7th Avenue
Evaluation Completed:
December 29, 2025
Evaluation Summary
Company Insights
Our research on 7th Avenue turned up a couple of good signs related to ingredient safety and environmental impact reduction. We also like their emphasis on durability. But many of the foundational elements we look for across the categories we evaluate were absent. For example, we like to see restrictions on chemicals of concern like PFAS. But we couldn’t find information about any of the other elements that would indicate to us that the company has a real safety program in place.
The company mentions being “sustainably built” on their homepage but offers very little information related to their environmental impacts or people benefits. We were not able to locate any sustainability reports or dedicated pages on their website. The lack of information resulted in poor scores on our evaluation and a low overall rating. There are some building blocks in place so hopefully the company decides to invest in a more authentic sustainability program in the future.
Ingredient Safety
Foundational Gaps
Solid Baseline
Strong Performance
Hilde Likes
Emphasis on some relevant chemicals of concern
This brand recognizes that certain groups of chemicals should be restricted from the products they make or sell
Verified ingredient safety efforts
This company makes a significant number of products that have at least one high-quality ingredient safety certification
Opportunities for Improvement
Additional disclosure needed on ingredient safety
We would appreciate more information from this company on their ingredient safety efforts to enhance our evaluation of their policies, practices, and impacts
Adopting a comprehensive approach to ingredient safety
We would like to see this brand adopt a precautionary safer chemicals policy, use a publicly available Restricted Substances List, address sources of contaminants, and use laboratory testing to ensure purity and assess compliance
Crafting a comprehensive chemicals policy
We think this company should create and publicly share a comprehensive and precautionary chemicals policy, ingredient safety standard, or similar
Category Definition
Our ingredient safety evaluation criteria are designed to help us determine how a company measures, manages, and discloses, the use of chemicals of concern that may be present in raw materials, ingredients, manufacturing processes, and finished products.
Foundational Gaps
The company does not meet sufficient baseline criteria for this category and has many opportunities for improvement.
Solid Baseline
The company meets most of our basic criteria and sometimes demonstrates a deeper commitment than other companies on issues in this category.
Strong Performance:
The company appears to be a top performer in this evaluation category and exhibits leadership on one or more of the issues we evaluate.
Environmental Impact
Foundational Gaps
Solid Baseline
Strong Performance
Hilde Likes
None Identified
Opportunities for Improvement
Improving producer responsibility
Given the hard to recycle nature of many kinds of the products this company makes and sells we would like to see this company provide a manufacturer takeback or recovery program beyond what is required by state or local laws
Launching climate protection efforts
We would like to see this company take credible actions to measure, reduce, and report on their greenhouse gas emissions
Launching efforts to protect biodiversity & ecosyse
We would like to see this company take steps to understand and mitigate the impacts their operations, supply chain, or products have on biodiversity, nature, and ecosystems and communicate about them publicly
Category Definition
Our environmental impact reduction evaluation criteria are designed to help us determine how a company measures, manages, and discloses information about the impacts that their operations, products, and supply chain may have on our air, land, water, and ecosystems.
Foundational Gaps
The company does not meet sufficient baseline criteria for this category and has many opportunities for improvement.
Solid Baseline
The company meets most of our basic criteria and sometimes demonstrates a deeper commitment than other companies on issues in this category.
Strong Performance:
The company appears to be a top performer in this evaluation category and exhibits leadership on one or more of the issues we evaluate.
Worker Fairness
Foundational Gaps
Solid Baseline
Strong Performance
Hilde Likes
None Identified
Opportunities for Improvement
Launching a responsible sourcing program
We would like this company to launch a responsible sourcing program that includes an internal policy, defines higher-risk raw materials, and their process for mitigating impacts to people & the planet
Filling gaps on people impacts
We believe this company should put credible efforts in place to ensure that their employees are treated fairly, that human rights are protected for people in their supply chain, raw materials are sourced responsibly, and publicly share info about their work
Category Definition
Our worker fairness evaluation criteria are designed to help us determine how a company measures, manages, and discloses information about the way they treat their employees, workers in their supply chain, and other stakeholders.
Foundational Gaps
The company does not meet sufficient baseline criteria for this category and has many opportunities for improvement.
Solid Baseline
The company meets most of our basic criteria and sometimes demonstrates a deeper commitment than other companies on issues in this category.
Strong Performance:
The company appears to be a top performer in this evaluation category and exhibits leadership on one or more of the issues we evaluate.
Accountability
Foundational Gaps
Solid Baseline
Strong Performance
Hilde Likes
None Identified
Opportunities for Improvement
Integrating sustainability into the mission
This company could boost their credibility and accelerate meaningful action on sustainability issues by making it an explicit part of their mission, purpose, or values
Providing public disclosure and reporting
We think this company should start publishing regular annual reports on sustainability or ESG topics for consumers or other stakeholders and maintain a publicly available archive of past reports
Category Defition
Our corporate accountability evaluation criteria are designed to help us determine how a company integrates sustainability across their organization to help govern decision making and engage with external stakeholders in socially responsible ways.
Foundational Gaps
The company does not meet sufficient baseline criteria for this category and has many opportunities for improvement.
Solid Baseline
The company meets most of our basic criteria and sometimes demonstrates a deeper commitment than other companies on issues in this category.
Strong Performance:
The company appears to be a top performer in this evaluation category and exhibits leadership on one or more of the issues we evaluate.