Jimmy Choo sustainability score: 31/100
Jimmy Choo is a London-based luxury footwear and accessories brand founded in 1996, owned by Capri Holdings. Known for handcrafted women's shoes and leather goods, it operates approximately 234 stores globally and positions itself in the premium segment of the apparel and accessories market.
Founded 1996Head office London, GBStaff ~14,600 (Capri Holdings group; Jimmy Choo share estimated ~3,000–4,000)Revenue ~$605M (FY2025, Jimmy Choo brand)Website ↗
Jimmy Choo discloses emissions only at parent-company level with no brand-specific quantification. Scope 3 emissions are rising, deforestation risk in leather supply chains remains unaddressed despite policy commitments, and science-based targets lack net-zero validation. Forest 500 and Good On You both rate the company poorly on environmental ambition.
Jimmy Choo scores 31/100 (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 May 2026.
That places Jimmy Choo joint 658th of 934 companies scored, and 37th of 43 in Apparel (Durable / Outdoor).
Limited evidence. This score rests on 6 sources, 33% of them published by the company itself. Every source cited here passed the same quality checks as any other score: all live, none from data aggregators. There is simply less of it.
What is Jimmy Choo doing well, and where does it fall short?
Strongest on Controversies & Red Flags and Energy Source (5/10, 4/10). Weakest on Carbon Footprint: Operations and Emissions Trajectory (2/10, 2/10).
Where Jimmy Choo lost points
For each question that lost points, the evidence our public rubric looks for that we didn't find.
- Emissions from its own operations2/10No emissions figures for its own operations, not even an estimate from energy bills.
- Emissions from its supply chain3/10No assessment of where its supply-chain emissions come from.
- Whether its emissions are falling2/10No evidence its emissions are falling, not even from energy bills or mileage.
- How clean its energy is4/10Less than half its energy shown to be renewable, or no transition plan.
- Its effect on nature3/10No assessment of its effect on nature, and no basic environmental policy.
- How it uses materials and handles waste3/10No active waste reduction, reuse or repair shown.
- Its effect on water2/10No monitoring of water use, or no measures to reduce it.
- Its climate targets3/10No specific targets with dates.
- How openly it reports4/10No dedicated sustainability role, board oversight or public report.
- Its record on controversies5/10Points 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 Jimmy Choo's SINK score calculated?
Same ten questions for every company. No private weighting.
SINK = (0.3 × Base + 0.7 × Performance) × ScaleWhat evidence is Jimmy Choo's score based on?
6 sources used in this assessment. All publicly available. Each row shows which of the ten questions it informed.
33% of them were published by Jimmy Choo itself; the rest come from independent sources.
Scored on 9 April 2026 under an earlier version of our method. We're re-checking it under the current method.
This company's public sustainability disclosure is limited. This score is based on the 6 verified sources cited below, rather than padded to a standard count.
Limited data coverage. This assessment is based on 6 sources, 33% of which are self-reported by the company. Scores may change as independent evidence becomes available.
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 Jimmy Choo compare with other apparel (durable / outdoor) companies?
Where Jimmy Choo sits among apparel (durable / outdoor) peers.
Among the 43 major apparel (durable / outdoor) brands we've scored, Jimmy Choo sits 37th of 43.
Who scores higher in Apparel (Durable / Outdoor)?
The 3 companies in the sector scoring nearest above Jimmy Choo.
Next plc reports comprehensively on climate but relies on intensity-based Scope 3 targets that mask absolute emissions growth.
See the breakdown →Bottega Veneta publishes no brand-level sustainability data, relying entirely on Kering Group reporting.
See the breakdown →Valentino reports carbon reductions and renewable energy commitments but lacks science-based targets, supply chain transparency, and water disclosure.
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.