Starbucks scores 7 points higher than McDonald's on SINK's sustainability index.
Starbucks is more sustainable according to SINK's open sustainability index, scoring 34/100 vs McDonald's's 27/100 — a difference of 7 points.
Starbucks scores 34/100 on the SINK sustainability index (Below expectations). Starbucks discloses comprehensive emissions data but is dramatically off-track on climate targets. Absolute emissions have risen 3% since baseline against a 50% reduction goal by 2030. The company removed sustainability from executive pay in 2025, faces active greenwashing lawsuits, and its massive coffee supply chain drives deforestation and water stress across tropical regions.
McDonald's scores 27/100 on the SINK sustainability index (Significant gaps). McDonald's has validated net-zero targets but Scope 3 emissions—99.65% of total—are essentially flat. Beef supply chain deforestation remains unresolved. The company faces greenwashing accusations, regulatory action on misleading ads, and modest biodiversity commitments. Operations reporting is solid; systemic impact is stagnant.
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 →