Puma sustainability score: 42/100
PUMA is a German sportswear and athletic footwear manufacturer founded in 1948, headquartered in Herzogenaurach. With ~18,700 employees and €8.8bn revenue (2024), it designs and sells apparel, footwear, and accessories across lifestyle and performance segments, competing directly with Nike and Adidas in the global athletic wear market.
Founded 1948Head office Herzogenaurach, GermanyStaff ~18,668 (2024)Revenue ~€8.6B (~$9.5B)Website ↗
PUMA reports comprehensive climate data with third-party verification and achieved a 29% absolute emissions reduction from 2017. However, its renewable energy claim relies entirely on unbundled RECs rather than additionality-based procurement, understating decarbonization integrity. Ongoing controversies over Palestinian settlement sponsorship and worker rights concerns materially undermine sustainability credibility.
Puma scores 42/100 (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 Puma joint 357th of 934 companies scored, and joint 25th of 43 in Apparel (Durable / Outdoor).
What is Puma doing well, and where does it fall short?
Strongest on Carbon Footprint: Operations and Carbon Footprint: Supply Chain (8/10, 7/10). Weakest on Controversies & Red Flags and Energy Source (3/10, 5/10).
Where Puma 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 nature5/10Its effect on nature isn't measured or independently verified.
- How it uses materials and handles waste6/10No verified figures for reuse and recycling across the business.
- Its effect on water6/10No water stewardship programme or verified fall in water use.
- 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 controversies3/10Points 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 Puma's SINK score calculated?
Same ten questions for every company. No private weighting.
SINK = (0.3 × Base + 0.7 × Performance) × ScaleWhat evidence is Puma's score based on?
16 sources used in this assessment. All publicly available. Each row shows which of the ten questions it informed.
69% of them were published by Puma itself; the rest come from independent sources.
Scored on 4 April 2026 under an earlier version of our method. We're re-checking it under the current method.
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 Puma compare with other apparel (durable / outdoor) companies?
Where Puma sits among apparel (durable / outdoor) peers.
Among the 43 major apparel (durable / outdoor) brands we've scored, Puma is tied =25th of 43, with 1 other.
Who scores higher in Apparel (Durable / Outdoor)?
The 3 companies in the sector scoring nearest above Puma.
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 →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 →Prada has cut operational emissions 34% against 2019 baseline, beating its SBTi target.
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.