Warburtons sustainability score: 38/100
Warburtons is a British bakery manufacturer founded in 1876 and headquartered in Bolton. Operating 11 bakeries and 18 depots with ~5,000 employees, it produces bread, crumpets, bagels, and related bakery products across the UK.
More about Warburtons
It is family-owned and unquoted, with significant FMCG distribution.
Founded 1876Head office Bolton, GBStaff ~5,000Revenue ~£741MWebsite ↗
Warburtons operates without published absolute emissions data, interim climate targets, or formal sustainability reporting. A major industrial bakery claiming 20% historical CO₂ reductions refuses to disclose tonnages or Scope 3 figures. Renewable electricity procurement and zero food waste to landfill are genuine, but gas-fired ovens and unverified supply chain claims leave the picture incomplete.
Warburtons 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 May 2026.
That places Warburtons joint 460th of 934 companies scored, and joint 33rd of 51 in Food & Beverage (non-meat).
Limited evidence. This score rests on 7 sources, 57% 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 Warburtons doing well, and where does it fall short?
Strongest on Controversies & Red Flags and Energy Source (7/10, 5/10). Weakest on Carbon Footprint: Supply Chain and Emissions Trajectory (2/10, 2/10).
Where Warburtons lost points
For each question that lost points, the evidence our public rubric looks for that we didn't find.
- Emissions from its own operations3/10No emissions figures for its own operations, not even an estimate from energy bills.
- Emissions from its supply chain2/10No 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 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 water3/10No monitoring of water use, or no measures to reduce it.
- Its climate targets2/10No specific targets with dates.
- How openly it reports3/10No published sustainability data, or no one named as responsible for it.
- 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 Warburtons's SINK score calculated?
Same ten questions for every company. No private weighting.
SINK = (0.3 × Base + 0.7 × Performance) × ScaleWhat evidence is Warburtons's score based on?
7 sources used in this assessment. All publicly available. Each row shows which of the ten questions it informed.
57% of them were published by Warburtons itself; the rest come from independent sources.
Scored on 11 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 7 verified sources cited below, rather than padded to a standard count.
Limited data coverage. This assessment is based on 7 sources, 57% 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 Warburtons compare with other food & beverage (non-meat) companies?
Where Warburtons sits among food & beverage (non-meat) peers.
Among the 51 major food & beverage (non-meat) brands we've scored, Warburtons is tied =33rd of 51, with 2 others.
Who scores higher in Food & Beverage (non-meat)?
The 3 companies in the sector scoring nearest above Warburtons.
WK Kellogg Co inherited decent emissions baselines from legacy Kellogg but post-split disclosure collapsed.
See the breakdown →BrewDog has abandoned false carbon-negative claims and disclosed Scope 1, 2, and 3 emissions with third-party calculation, but lacks science-based targets, multi-year emissions reductions, and credible supplier engagement.
See the breakdown →Lavazza reports emissions and publishes annual sustainability updates, but relies heavily on offsetting for near-term targets and lacks SBTi validation.
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.