Unilever scores 4 points higher than The Procter & Gamble Company on SINK's sustainability index.
Unilever is more sustainable according to SINK's open sustainability index, scoring 30/100 vs The Procter & Gamble Company's 26/100 — a difference of 4 points.
The Procter & Gamble Company scores 26/100 on the SINK sustainability index (Significant gaps). P&G has cut operational emissions 60% but Scope 3—which dominates its footprint—is rising. Forest degradation via toilet paper sourcing, five active greenwashing lawsuits, and intensity-based (not absolute) Scope 3 targets expose a company optimizing optics while core business remains linear and extractive.
Unilever scores 30/100 on the SINK sustainability index (Significant gaps). Unilever reports granular climate data with third-party verification, yet total emissions rose 3% in 2024 while Scope 3 dominates at 99% of the footprint. Trajectory misses SBTi targets by 45%. Multiple greenwashing investigations and weakened targets (plastics, biodiversity) undermine credibility despite renewable energy progress and deforestation commitments.
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 →