On Holding sustainability score: 41/100
On designs and sells running, outdoor, training and tennis shoes, apparel and accessories; shoes made up CHF 2,804.4 million of its CHF 3,014.0 million net sales in 2025, and 57.7% of sales were to customers in the Americas. On Holding AG was incorporated in Switzerland in 2012 as the group's holding company; its roots go back to 2010, when it was founded as On AG.
More about On Holding
It is based in Zurich and had 3,963 full-time equivalent employees at 31 December 2025.
Founded 2012Head office Zurich, SwitzerlandStaff ~3,963 FTE (31 December 2025)Revenue ~CHF 3.01B net sales (2025)Website ↗
On's footprint was 572,382 tCO2e in 2025, nearly all of it in its supply chain, and it is 85% above 2023 as production grew. All its own offices and stores run on renewable electricity, partly through certificates, but only eight of 35 suppliers used renewable electricity. Its SBTi-validated targets are a 42% absolute cut in Scope 1 and 2 by 2030 and a 51.6% cut in Scope 3 per unit produced, an intensity target. Its emissions figures are not externally assured. A consumer group's greenwashing complaint over its 'recyclable' Cyclon shoes was dropped by the Zurich public prosecutor in 2025.
On Holding scores 41/100 (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 On Holding joint 392nd of 969 companies scored, and joint 29th of 55 in Apparel (Durable / Outdoor).
What is On Holding doing well, and where does it fall short?
Strongest on Carbon Footprint: Supply Chain and Carbon Footprint: Operations (7/10, 6/10). Weakest on Emissions Trajectory and Nature & Biodiversity Impact (0/10, 4/10).
Where On Holding lost points
For each question that lost points, the evidence our public rubric looks for that we didn't find.
- Emissions from its own operations6/10Its own emissions aren't independently verified or tracked over several years.
- Emissions from its supply chain7/10No full value-chain map or supplier engagement programme.
- Whether its emissions are falling0/10No evidence its emissions are falling, not even from energy bills or mileage.
- 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 water4/10No measured water footprint with reduction targets.
- Its climate targets6/10Its targets aren't validated by the Science Based Targets initiative.
- How openly it reports6/10No annual impact report, or no pay linked to climate targets.
- Its record on controversies6/10Points 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 On Holding's SINK score calculated?
Same ten questions for every company. No private weighting.
SINK = (0.3 × Base + 0.7 × Performance) × ScaleWhat evidence is On Holding's score based on?
12 sources used in this assessment. All publicly available. Each row shows which of the ten questions it informed.
25% of them were published by On Holding itself; the rest come from independent sources.
9 of 12 sources are independent of the company.
“our absolute Scope 1 and 2 emissions increased in 2025 by 14% compared to 2024”
“While our rapid global expansion has led to an increase in absolute emissions”
“our analysts couldn’t find evidence that it’s taking action to reduce hazardous chemicals in manufacturing, or to minimise its packaging, or to protect biodiversity”
“Total employees (full-time equivalents) 3,963 3,254 2,353”
“net sales from shoes, apparel and accessories increased by 27.5% to CHF 2,804.4 million, 68.2% to CHF 169.9 million and 124.1% to CHF 39.6 million”
“Last year, revenue amounted to 3.01 billion Swiss francs (3.83 billion dollars).”
“Le Ministère public classe la plainte contre ON, la FRC poursuit son combat”
“«Il n’est pas établi que l’entreprise a intentionnellement trompé les consommateurs», a conclu le parquet.”
“secondo la giustizia zurighese, il marchio non fa pubblicità ingannevole”
“Sportswear brand On is facing claims of greenwashing over the recycling rates being achieved under its ‘Cyclon’ sustainability programme”
“Cloudneo trainers had not yet been recycled, despite the sale of tens of thousands of pairs”
“It uses some lower-impact materials including recycled materials.”
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 On Holding compare with other apparel (durable / outdoor) companies?
Where On Holding sits among apparel (durable / outdoor) peers.
Among the 55 major apparel (durable / outdoor) brands we've scored, On Holding is tied =29th of 55, with 1 other.
Who scores higher in Apparel (Durable / Outdoor)?
The 3 companies in the sector scoring nearest above On Holding.
Ecoalf has built a genuine circular model with 294 million plastic bottles recycled and measurable ocean cleanup impact, but fails to publish Scope 1, 2, or 3 emissions figures despite rapid 20% annual growth.
See the breakdown →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.
See the breakdown →Fenix Outdoor's footprint was 112,884 tCO2e in 2025, up from 81,341 tCO2e in 2024, partly because Devold was added; it is level with 2019.
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.