals; Supplier requirement; Policy only; Global
Do not interpret limits as absence. Full detail captured in extended claims. Dated 2021 official RSL wording; continuing policy status after later V4 is not confirmed. Source is the official September 2021 V3 RSL; whether it remains the current policy is unconfirmed.
PVC / vinyl
Status
Phaseout or process commitment
What the brand says
“CamelBak has eliminated the use of PVC from all products”
How broad the wording is
General material or category wording
What it applies to
All CamelBak products; PVC; Brand products; Brand-wide; Global
Explicit broad first-party product statement in RSL; document date/version caveat recorded. Dated 2021 official RSL wording; continuing policy status after later V4 is not confirmed. Source is the official September 2021 V3 RSL; whether it remains the current policy is unconfirmed.
Carl Oscar
0
Claims found for 0 of 12 topics
No public claim found
No bottle-specific evidence found
Carl Oscar
WBA Chemical Transparency Score: 0/100
This score measures how much public chemical information a brand provides and how well it documents it. It is not a safety score.
Disclosure Coverage0.00/35
Evidence & Documentation0.00/45
Claim Clarity0.00/10
Source Transparency0.00/10
12-topic overview
BPANo public claim found
BPSNo public claim found
BPFNo public claim found
Bisphenols / all-bisphenol claimsNo public claim found
PhthalatesNo public claim found
PFASNo public claim found
LeadNo public claim found
CadmiumNo public claim found
Other heavy metalsNo public claim found
PVC / vinylNo public claim found
LatexNo public claim found
Microplastics / plastic sheddingNo public claim found
Brand claims and sources
No qualifying public claim records were located for this brand in the reviewed sources. That is not evidence of chemical presence or absence.
Chilly's
23
Claims found for 1 of 12 topics
Several types of claims
Brand statement
Chilly's
WBA Chemical Transparency Score: 23/100
This score measures how much public chemical information a brand provides and how well it documents it. It is not a safety score.
Disclosure Coverage1.54/35
Evidence & Documentation1.50/45
Claim Clarity9.80/10
Source Transparency9.88/10
12-topic overview
BPAFree-from statement
BPSNo public claim found
BPFNo public claim found
Bisphenols / all-bisphenol claimsNo public claim found
PhthalatesNo public claim found
PFASNo public claim found
LeadNo public claim found
CadmiumNo public claim found
Other heavy metalsNo public claim found
PVC / vinylNo public claim found
LatexNo public claim found
Microplastics / plastic sheddingNo public claim found
Brand claims and sources
BPA
Status
Free-from statement
What the brand says
“All materials are BPA free!”
How broad the wording is
Single named compound
What it applies to
Series 3 bottles; FAQ describes Series 3 bottle family; All materials in stated family; Product family; Product family; QA/English
This record concerns a filter, partner, or other non-bottle target. It is shown for transparency but excluded from bottle-relevant summaries and evidence filters. Generic filter-performance wording; no individual heavy metal or bottle material claim inferred.
Evidence relevance
Partner / non-bottle evidence — not bottle material evidence
Microplastics / plastic shedding
Status
Other public statement
What the brand says
Grayl purifier bottles filter microplastics from treated water.
How broad the wording is
General material or category wording
What it applies to
Bottle Range; Bottle / filter / component as limited by source; Filter or partner product; Bottle range; US / global as page states
This record concerns a filter, partner, or other non-bottle target. It is shown for transparency but excluded from bottle-relevant summaries and evidence filters. Filter-performance statement for drinking water; not a microplastic-free bottle-material or shedding claim.
Evidence relevance
Partner / non-bottle evidence — not bottle material evidence
Gregory
27
Claims found for 3 of 12 topics
Several types of claims
Brand statement
Gregory
WBA Chemical Transparency Score: 27/100
This score measures how much public chemical information a brand provides and how well it documents it. It is not a safety score.
Disclosure Coverage5.80/35
Evidence & Documentation3.00/45
Claim Clarity9.00/10
Source Transparency9.55/10
12-topic overview
BPAFree-from statement
BPSNo public claim found
BPFNo public claim found
Bisphenols / all-bisphenol claimsNo public claim found
PhthalatesNo public claim found
PFASNo intentionally added
LeadNo public claim found
CadmiumNo public claim found
Other heavy metalsNo public claim found
PVC / vinylFree-from statement
LatexNo public claim found
Microplastics / plastic sheddingNo public claim found
Brand claims and sources
BPA
Status
Free-from statement
What the brand says
Metallocene PE Film (BPA & PVC Free).
How broad the wording is
Single named compound
What it applies to
Gregory Hydro 3L Reservoir; Pack body metallocene PE film; Product material; Specific product; US / English
All of HydraPak’s products are latex-free, and don’t contain any similar compounds that could affect someone with a severe latex allergy. Our products are also BPA-, BPF-, and BPS-free.
How broad the wording is
General material or category wording
What it applies to
All HydraPak products; TPU reservoirs/flasks and silicone bite valves; Brand products; Brand-wide; US / English
Lid claim only; do not generalize to every product material.
Lead
Status
Phaseout or process commitment
What the brand says
Additionally, we performed third-party testing of components of the bottle that could contact a liquid or the user. This includes testing of the steel vessel, paint and plastic cap, which have all shown that lead is not detected in the product.
How broad the wording is
Single named compound
What it applies to
Hydro Flask vacuum-insulated bottles and tumblers; Vacuum sealing process; Production process; Product family; UK / English
Direct readable official FAQ confirms historical process change. This is a lead-related manufacturing-process claim, not evidence that every product/component is lead-free.
Other heavy metals
Status
No intentionally added
What the brand says
“we disclose the presence of any intentionally added chemicals”
How broad the wording is
Chemical scope unclear
What it applies to
Hydration SKUs listed in AB 1200 table; Stainless-steel body/materials; listed chromium, iron, manganese, molybdenum, nickel; Product material; Product family; California / US
Broad policy intro with category-specific milestones; no bottle absence claim.
PVC / vinyl
Status
Policy or compliance evidence
What the brand says
We also phased out PVC (polyvinyl chloride) from most products and today, PVC remains only in some electrical products, and work continues to find replacements.
How broad the wording is
Single named compound
What it applies to
Our view on chemical safety; As explicitly scoped in source; Supplier requirement; Policy only; Global
This record concerns a filter, partner, or other non-bottle target. It is shown for transparency but excluded from bottle-relevant summaries and evidence filters. Filter-performance claim for treated water, not a microplastic-free bottle or low-shedding statement.
Evidence relevance
Partner / non-bottle evidence — not bottle material evidence
KeepCup
30
Claims found for 5 of 12 topics
Several types of claims
Brand statement
KeepCup
WBA Chemical Transparency Score: 30/100
This score measures how much public chemical information a brand provides and how well it documents it. It is not a safety score.
Disclosure Coverage8.72/35
Evidence & Documentation1.50/45
Claim Clarity10.00/10
Source Transparency9.88/10
12-topic overview
BPAFree-from statement
BPSFree-from statement
BPFNo public claim found
Bisphenols / all-bisphenol claimsNo public claim found
PhthalatesFree-from statement
PFASNo public claim found
LeadFree-from statement
CadmiumFree-from statement
Other heavy metalsNo public claim found
PVC / vinylNo public claim found
LatexNo public claim found
Microplastics / plastic sheddingNo public claim found
Brand claims and sources
BPA
Status
Free-from statement
What the brand says
BPA-free
How broad the wording is
Single named compound
What it applies to
Single Product; Bottle / product materials as limited by source; Specific product; Specific product; US / global as page states
This record concerns a filter, partner, or other non-bottle target. It is shown for transparency but excluded from bottle-relevant summaries and evidence filters. Explicitly named PFOA/PFOS removal; filter efficacy only, not PFAS-free bottle material.
Evidence relevance
Partner / non-bottle evidence — not bottle material evidence
Lead
Status
Testing statement
What the brand says
LARQ Bottle Filters are tested to NSF standards (42, 53, and 401) to remove lead, chlorine, heavy metals, PFAS (PFOA/PFOS), and other particulates.
How broad the wording is
Single named compound
What it applies to
LARQ Bottle Filtered; Filter performance for lead in filtered water; Filter or partner product; Specific product; US / English
This record concerns a filter, partner, or other non-bottle target. It is shown for transparency but excluded from bottle-relevant summaries and evidence filters. Filter result is for filtered potable water; not a claim that bottle materials are lead-free. Third-party report linked by FAQ.
Evidence relevance
Partner / non-bottle evidence — not bottle material evidence
Lifefactory
34
Claims found for 2 of 12 topics
Several types of claims
Brand statement
Lifefactory
WBA Chemical Transparency Score: 34/100
This score measures how much public chemical information a brand provides and how well it documents it. It is not a safety score.
Disclosure Coverage4.00/35
Evidence & Documentation10.50/45
Claim Clarity9.80/10
Source Transparency9.88/10
12-topic overview
BPAFree-from statement
BPSNo public claim found
BPFNo public claim found
Bisphenols / all-bisphenol claimsNo public claim found
PhthalatesFree-from statement
PFASNo public claim found
LeadNo public claim found
CadmiumNo public claim found
Other heavy metalsNo public claim found
PVC / vinylNo public claim found
LatexNo public claim found
Microplastics / plastic sheddingNo public claim found
Brand claims and sources
BPA
Status
Free-from statement
What the brand says
BPA-free and phthalate-free.
How broad the wording is
Single named compound
What it applies to
9 oz Glass Baby Bottle with Flat Cap; Glass bottle, polypropylene cap and silicone sleeve; Specific product; Specific product; US / English
This record concerns a filter, partner, or other non-bottle target. It is shown for transparency but excluded from bottle-relevant summaries and evidence filters. Claims concern Home pitcher/dispenser filtration of water, not bottle materials or bottle shedding.
Evidence relevance
Partner / non-bottle evidence — not bottle material evidence
Lead
Status
Other public statement
What the brand says
Specified Home pitchers reduce lead in water.
How broad the wording is
General material or category wording
What it applies to
Single Product; Bottle / filter / component as limited by source; Filter or partner product; Specific product; US / global as page states
This record concerns a filter, partner, or other non-bottle target. It is shown for transparency but excluded from bottle-relevant summaries and evidence filters. Claims concern Home pitcher/dispenser filtration of water, not bottle materials or bottle shedding.
Evidence relevance
Partner / non-bottle evidence — not bottle material evidence
Microplastics / plastic shedding
Status
Other public statement
What the brand says
The Go Series filter removes microplastics from treated water.
How broad the wording is
General material or category wording
What it applies to
Single Product; Bottle / filter / component as limited by source; Filter or partner product; Specific product; US / global as page states
This record concerns a filter, partner, or other non-bottle target. It is shown for transparency but excluded from bottle-relevant summaries and evidence filters. Filter performance claim for treated water; does not claim that the bottle itself is microplastic-free or tested for shedding.
Evidence relevance
Partner / non-bottle evidence — not bottle material evidence
Status
Other public statement
What the brand says
Specified Home pitchers remove microplastics from water.
How broad the wording is
General material or category wording
What it applies to
Single Product; Bottle / filter / component as limited by source; Filter or partner product; Specific product; US / global as page states
This record concerns a filter, partner, or other non-bottle target. It is shown for transparency but excluded from bottle-relevant summaries and evidence filters. Claims concern Home pitcher/dispenser filtration of water, not bottle materials or bottle shedding.
Evidence relevance
Partner / non-bottle evidence — not bottle material evidence
LocknLock
23
Claims found for 1 of 12 topics
Several types of claims
Brand statement
LocknLock
WBA Chemical Transparency Score: 23/100
This score measures how much public chemical information a brand provides and how well it documents it. It is not a safety score.
Disclosure Coverage1.54/35
Evidence & Documentation1.50/45
Claim Clarity9.80/10
Source Transparency9.88/10
12-topic overview
BPAFree-from statement
BPSNo public claim found
BPFNo public claim found
Bisphenols / all-bisphenol claimsNo public claim found
PhthalatesNo public claim found
PFASNo public claim found
LeadNo public claim found
CadmiumNo public claim found
Other heavy metalsNo public claim found
PVC / vinylNo public claim found
LatexNo public claim found
Microplastics / plastic sheddingNo public claim found
Brand claims and sources
BPA
Status
Free-from statement
What the brand says
BPA FREE and free of other environmental hormones.
How broad the wording is
Single named compound
What it applies to
Product Family; As explicitly scoped in source; Product family; Product family; As page states
RSL v11 lists BPA, BPS, BPB and BPF with stated limits/reporting requirements.
How broad the wording is
Chemical subclass
What it applies to
All products within RSL scope; matrix differs by section/material; Named bisphenols; policy table is not an all-bisphenol-free claim; Supplier requirement; Policy only; Global
Separate the all-class policy context from product free-from claims; no all-bisphenol-free claim found.
Phthalates
Status
Policy or compliance evidence
What the brand says
RSL v11 lists multiple named phthalates with individual and total concentration limits.
How broad the wording is
Chemical subclass
What it applies to
All products within RSL scope; matrix differs by section/material; DINP, DEHP, DBP, BBP, DIDP, DINP, DNOP and other ortho-phthalates; Supplier requirement; Policy only; Global
Exact sentence is broad; article context focuses on apparel. The separate RSL class C rows do not negate this claim, but limits are not proof of zero presence.
Status
Policy or compliance evidence
What the brand says
RSL v11 sets a 50 ppm total organic fluorine limit for all PFAS in covered materials and specifies limits for PFOS, PFOA, PFHxS and related substances.
How broad the wording is
Full named chemical class
What it applies to
All products in RSL scope; section/material-specific test matrices; PFAS; total organic fluorine, PFOS, PFOA, PFHxS, C9-C14 PFCAs; Supplier requirement; Policy only; Global
RSL v11 lists limits for mercury, chromium, nickel and other metals; packaging section includes total heavy metals (Cd, Cr, Pb & Hg).
How broad the wording is
Chemical scope unclear
What it applies to
All products in RSL scope; matrix differs by material/section; Mercury, chromium, nickel, arsenic, antimony and others; Supplier requirement; Policy only; Global
This record concerns a filter, partner, or other non-bottle target. It is shown for transparency but excluded from bottle-relevant summaries and evidence filters. Partner Epic performance claim; not Nalgene-made bottle material claim.
Evidence relevance
Partner / non-bottle evidence — not bottle material evidence
Lead
Status
Secondary source only
What the brand says
Epic filter targets contaminants including lead.
How broad the wording is
Single named compound
What it applies to
Nalgene-branded Epic filter; Filtered water; Filter or partner product; Partner Product; US / English
This record concerns a filter, partner, or other non-bottle target. It is shown for transparency but excluded from bottle-relevant summaries and evidence filters. Partner Epic performance claim; not Nalgene-made bottle material claim.
Evidence relevance
Partner / non-bottle evidence — not bottle material evidence
Microplastics / plastic shedding
Status
Secondary source only
What the brand says
Epic filter targets contaminants including microplastics.
How broad the wording is
General material or category wording
What it applies to
Nalgene-branded Epic filter; Filtered water; Filter or partner product; Partner Product; US / English
This record concerns a filter, partner, or other non-bottle target. It is shown for transparency but excluded from bottle-relevant summaries and evidence filters. Partner Epic performance claim; not a microplastic-free bottle claim.
Evidence relevance
Partner / non-bottle evidence — not bottle material evidence
Nathan
23
Claims found for 1 of 12 topics
Several types of claims
Brand statement
Nathan
WBA Chemical Transparency Score: 23/100
This score measures how much public chemical information a brand provides and how well it documents it. It is not a safety score.
Disclosure Coverage1.51/35
Evidence & Documentation1.50/45
Claim Clarity9.80/10
Source Transparency9.88/10
12-topic overview
BPAFree-from statement
BPSNo public claim found
BPFNo public claim found
Bisphenols / all-bisphenol claimsNo public claim found
PhthalatesNo public claim found
PFASNo public claim found
LeadNo public claim found
CadmiumNo public claim found
Other heavy metalsNo public claim found
PVC / vinylNo public claim found
LatexNo public claim found
Microplastics / plastic sheddingNo public claim found
Brand claims and sources
BPA
Status
Free-from statement
What the brand says
BPA-free materials.
How broad the wording is
Single named compound
What it applies to
Bottle Range; As scoped in claim wording/source; Product material; Bottle range; As page states
Official FAQ lists bottle materials and parts; applies to stated Avent bottle models/food-contact parts, not unrelated Philips products.
Phthalates
Status
Free-from statement
What the brand says
Philips Avent line of infant feeding products, including feeding bottles, nipples, cups, spouts, soothers, tempo liners and weaning spoons, do not contain Phthalates.
How broad the wording is
Full named chemical class
What it applies to
Philips Avent infant-feeding product line, including feeding bottles; Infant-feeding product materials; Product family; Product family; US
FAQ text explicitly covers the Philips Avent infant-feeding line including feeding bottles; associated page model is SCF670/01. Class B/product-family scope, not all Philips products.
Microplastics / plastic shedding
Status
Regulatory compliance statement
What the brand says
Philips Avent states it follows applicable safety requirements and is not aware of studies recognized by health authorities confirming health risks of microplastics in baby bottles.
How broad the wording is
General material or category wording
What it applies to
Bottle Range; Bottle / product materials as limited by source; Product family; Bottle range; US / global as page states
Manufacturer reports independent testing and no detectable levels; underlying lab report is not linked in this source. No detection is not proof of absolute absence.
Phthalates
Status
Tested — not detected
What the brand says
All bottles, components, and accessories are independently tested and certified to have no detectable levels of Phthalates.
How broad the wording is
Chemical subclass
What it applies to
Pura bottles, components, and accessories; Product materials and components; Brand products; Brand-wide; US / English
Manufacturer reports independent testing and no detectable levels; underlying lab report is not linked in this source. No detection is not proof of absolute absence.
Lead
Status
Free-from statement
What the brand says
Currently, we use a certified lead-free solder for all our insulated bottles, and no solder in our standard non-insulated bottles.
How broad the wording is
Single named compound
What it applies to
All current Pura insulated bottles and standard non-insulated bottles; Solder/process materials; Production process; Bottle range; US / English
Manufacturing process changed in 2017. Older insulated bottles made before the change could have lead-containing solder, though page says as-sold products showed zero lead exposure. Current solder claim is not a blanket claim that every bottle component is lead-free.
Cadmium
Status
Tested — not detected
What the brand says
All bottles, components, and accessories are independently tested and certified to have no detectable levels of Cadmium.
How broad the wording is
Single named compound
What it applies to
Pura bottles, components, and accessories; Product materials and components; Brand products; Brand-wide; US / English
Manufacturer reports independent testing and no detectable levels; underlying lab report is not linked in this source. No detection is not proof of absolute absence.
PVC / vinyl
Status
Tested — not detected
What the brand says
All bottles, components, and accessories are independently tested and certified to have no detectable levels of PVC.
How broad the wording is
General material or category wording
What it applies to
Pura bottles, components, and accessories; Product materials and components; Brand products; Brand-wide; US / English
Manufacturer reports independent testing and no detectable levels; underlying lab report is not linked in this source. No detection is not proof of absolute absence.
Purifyou
32
Claims found for 5 of 12 topics
Several types of claims
Brand statement
Purifyou
WBA Chemical Transparency Score: 32/100
This score measures how much public chemical information a brand provides and how well it documents it. It is not a safety score.
Disclosure Coverage8.84/35
Evidence & Documentation3.00/45
Claim Clarity9.80/10
Source Transparency9.88/10
12-topic overview
BPAFree-from statement
BPSNo public claim found
BPFNo public claim found
Bisphenols / all-bisphenol claimsNo public claim found
PhthalatesFree-from statement
PFASNo public claim found
LeadFree-from statement
CadmiumFree-from statement
Other heavy metalsNo public claim found
PVC / vinylFree-from statement
LatexNo public claim found
Microplastics / plastic sheddingNo public claim found
Brand claims and sources
BPA
Status
Free-from statement
What the brand says
Their color is created during the manufacturing process and is BPA, lead, cadmium, and PVC free.
How broad the wording is
Single named compound
What it applies to
Purifyou glass bottles and caps; color-producing materials; Coloring/materials; Product material; Product family; US / English
Current Pro Team Bidon product page; single product.
Reebok
0
Claims found for 0 of 12 topics
No public claim found
No bottle-specific evidence found
Reebok
WBA Chemical Transparency Score: 0/100
This score measures how much public chemical information a brand provides and how well it documents it. It is not a safety score.
Disclosure Coverage0.00/35
Evidence & Documentation0.00/45
Claim Clarity0.00/10
Source Transparency0.00/10
12-topic overview
BPANo public claim found
BPSNo public claim found
BPFNo public claim found
Bisphenols / all-bisphenol claimsNo public claim found
PhthalatesNo public claim found
PFASNo public claim found
LeadNo public claim found
CadmiumNo public claim found
Other heavy metalsNo public claim found
PVC / vinylNo public claim found
LatexNo public claim found
Microplastics / plastic sheddingNo public claim found
Brand claims and sources
No qualifying public claim records were located for this brand in the reviewed sources. That is not evidence of chemical presence or absence.
REI Co-op
28
Claims found for 2 of 12 topics
Several types of claims
Policy or compliance document, Testing or certification mentioned
REI Co-op
WBA Chemical Transparency Score: 28/100
This score measures how much public chemical information a brand provides and how well it documents it. It is not a safety score.
Disclosure Coverage2.38/35
Evidence & Documentation6.00/45
Claim Clarity9.80/10
Source Transparency9.88/10
12-topic overview
BPAPolicy or compliance evidence
BPSNo public claim found
BPFNo public claim found
Bisphenols / all-bisphenol claimsNo public claim found
PhthalatesPolicy or compliance evidence
PFASNo public claim found
LeadNo public claim found
CadmiumNo public claim found
Other heavy metalsNo public claim found
PVC / vinylNo public claim found
LatexNo public claim found
Microplastics / plastic sheddingNo public claim found
Brand claims and sources
BPA
Status
Policy or compliance evidence
What the brand says
All bottles sold at REI Co-op cannot intentionally be manufactured with, and are tested for, the industrial chemical Bisphenol A (BPA) and other potentially health-harming substances, such as phthalates.
How broad the wording is
Single named compound
What it applies to
Water Bottles Buying Guide; As stated in source; Supplier requirement; Policy only; United States
REI buying guide describes policy for all bottles it sells, including third-party brands. It reports no analyte-specific results and is not a REI product-specific test claim.
Phthalates
Status
Policy or compliance evidence
What the brand says
All bottles sold at REI Co-op cannot intentionally be manufactured with, and are tested for, the industrial chemical Bisphenol A (BPA) and other potentially health-harming substances, such as phthalates.
How broad the wording is
Full named chemical class
What it applies to
Water Bottles Buying Guide; As stated in source; Supplier requirement; Policy only; United States
REI buying guide describes policy for all bottles it sells, including third-party brands. It reports no analyte-specific results and is not a REI product-specific test claim.
Retap
27
Claims found for 5 of 12 topics
Several types of claims
Brand statement
Retap
WBA Chemical Transparency Score: 27/100
This score measures how much public chemical information a brand provides and how well it documents it. It is not a safety score.
Disclosure Coverage6.41/35
Evidence & Documentation1.50/45
Claim Clarity9.80/10
Source Transparency9.02/10
12-topic overview
BPAFree-from statement
BPSNo public claim found
BPFNo public claim found
Bisphenols / all-bisphenol claimsNo public claim found
PhthalatesFree-from statement
PFASNo public claim found
LeadFree-from statement
CadmiumFree-from statement
Other heavy metalsNo public claim found
PVC / vinylFree-from statement
LatexNo public claim found
Microplastics / plastic sheddingNo public claim found
Brand claims and sources
BPA
Status
Free-from statement
What the brand says
Retap lid does not contain BPA.
How broad the wording is
Single named compound
What it applies to
Component Specific; Bottle / product materials as limited by source; Product component; Component-specific; US / global as page states
This record concerns a filter, partner, or other non-bottle target. It is shown for transparency but excluded from bottle-relevant summaries and evidence filters. Official Sawyer page labels the included CNOC Premium bottle as BPA-free; because it is a paired partner bottle, the record is kept outside Sawyer-proprietary bottle-material statistics.
Evidence relevance
Partner / non-bottle evidence — not bottle material evidence
Microplastics / plastic shedding
Status
Other public statement
What the brand says
Sawyer Squeeze filter removes 100% of microplastics from treated water.
How broad the wording is
General material or category wording
What it applies to
Single Product; Bottle / filter / component as limited by source; Filter or partner product; Specific product; US / global as page states
This record concerns a filter, partner, or other non-bottle target. It is shown for transparency but excluded from bottle-relevant summaries and evidence filters. Filter-performance claim, not a microplastic-free bottle-material or shedding claim.
Evidence relevance
Partner / non-bottle evidence — not bottle material evidence
SIGG
47
Claims found for 5 of 12 topics
Several types of claims
Brand statement
SIGG
WBA Chemical Transparency Score: 47/100
This score measures how much public chemical information a brand provides and how well it documents it. It is not a safety score.
Range-specific official materials. German catalog statement is preserved in original wording and not generalized beyond cataloged reusable drinking bottles.
Status
Free-from statement
What the brand says
Frei von BPA & Phthalaten
How broad the wording is
Single named compound
What it applies to
Sistema reusable drinking bottles in German catalog; Bottle materials; Product family; Product family; Germany / German
Range-specific official materials. German catalog statement is preserved in original wording and not generalized beyond cataloged reusable drinking bottles.
Phthalates
Status
Free-from statement
What the brand says
Frei von BPA & Phthalaten
How broad the wording is
Chemical subclass
What it applies to
Sistema reusable drinking bottles in German catalog; Bottle materials; Product family; Product family; Germany / German
Range-specific official materials. German catalog statement is preserved in original wording and not generalized beyond cataloged reusable drinking bottles.
Skater
0
Claims found for 0 of 12 topics
No public claim found
No bottle-specific evidence found
Skater
WBA Chemical Transparency Score: 0/100
This score measures how much public chemical information a brand provides and how well it documents it. It is not a safety score.
Disclosure Coverage0.00/35
Evidence & Documentation0.00/45
Claim Clarity0.00/10
Source Transparency0.00/10
12-topic overview
BPANo public claim found
BPSNo public claim found
BPFNo public claim found
Bisphenols / all-bisphenol claimsNo public claim found
PhthalatesNo public claim found
PFASNo public claim found
LeadNo public claim found
CadmiumNo public claim found
Other heavy metalsNo public claim found
PVC / vinylNo public claim found
LatexNo public claim found
Microplastics / plastic sheddingNo public claim found
Brand claims and sources
No qualifying public claim records were located for this brand in the reviewed sources. That is not evidence of chemical presence or absence.
Skip Hop
22
Claims found for 1 of 12 topics
Several types of claims
Brand statement
Skip Hop
WBA Chemical Transparency Score: 22/100
This score measures how much public chemical information a brand provides and how well it documents it. It is not a safety score.
Disclosure Coverage1.20/35
Evidence & Documentation1.50/45
Claim Clarity9.80/10
Source Transparency9.88/10
12-topic overview
BPAFree-from statement
BPSNo public claim found
BPFNo public claim found
Bisphenols / all-bisphenol claimsNo public claim found
PhthalatesNo public claim found
PFASNo public claim found
LeadNo public claim found
CadmiumNo public claim found
Other heavy metalsNo public claim found
PVC / vinylNo public claim found
LatexNo public claim found
Microplastics / plastic sheddingNo public claim found
Brand claims and sources
BPA
Status
Free-from statement
What the brand says
BPA-free
How broad the wording is
Single named compound
What it applies to
Single Product; Bottle / product materials as limited by source; Specific product; Specific product; US / global as page states
Secondary retailer listing. Soma official site states the brand moved to Full Circle; no current first-party chemical claim was located. Retailer listing is preserved as Class D only.
Source
26
Claims found for 3 of 12 topics
Several types of claims
Brand statement
Source
WBA Chemical Transparency Score: 26/100
This score measures how much public chemical information a brand provides and how well it documents it. It is not a safety score.
Disclosure Coverage4.41/35
Evidence & Documentation1.50/45
Claim Clarity9.80/10
Source Transparency9.88/10
12-topic overview
BPAFree-from statement
BPSNo public claim found
BPFNo public claim found
Bisphenols / all-bisphenol claimsNo public claim found
PhthalatesFree-from statement
PFASNo public claim found
LeadNo public claim found
CadmiumNo public claim found
Other heavy metalsNo public claim found
PVC / vinylFree-from statement
LatexNo public claim found
Microplastics / plastic sheddingNo public claim found
Brand claims and sources
BPA
Status
Free-from statement
What the brand says
JET drinking bottles are foldable, lightweight, dishwasher-safe and phthalate-free (PVC- and BPA-free).
How broad the wording is
Single named compound
What it applies to
SOURCE JET folding bottle; Foldable bottle material; Specific product; Specific product; Germany / German
Stanley 1913 products meet all US & EU regulatory requirements, including Prop 65. Stanley 1913 tests for and validates compliance on all products through FDA-accredited third-party labs that verify our products follow strict guidelines, including but not limited to BPA/BPS, PFOS and phthalate regulatory requirements.
How broad the wording is
Single named compound
What it applies to
Stanley 1913 products, exact product scope unstated; PFOS only (named PFAS); Brand products; Policy only; UK
The official Tatonka-branded shop lists PFC/PFAS-free for this named stainless-steel bottle. The shop is operated by EXPedition GmbH; its product listing identifies Tatonka GmbH as manufacturer.
ThermoFlask
28
Claims found for 3 of 12 topics
Several types of claims
Brand statement
ThermoFlask
WBA Chemical Transparency Score: 28/100
This score measures how much public chemical information a brand provides and how well it documents it. It is not a safety score.
Disclosure Coverage6.80/35
Evidence & Documentation1.50/45
Claim Clarity9.80/10
Source Transparency9.88/10
12-topic overview
BPAFree-from statement
BPSNo public claim found
BPFNo public claim found
Bisphenols / all-bisphenol claimsNo public claim found
PhthalatesNo public claim found
PFASFree-from statement
LeadFree-from statement
CadmiumNo public claim found
Other heavy metalsNo public claim found
PVC / vinylNo public claim found
LatexNo public claim found
Microplastics / plastic sheddingNo public claim found
Brand claims and sources
BPA
Status
Free-from statement
What the brand says
BPA Free
How broad the wording is
Single named compound
What it applies to
ThermoFlask 32oz Leakproof Straw Tumbler; BPA; Specific product; Specific product; US / English
Official sustainability page states 100% BPA-free across bottles and reservoirs.
PFAS
Status
Policy or compliance evidence
What the brand says
Ultimate Direction has replaced PFAS with non-fluorinated alternatives in many products and is committed to eliminating PFAS chemicals from its supply chain.
How broad the wording is
Full named chemical class
What it applies to
Policy Only; As scoped in claim wording/source; Production process; Policy only; As page states
Lead-free statement applies to Vapur Chill insulated product range; not all Vapur products.
Vaude
35
Claims found for 2 of 12 topics
Multiple public status types
Brand statement
Vaude
WBA Chemical Transparency Score: 35/100
This score measures how much public chemical information a brand provides and how well it documents it. It is not a safety score.
Disclosure Coverage4.80/35
Evidence & Documentation12.00/45
Claim Clarity8.34/10
Source Transparency9.50/10
12-topic overview
BPANo public claim found
BPSNo public claim found
BPFNo public claim found
Bisphenols / all-bisphenol claimsNo public claim found
PhthalatesNo public claim found
PFASPhaseout or process commitment
LeadNo public claim found
CadmiumNo public claim found
Other heavy metalsNo public claim found
PVC / vinylFree-from statement
LatexNo public claim found
Microplastics / plastic sheddingNo public claim found
Brand claims and sources
PFAS
Status
Phaseout or process commitment
What the brand says
“With the Spring/Summer 2025 collection, this transformation is complete: VAUDE now fully avoids PFAS – from weather protection apparel to backpacks, sleeping bags, footwear and waterproof tents.”
How broad the wording is
Full named chemical class
What it applies to
VAUDE Sustainability Report 2025; As explicitly scoped in source; Production process; Brand-wide; Global
Official company announcement dated 2026-01-20 documents a product-category phase-out completed with Spring/Summer 2025. Treat as a process/production-use commitment; the source does not establish a bottle-specific or zero-residue claim.
PVC / vinyl
Status
Free-from statement
What the brand says
All VAUDE products: 0 % PVC.
How broad the wording is
Single named compound
What it applies to
VAUDE Sustainability Report 2024; As explicitly scoped in source; Specific product; Brand-wide; Global
2022 review/testing stated; scope is food/beverage-contact products/materials.
Bisphenols / all-bisphenol claims
Status
Testing statement
What the brand says
“all other bisphenol substances of concern, including BPS and BPF”
How broad the wording is
Multiple named substances
What it applies to
YETI food/beverage-contact products and materials; BPS/BPF and other substances of concern; not explicitly every bisphenol analogue; Product family; Product family; Global
A 2022 review/testing scope and named examples are not an all-bisphenol-free claim.
Phthalates
Status
Material statement
What the brand says
“all our drinkware and products with food contact surfaces do not contain harmful chemicals such as bisphenols … or other endocrine disruptors (phthalates)”
How broad the wording is
Chemical scope unclear
What it applies to
YETI drinkware and products with food-contact surfaces; Phthalates; Product family; Product family; Global
Production use only; long-chain PFAS subset, not a claim of all-PFAS-free products or absence of residual PFAS.
Lead
Status
Lead-safe disclosure; tested — not detected
What the brand says
“All YETI Rambler® Drinkware is Lead Safe. When YETI Rambler® Drinkware is tested, lead is not detected. The limit of detection is <0.002 mg/kg (ppm).”
How broad the wording is
Single named compound
What it applies to
YETI Rambler drinkware; Leachable lead exposure / encapsulated sealing pellet; Product family; Product family; Global
The current FAQ reports lead not detected at an LOD of <0.002 mg/kg (ppm), but separately says the vacuum-seal pellet contains lead and is fully encapsulated/inaccessible. “Lead safe” is not “lead-free.”
PVC / vinyl
Status
Phaseout or process commitment
What the brand says
“YETI achieved its goal to eliminate PVC from all production in 2025.”
How broad the wording is
General material or category wording
What it applies to
YETI production; PVC; Brand products; Brand-wide; Global
Official FAQ explicitly covers entire bottle range; not expanded to all bisphenols.
Zojirushi
24
Claims found for 2 of 12 topics
Several types of claims
Brand statement
Zojirushi
WBA Chemical Transparency Score: 24/100
This score measures how much public chemical information a brand provides and how well it documents it. It is not a safety score.
Disclosure Coverage4.02/35
Evidence & Documentation1.50/45
Claim Clarity8.74/10
Source Transparency9.78/10
12-topic overview
BPAFree-from statement
BPSNo public claim found
BPFNo public claim found
Bisphenols / all-bisphenol claimsNo public claim found
PhthalatesNo public claim found
PFASMaterial statement; Free-from statement
LeadNo public claim found
CadmiumNo public claim found
Other heavy metalsNo public claim found
PVC / vinylNo public claim found
LatexNo public claim found
Microplastics / plastic sheddingNo public claim found
Brand claims and sources
BPA
Status
Free-from statement
What the brand says
“All Zojirushi vacuum mugs and bottles are made of high quality 18/8 stainless steel and BPA-free plastic. Lids, stoppers, and mouth rings are also BPA-free.”
How broad the wording is
Single named compound
What it applies to
Vacuum mugs and bottles; Plastic, lids, stoppers, mouth rings; Product family; Broad drinkware range; US
Search-indexed official FAQ wording; open redirect currently prevents direct line verification, but BPA scope is clear in official result. Record source limitation.
Official Japanese wording: no Japan-market stainless bottle products use the three compounds listed as regulated in Japan. Translation: “There are no products using the following substances currently regulated in Japan: PFOA, PFOS, PFHxS.” Not an all-PFAS claim and not analytical absence evidence.
Status
Free-from statement
What the brand says
Yes, all of our mugs or bottles with a nonstick coated interior are PFOA-free.
How broad the wording is
Single named compound
What it applies to
Zojirushi mugs and bottles with nonstick-coated interiors; Nonstick-coated interior; PFOA; Product material; Product family; US / English
Current Kids Flip Straw Bottle 14 oz; product-specific materials claim.
No brands match these filters. This is a filter result, not a chemical finding.
Why these claims are harder to compare than they look
“PFAS-free” and “PFOA-free” may sound almost identical, but they are not. PFOA is just one member of the much larger PFAS family. “No intentionally added PFAS” means the company says it does not deliberately add PFAS. It does not mean a laboratory tested the bottle and found none.
“BPA-free” does not mean “free of all bisphenols”: BPA is one bisphenol, and BPS and BPF are others. “Lead-free”, “lead safe” and “not detected” do not mean the same thing either. Even a “not detected” result depends on what was tested and how sensitive the test was.
That is why I show the exact wording and which products it covers instead of turning every claim into a simple yes or no.
What “no public claim found” actually means
If you see “no public claim found” in the table, it does not mean I found the chemical in the bottle. It only means I could not find a clear public statement from the brand about it.
No public claim does not mean the chemical is present or that the product is unsafe. The company may have private testing or documentation.
How I score chemical transparency
The WBA Chemical Transparency Score rewards brands for covering more chemical topics, explaining what claims apply to, publishing stronger supporting documentation, and making information easier to verify.
It is a transparency score, not a safety score. The highest current score is only about 53/100. I did not stretch the scores just to make the best brand look close to 100. A top score of around 53 simply shows how much room there still is for better transparency.
What I think brands should publish
If a company makes an important chemical-safety or testing claim, consumers should be able to find:
the exact product or product family covered
the chemical or chemical class discussed
whether the statement is a free-from claim, test result or company policy
who performed the testing
enough information about how the test was done to understand what the result actually means
a full report or useful information about the test whenever possible
The burden should not be on the customer to decode chemical-policy language just to understand a water bottle listing.
If testing is part of the marketing, the evidence should be part of the conversation.
My takeaway
I came into this project expecting to compare chemical claims. I ended up much more interested in how difficult those claims are to verify.
I am not asking brands to prove that a bottle contains literally zero of every chemical. I am asking for something much simpler: if safety and testing are part of the sales pitch, show customers enough evidence to understand what was actually tested.
Right now, I think the water bottle industry has a transparency problem.
Methodology / Sources
How I selected the 150 brands
The panel is a fixed group of 150 consumer-facing brands chosen because they are relevant to reusable water bottle buyers. Each entry passed a current reusable-drinking-product eligibility review and has documented market-presence evidence. The panel includes major and regional brands across outdoor hydration, sports, kids, kitchen, cycling, and lifestyle retail. It does not represent every bottle brand worldwide, and these market signals do not tell us market share.
Commercial brands are represented as distinct customer-facing entities. Parent companies, ownership, retailer private-label status, and aliases are recorded separately to avoid counting the same commercial brand twice.
What I searched
I prioritized current official product pages, FAQs and help centers, materials and safety pages, sustainability or responsibility pages, chemical policies, compliance documents, restricted-substance lists, technical PDFs, test reports, certifications, and relevant regional brand pages. Retailer or other secondary evidence is identified separately and is not treated as first-party manufacturer evidence.
A source record includes its URL, title, type, first-party status, region, access date, source status, and notes. Wording is checked against the source when it is accessible.
The 12 topics I tracked
BPA
BPS
BPF
Bisphenols / all-bisphenol claims
Phthalates
PFAS
Lead
Cadmium
Other heavy metals
PVC / vinyl
Latex
Microplastics / plastic shedding
Microplastics and plastic shedding are tracked separately. I do not infer microplastic performance from BPA wording, bottle material, packaging, or environmental statements.
How I classified claims
Broad and scoped first-party claims are kept separate from policy/compliance-only evidence, secondary-only claims, no qualifying public claim found, and unresolved evidence. The public labels describe the kind of information located, not the truth of a claim, chemical presence, safety, or health risk.
Free-from wording, no-intentionally-added statements, phaseouts, test results, compliance statements, and RSL restrictions remain distinct. A claim about one named compound is not generalized to a broader chemical class.
The strict PFAS-free bottle count requires a first-party source, explicit wording that covers PFAS as a class, and a claim applying to a reusable water bottle or bottle range. PFOA-only, PFOS-only, no-intentionally-added PFAS and tumbler-only claims are tracked separately and do not qualify. This measures what brands publicly claim; it does not establish laboratory absence or zero migration.
How product-specific claims are handled
Each record retains what product, family, bottle range, material, component, production process, or supplier policy the wording covers. A statement about a lid or one product does not automatically apply to every product from that brand. Partner and filter-system statements remain identified as non-bottle evidence and are excluded from bottle-relevant summaries.
How regional claims are handled
Region and source language are preserved when provided. A regional statement is not automatically generalized worldwide. If wording differs meaningfully by region or the scope is unclear, the case stays unresolved until it can be checked.
What “no public claim found” means
WBA searched the defined public sources reviewed for this audit and did not locate a qualifying claim for that brand/topic. It does not mean the chemical is present or absent, that the brand performed no testing, or that the product is unsafe.
Chemical Transparency Score methodology
The frozen v1.3 formula weights Disclosure Coverage at 35 points, Evidence & Documentation at 45, Claim Clarity at 10, and Source Transparency at 10. The total is displayed as a whole number. Broad bands—Top 10%, Top 11–25%, Middle 50%, Bottom 11–25%, and Bottom 10%—are relative to this WBA 150 panel. No exact rank or percentile is displayed. The score is not a safety score.
Documentation and testing
Manufacturer statements, technical or compliance documents, RSLs, testing references, certifications, public test data, and public laboratory reports are different evidence types. A testing reference is not a public laboratory report. Brita’s filter-performance data are not bottle-material testing. The page uses reader-facing evidence descriptions and omits internal documentation labels.
Research limitations
Manufacturer claims are not independent laboratory proof. This database does not measure real-world chemical presence, exposure, or health risk. Sources can change or disappear; claims may be product-specific, regional, policy-only, secondary, or partner-related. The panel was deliberately selected; it does not statistically represent every reusable-bottle brand worldwide.
Unresolved cases
Air Up / Microplastics remains unresolved. The reviewed wording says trace microplastics can occur generally but does not provide a bottle-specific measurement, method, or threshold. This is not evidence of microplastic-free performance or a bottle-specific test result.
Manufacturer, policy and technical-source records remain attached to the matching brand and topic in the database above, where their original wording and scope can be checked in context. Open the brand database.
Chemical claim glossary
PFAS-free
A broad claim about PFAS within the product or component scope named by the company. It remains a manufacturer claim, not independent proof.
PFOA-free
A claim about PFOA specifically; it does not automatically mean PFAS-free.
No intentionally added PFAS
The company says it does not deliberately add PFAS. That is different from proving testing would find none.
Tested-not-detected
The chemical was not detected in the test described. The result depends on the sample, method and detection limit.
Compliance or limit
A statement that a product meets a rule or stays below a threshold does not necessarily mean zero.
RSL
A Restricted Substances List is a company policy telling suppliers which chemicals are prohibited or limited. It does not prove every finished bottle is free from a chemical.
No qualifying public claim found
I did not find a qualifying public statement in the sources reviewed. This does not establish chemical presence or absence.
Version history
This version presents the approved 150-brand panel, 12 topics, claim/source records, and frozen v1.3 transparency scores. Dated changes are recorded in the underlying claim history using added, updated, removed, source-changed, or scope-changed events.
How we test products
Every product we review is tested using the same structured process, with dozens of measurements and checks covering areas such as thermal performance, lid usability, cleaning, durability, portability, and everyday use. Those results feed into the WBA Score, which helps us compare bottles using consistent criteria instead of relying only on manufacturer claims.
Jeremiah Kowalski founded Water Bottle Advisor to make drinkware reviews more useful and less dependent on manufacturer claims. He has personally tested 50+ products, putting them through measuring, cleaning, leak testing, durability testing, and everyday use before sharing his conclusions. It also means occasionally explaining why yet another large box of bottles has arrived at his door.