Editor’s note: Our editors curate highly rated brands that are first assessed by our rigorous ratings system. Buying through our links may earn us a commission—supporting the work we do. Learn more about our editorial mission.
Adidas stands as one of the most recognizable athletic apparel giants on the global stage. Alongside its chief competitor, Nike, the German sportswear titan shapes modern activewear trends, outfitting elite athletes and casual wearers alike. Yet, despite their immense market power and global influence, both industry leaders currently hold a middling "It’s a Start" rating from Good On You. This evaluation signals that neither brand is taking sufficient, comprehensive action on critical sustainability and ethical issues relative to their enormous footprints.
To understand where the brand stands today, it is necessary to examine the publicly available evidence concerning Adidas’s environmental impact, labor practices, and animal welfare standards. This assessment is based on the official Adidas brand rating published in January 2026, meaning it may not reflect subsequent marketing claims or corporate pivots made since that time. As ratings analysts continuously evaluate thousands of brands featured in the public directory, consumer awareness remains vital for holding major corporations accountable.
Is Adidas Ethical?
The roots of Adidas stretch back to 1949 in Bavaria, Germany, where the company was established by Adolf Dassler—the brother of Puma founder Rudolf Dassler. Over the decades, Adidas evolved from a localized shoemaker into a dominant multinational corporation, famous for its iconic three-stripe logo, timeless Stan Smith sneakers, high-profile collaborations with designers like Stella McCartney, and ubiquitous activewear presence.
However, public evidence reviewed by sustainability experts reveals a stark gap between the brand’s cultural prominence and its supply chain ethics. Scoring a middling "It’s a Start" against established sustainability methodologies, Adidas lags behind key competitors. Notably, rival brand Puma secures a "Good" rating in comparable reviews, proving that enterprises of similar scale and historic heritage can successfully implement more rigorous standards. While Adidas has improved its standing since previously languishing in the "Not Good Enough" category, significant operational changes remain necessary.
Environmental Impact
In environmental performance, Adidas retains an "It’s a Start" rating. The brand utilizes a medium proportion of lower-impact materials and publishes aggregate breakdowns of the raw materials integrated into its collections. Given that activewear fundamentally relies on synthetic fibers and chemical treatments—the very core of Adidas’s product specialism—industry watchdogs expect a more aggressive pivot toward lower-impact alternatives to reduce reliance on virgin polyester and conventional synthetics.
Recent regulatory scrutiny has further complicated the brand’s eco-friendly positioning. Earlier in 2026, an Adidas advertisement promoting "recycled running shoes" faced an official ban in the United Kingdom. The UK’s Advertising Standards Agency ruled that the marketing claims were insufficiently specific. Reports indicated that Adidas acknowledged it lacked a dedicated, standalone recycled running shoe range; rather, certain products across broader collections merely incorporated recycled components. Although the brand maintained that internal product documentation verified these assertions, the lack of publicly accessible transparency leaves consumers guessing about the true ecological value of their purchases. Critics argue that capitalizing on green marketing without providing rigorous, verifiable public assurances undermines consumer trust.
Furthermore, a persistent blind spot in the brand’s environmental framework is the lack of documented policies to protect biodiversity within its sprawling supply chain. This omission remains a critical criterion in comprehensive sustainability evaluations. On a more positive note, Adidas has established science-based targets aimed at curbing greenhouse gas emissions across both direct corporate operations and its supply chain network. By publicly reporting progress and indicating that it remains on track to meet these climate milestones, the company demonstrates a commendable level of transparency regarding carbon accountability.
Labour Conditions
Labor practices at Adidas continue to receive a "Not Good Enough" rating, highlighting a troubling lag behind crucial industry standards. Because human labor forms the backbone of the global fashion economy, ethical frameworks demand tangible, structural measures to protect workers rather than relying solely on surface-level supplier audits.
While Adidas has instituted projects aimed at improving wage structures—and reportedly pays a living wage to a fraction of workers in the final stages of production—this progress falls far short of what is expected from a multi-billion-dollar enterprise. In recent evaluations conducted by the Clean Clothes Campaign’s Fashion Checker monitoring project, Adidas scored among the lowest-ranking major brands regarding concrete living wage delivery, disappointing labor advocates.
Transparency remains another area requiring substantial improvement. Although the brand discloses details concerning suppliers in the second and final stages of production, it largely omits visibility into deeper tiers of the supply chain, where subcontracting is common and labor violations are hardest to track. Research further reveals that less than half of Adidas’s documented suppliers feature democratically elected unions or effective collective bargaining agreements. Given historical controversies surrounding supply chain violations—such as wage theft incidents in Cambodia—securing fundamental labor rights should be an urgent priority. On the positive side, the brand maintains a confidential complaints mechanism allowing supply chain workers to report suspected modern slavery safely.
Animal Welfare
Adidas holds an "It’s a Start" rating for animal welfare, supported by a formal animal welfare policy, though critics note it does not fully align with the comprehensive Five Freedoms framework.
The brand has successfully eliminated the use of fur, exotic animal hair, and angora from its collections. In a notable victory for animal advocates, Adidas halted the use of kangaroo leather in its sneaker lines, marking a significant step forward. Despite these measures, the company continues to utilize down, wool, cashmere, and conventional leather, though some fractions are sourced from recycled or certified alternatives. At the time of the most recent rating review, however, the brand had not yet instituted mandatory public commitments regarding the certification of its broader leather production.
Past actions prove that Adidas possesses the capacity to effect meaningful change when prompted. For example, the company completely avoids sourcing wool from mulesed sheep, backing this stance with formal commitments such as signing the Four Paws Letter of Intent.
Overall Rating and Moving Forward
While Adidas demonstrates incremental progress across several categories, it has yet to exhaust its potential for meaningful reform. Sustainability analysts emphasize the need for stronger worker rights enforcement, deeper supply chain transparency, and tighter certification standards for animal-derived inputs. Crucially, transitioning further toward non-animal alternatives would help eliminate the inherent cruelty associated with down and leather sourcing.
At the same time, experts stress that an "It’s a Start" rating indicates active engagement rather than total failure. Consumers who already own Adidas products are encouraged to cherish and maintain them, noting that extending the lifecycle of existing garments remains one of the most effective sustainable practices available.
For shoppers wishing to align their purchases more closely with their values, Good On You highlights several alternative brands embracing slower, more responsible fashion models. Companies such as Purusha People, Happy Earth, Flamingos’ Life, and ID.EIGHT offer lower-impact, certified, and vegan alternatives across activewear and footwear categories, demonstrating that ethical choices are increasingly accessible within the modern apparel market.
