TOMS sustainability score: 17/100
TOMS sells casual shoes and accessories for women, men and children; it publishes no split of its revenue. The name on its website is TOMS.com, LLC, a private US company based in California.
More about TOMS
Its last reported owners were a creditor group led by Jefferies, Nexus and Brookfield, which agreed to take over in January 2020; no later source was found. It publishes no employee or revenue figure.
Head office Los Angeles, United StatesStaff Not publishedRevenue Not publishedWebsite ↗
TOMS gives no emissions figure for any scope in its 2023, 2024 or 2025 Impact Reports, and no renewable electricity share. It publishes no emissions figure, so the size deduction (0.70x) applies. Its 2023 report aimed to set reduction targets by 2025; none is published, and its 100% sustainable cotton by 2025 target was dropped. Its packaging claims, plastics removed from 99% of packaging and at least 80% recycled content, are unassured company figures. B Corp certification is paid for, and One for One giving and a third of profits given are social programmes: none is evidence of reductions. Good On You rated its environment 'very poor' in April 2022; searches found no regulator finding.
TOMS scores 17/100 (Significant gaps) 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 TOMS joint 999th of 1,017 companies scored, and 57th of 59 in Apparel (Durable / Outdoor).
What is TOMS doing well, and where does it fall short?
Strongest on Controversies & Red Flags and Transparency & Accountability (7/10, 4/10). Weakest on Water Impact and Carbon Footprint: Operations (0/10, 1/10).
Where TOMS lost points
For each question that lost points, the evidence our public rubric looks for that we didn't find.
- Emissions from its own operations1/10No emissions figures for its own operations, not even an estimate from energy bills.
- Emissions from its supply chain1/10No assessment of where its supply-chain emissions come from.
- Whether its emissions are falling1/10No evidence its emissions are falling, not even from energy bills or mileage.
- How clean its energy is1/10No renewable energy tariff or major efficiency investment shown.
- 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 water0/10No figures for its water use.
- Its climate targets1/10No emissions reduction targets.
- How openly it reports4/10No dedicated sustainability role, board oversight or public report.
- Its record on controversies7/10Points 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 TOMS's SINK score calculated?
Same ten questions for every company. No private weighting.
SINK = (0.3 × Base + 0.7 × Performance) × ScaleWhat evidence is TOMS's score based on?
12 sources used in this assessment. All publicly available. Each row shows which of the ten questions it informed.
33% of them were published by TOMS itself; the rest come from independent sources.
8 of 12 sources are independent of the company.
“scope 1 and scope 2 emissions from our HQ location”
“conducted two baseline measurements calculating scope 1, 2, and 3 emissions”
“per package was 12.82% lower than in Q1 when we were still at our previous warehouse.”
“There is no evidence it reduces its carbon and other greenhouse gas emissions in its supply chain.”
“TOMS delayed measuring their carbon outtake due to production delays from the COVID-19 pandemic.”
“relevant data on topics like renewable energy, water consumption”
“TOMS offers a Earthwise line of footwear”
“TOMS earned an overall score of 126.7”
“will now take over ownership of TOMS from its founder Blake Mycoskie and private equity firm Bain Capital”
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 TOMS compare with other apparel (durable / outdoor) companies?
Where TOMS sits among apparel (durable / outdoor) peers.
Among the 59 major apparel (durable / outdoor) brands we've scored, TOMS sits 57th of 59.
Who scores higher in Apparel (Durable / Outdoor)?
The 3 companies in the sector scoring nearest above TOMS.
Houdini publishes ambitious planetary-boundaries science but does not quantify its actual emissions.
See the breakdown →New Era Cap publishes no emissions data, no renewable energy commitment, and no science-based targets across a $2 billion post-acquisition global supply chain spanning 16 countries.
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.