Acure
Evaluation Completed:
May 27, 2026
More Affordable
Evaluation Summary
Company Insights
Ingredient Safety
Foundational Gaps
Solid Baseline
Strong Performance
Hilde Likes
Avoiding known problem chemicals
This company appears to take a good first step by restricting the use of toxic chemicals that are common to their product categories
Best-in-class ingredient safety certifications
This company makes a significant number of products that have a best-in-class ingredient safety certification
Going beyond basic safety regulations
This company’s approach to ingredient safety appears to go beyond regulations to address unregulated or under-regulated chemicals of concern
Opportunities for Improvement
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
Using analytical testing to monitor
We think this company would benefit from using regular analytical testing to help ensure that their ingredient safety policies and standards are being followed by companies in their supply chain
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
Selecting lower impact raw materials
This brand is starting to consider how raw materials affect the environmental footprint of their products and make better decisions
Taking steps to reduce packaging impacts
This company is taking some good initial steps to reduce the environmental impacts of their packaging like using post-consumer recycled raw materials, offering refills, or other relevant efforts
Opportunities for Improvement
Committing to a science-based climate goal
We would love to see this company build on their existing climate efforts by publicly adopting a greenhouse gas emissions reduction goal aligned with a science-based approach
Improving climate pollution disclosures
We think this company should start measuring and publicly disclosing their annual GHG emissions including those from their value chain (Scope 3)
Launching efforts to protect biodiversity & ecosystems
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
Setting a circularity goal and metrics
We would like to see this company elevate their product or packaging circularity efforts by setting a credible goal for their circularity efforts and measuring and reporting on their progress over time
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
Ensuring that workers are treated fairly
We would like to see this company take steps to ensure the people that work for them or are employed by companies in their supply chain are treated fairly or disclose the steps they are taking if already doing so
Formalizing responsible sourcing efforts
This company has the opportunity to formalize their responsible sourcing efforts through a policy and Supplier Code of Conduct they deploy to cover their supply chain, which the brand is in a unique position to do given their direct relationship with many suppliers
Providing paid parental leave
We would like to see this company adopt a paid parental leave policy for their employees that goes beyond minimum legal requirements and share it publicly
Better claims substantiation for worker fairness
We would like to see more and better information related to this company's worker fairness claims
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
Mission alignment with sustainability
We appreciate that this company has included safety and sustainability as part of their mission
Opportunities for Improvement
Improving CEO-worker pay equity
We think this company should disclose and/or manage executive compensation to limit inequality between what their CEO is paid and what their workers are paid
Linking incentives & sustainability performance
We think this company should link incentives for key internal stakeholders to performance on sustainability goals and share those metrics publicly to help drive action on these issues
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.