How the score works
One number: estimated natural fiber share across a brand's core men's styles.
Natural share, 0 to 100
Cotton, wool (including alpaca), linen, hemp, cashmere, and silk count as natural. Polyester, nylon, acrylic, elastane, and similar synthetics do not. Regenerated cellulose such as modal or lyocell is counted as non-natural for this catalogue so the score stays strict about plant- or animal-grown fiber on the hangtag.
Pass and fail
A brand passes at 60 or higher. Below that, the card shows fail. The threshold is a catalogue rule, not a medical or environmental certification.
What we refuse to invent
No lab certifications, award counts, review totals, or logo walls. If a claim is not on a composition label we can cite, it stays off the page.
Corrections
Labels change. If you have a composition table for a men's style we missed, send it through the list form once that endpoint is live, or use the submit prompt on a brand page.
Questions about the score
- Does a high FabricTruth score mean a garment is better for the environment?
Not on its own. The score measures one thing: natural fiber share on the composition label. Across the apparel industry, dyeing, finishing and yarn preparation account for more climate impact than growing or making the fiber.
Counterpoint: Fiber still matters at end of life. In lab tests cotton and wool biodegraded while polyester barely did, though those direct comparisons were funded by the cotton and wool industries.
Sources: Quantis (2018); Zambrano et al. (2019) [Funded by Cotton Incorporated; two co-authors from Cotton Incorporated]; Li (2010) [Cotton Incorporated co-author]; Collie (2024) [Funded by Australian Wool Innovation; fabrics supplied by Woolmark]
- Why are viscose, modal and lyocell counted as non-natural?
They are made by dissolving plant cellulose, usually wood pulp, and spinning it into new fiber, and they are often sold as natural or as “bamboo”. The US Federal Trade Commission fined Kohl’s and Walmart a combined $5.5 million for marketing rayon as bamboo with false environmental claims.
Counterpoint: They are plant-derived, and in one lab study viscose biodegraded readily in seawater alongside wool (a study funded by Australian Wool Innovation). Counting them as non-natural is a strict catalogue rule, not a claim that they behave like plastic.
Sources: US Federal Trade Commission (2022); Collie (2024) [Funded by Australian Wool Innovation; fabrics supplied by Woolmark]
- Why not use a footprint score such as the Higg MSI?
The Higg Materials Sustainability Index measures production only, from cradle to gate, using global averages. Norway’s consumer authority found marketing based on it misleading and said such data cannot support claims about individual products or comparisons between fiber types; the coalition behind the index then paused its consumer-facing program.
Counterpoint: A label-based fiber share leaves out the same things: wear, washing, lifespan, and how the fabric was dyed and finished. In one wardrobe survey, synthetic garments were reported to last longer than 100% cotton ones.
Sources: Norwegian Consumer Authority (2022); Sustainable Apparel Coalition (2022); Laitala (2018) [Co-funded by Australian Wool Innovation and the Research Council of Norway; lifespan data from an AWI-commissioned survey]