Johnson & Johnson scores 15 points higher than The Procter & Gamble Company on SINK's sustainability index.
Johnson & Johnson is more sustainable according to SINK's open sustainability index, scoring 41/100 vs The Procter & Gamble Company's 26/100 — a difference of 15 points.
Johnson & Johnson scores 41/100 on the SINK sustainability index (Below expectations). Johnson & Johnson reports comprehensive climate data with third-party verification but stalls on emissions reduction where it matters most: Scope 3 emissions are flat year-on-year despite revenue growth, and net-zero validation lapsed without revalidation. Nature and biodiversity impact remains largely unquantified. Systemic governance failures evident in 90,000+ talc litigation cases and deforestation-linked palm sourcing.
The Procter & Gamble Company scores 26/100 on the SINK sustainability index (Significant gaps). P&G achieves strong operational emissions reductions but masks a fundamentally unaligned business model. Scope 3 emissions rising 22.7% annually puts the company on a +3°C trajectory. Five active greenwashing lawsuits, NRDC SEC complaint, and documented boreal forest degradation reveal systematic misleading of investors on core sustainability claims.
Both companies are rated on the same 10-question SINK rubric: Scope 1/2/3 carbon footprint, energy source, nature and biodiversity, resource use, water, emissions trajectory, science-based targets, transparency, and controversies. Scores are 0–100, based on public data, and fully reproducible.
See the full leaderboard — 500+ companies ranked.
View full leaderboard →