Johnson & Johnson sustainability score: 38/100
Johnson & Johnson is a US multinational pharmaceutical and medical devices company incorporated in New Jersey in 1887 and headquartered in New Brunswick, New Jersey. With FY2025 revenue of $94.2 billion and 138,200 employees, it ranks among the world's largest healthcare manufacturers, spanning prescription drugs, vaccines, consumer health, and medical technology.
Founded 1887Head office New Brunswick, New Jersey, USStaff ~138,200 (FY2025)Revenue $94,193M revenue (FY2025)Website ↗
J&J's Scope 1 and 2 emissions fell 38% from 2021, mostly through renewable electricity instruments including unbundled certificates; Scope 1 itself fell only about 3% from 2023 to 2025. It reports Scope 3 by category but states no total, and says most of the recent fall in its largest categories comes from a 2025 methodology change. Only 37% of key suppliers have science-based targets, and its trade-association dues go to groups opposing climate policy.
Johnson & Johnson scores 38/100 (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 October 2026.
That places Johnson & Johnson joint 460th of 934 companies scored, and 17th of 22 in Healthcare / Pharmaceuticals.
What is Johnson & Johnson doing well, and where does it fall short?
Strongest on Carbon Footprint: Operations and Carbon Footprint: Supply Chain (8/10, 7/10). Weakest on Nature & Biodiversity Impact and Energy Source (4/10, 5/10).
Where Johnson & Johnson 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 chain7/10No full value-chain map or supplier engagement programme.
- Whether its emissions are falling6/10No consistent fall over several years across its operations and supply chain.
- How clean its energy is5/10Less than half its energy shown to be renewable, or no transition plan.
- 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 water5/10No measured water footprint with reduction targets.
- Its climate targets7/10Its targets aren't validated by the Science Based Targets initiative.
- How openly it reports7/10No annual impact report, or no pay linked to climate targets.
- 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 Johnson & Johnson's SINK score calculated?
Same ten questions for every company. No private weighting.
SINK = (0.3 × Base + 0.7 × Performance) × ScaleHas Johnson & Johnson's score changed?
Johnson & Johnson's score has moved from 41 to 38 across 2 recorded reviews, down 3 points.
- 41 → 38-317 October 2026
Fortune 50 re-score (owner-approved batch 2, 2026-10-17)
- Scored 418 February 2026
Initial score at platform launch
What evidence is Johnson & Johnson's score based on?
9 sources used in this assessment. All publicly available. Each row shows which of the ten questions it informed.
44% of them were published by Johnson & Johnson itself; the rest come from independent sources.
“Market-based 42,811”
“Climate change or legal, regulatory or market measures to address climate change may negatively affect our business and results of operations.”
“We have used the LEAP (Locate, Evaluate, Assess, Prepare) approach, developed by the Taskforce on Nature-related Financial Disclosures (TNFD)”
“In addition to our climate goals, we also have a longer-term ambition to reach net zero emissions by 2045.”
“39.1% in Forest 500 Rankings”
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 Johnson & Johnson compare with other healthcare / pharmaceuticals companies?
Where Johnson & Johnson sits among healthcare / pharmaceuticals peers.
Among the 22 major healthcare / pharmaceuticals brands we've scored, Johnson & Johnson sits 17th of 22.
Who scores higher in Healthcare / Pharmaceuticals?
The 3 companies in the sector scoring nearest above Johnson & Johnson.
Eli Lilly has renewable energy momentum but weak climate fundamentals.
See the breakdown →Merck reports emissions via GHG Protocol with third-party assurance, but buries specific figures in CDP filings.
See the breakdown →Pfizer discloses robust climate data with GHG Protocol alignment and SBTi validation, but progress is dire: only 15% of its 46% emissions reduction target achieved by 2024, renewable energy stuck at 14% despite RE100 membership, and hazardous waste flat since 2022.
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.