FatFace sustainability score: 43/100
FatFace is a UK clothing and accessories retailer headquartered near Leicester, selling through more than 180 sites in the UK and Ireland and online; it is 97% owned by Next plc. Fat Face Limited was incorporated in 1994. It had 2,047 employees and £215.7 million revenue in its year to January 2026.
Founded 1994Head office Enderby, Leicester, UKStaff ~2,047 (FY to Jan 2026 average)Revenue ~£215.7M revenue (FY to Jan 2026)Website ↗
FatFace's footprint was 49,033 tCO2e in its year to January 2026, independently assured and 93% of it the goods it buys, and it rose about 4% on the year. About 91% of its electricity is renewable through certificates and 99.5% of its cotton comes from lower-impact sources, but it missed most of its 2025 materials targets and has no current reduction target or SBTi commitment. It publishes no water or chemicals data.
FatFace scores 43/100 (Below expectations) on SINK's independent climate assessment, scored from public data only. Scores are free. Companies can never pay for anything about their own score. Last verified November 2026.
That places FatFace joint 331st of 934 companies scored, and joint 22nd of 43 in Apparel (Durable / Outdoor).
What is FatFace doing well, and where does it fall short?
Strongest on Carbon Footprint: Operations and Controversies & Red Flags (8/10, 8/10). Weakest on Water Impact and Emissions Trajectory (1/10, 2/10).
Where FatFace lost points
For each question that lost points, the evidence our public rubric looks for that we didn't find.
- Emissions from its own operations8/10No verified figures published with their method and a falling trend.
- Emissions from its supply chain6/10No full value-chain map or supplier engagement programme.
- Whether its emissions are falling2/10No evidence its emissions are falling, not even from energy bills or mileage.
- How clean its energy is6/10Less than 90% of its energy shown to be renewable.
- Its effect on nature4/10Its effect on nature isn't measured or independently verified.
- How it uses materials and handles waste5/10No measurable waste or recycling targets reported publicly.
- Its effect on water1/10No figures for its water use.
- Its climate targets2/10No specific targets with dates.
- How openly it reports7/10No annual impact report, or no pay linked to climate targets.
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 FatFace's SINK score calculated?
Same ten questions for every company. No private weighting.
SINK = (0.3 × Base + 0.7 × Performance) × ScaleWhat evidence is FatFace's score based on?
12 sources used in this assessment. All publicly available. Each row shows which of the ten questions it informed.
8% of them were published by FatFace itself; the rest come from independent sources.
FatFace's footprint (49,033 tCO2e in its year to January 2026, independently assured) is its own figure, from the energy and carbon report its parent Fulham Parent Limited files for FatFace. It leaves out upstream and downstream transport (Scope 3 categories 4 and 9), which its owner Next runs for the whole group, and does not report the use of the products it sells (category 11). Purchased goods, 93% of the total, are included, so we use the total as reported.
11 of 12 sources are independent of the company.
“with gross market-based scope 1 & 2 GHG emissions reducing compared”
“The Company |s included tn the ESG and Streamline Energy and Carbon Reporting tn the parent”
“Two of FatFace’s largest suppliers were among the first to sign up.”
“There’s no evidence it’s taking any action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in its supply chain.”
“The company aims to be carbon neutral by 2025.”
“The brand offsets emissions from its corporate operations (scope 1 -2 ) .”
“FatFace performs well in our criteria for its Environmental Report”
“The fashion retailer said its grew its B Corp score from 80.4 to 89.1, following a successful recertification process.”
“Next has agreed a deal to buy high-street rival Fat Face for £115.2 million.”
“Once the transaction is complete, Next will hold 97 percent of the equity, while FatFace’s management will hold 3 percent”
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 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 FatFace compare with other apparel (durable / outdoor) companies?
Where FatFace sits among apparel (durable / outdoor) peers.
Among the 43 major apparel (durable / outdoor) brands we've scored, FatFace is tied =22nd of 43, with 2 others.
Who scores higher in Apparel (Durable / Outdoor)?
The 3 companies in the sector scoring nearest above FatFace.
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 →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 →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 →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. Companies can never pay for anything about their own score.