Ajax
Evaluation Completed:
July 9, 2025
Adults
Kitchen
Bathroom
Evaluation Summary
Company Insights
Ajax is owned by the company Colgate-Palmolive. Hilde evaluates parent companies rather than individual brands. You can read more about why we think this approach is more helpful for consumers on our blog.
Like some of the other multinational companies we’ve evaluated, Colgate-Palmolive presents a bit of a challenge. The company has a large number of brands and some of those brands have been acquired over time. Some of those brands may go a bit further when it comes to ingredient safety & sustainability. For example, Tom’s of Maine is a B-Corp. But the majority of brands owned by this company are not and are ultimately subject to the overarching policies and practices dictated by the company that owns them. And in this case, there are some foundational gaps when it comes to the issues we evaluate for parent companies like Colgate-Palmolive.
Ingredient Safety
Foundational Gaps
Solid Baseline
Strong Performance
Hilde Likes
Benchmarking ingredient safety practices
It is helpful to see that this company has participated in the Chemical Footprint Policy to help benchmark their policies and practices against other companies but they should make the results public
Opportunities for Improvement
Improving ingredient safety substantiation
We’d like to have more information on their approach to ingredient safety to support a deeper assessment of their efforts
Transitioning to a more protective ingredient safety approach
This company has framework for evaluating ingredient safety but we would like to see them move from a risk-based approach to a more precautionary one based on hazard
Verification of ingredient safety efforts
We think this company should start using or expand the use of high-quality certifications that help verify their claims related to ingredient safety
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
Nature & biodiversity protection
This company appears to have a holistic approach to identifying and attempting to manage impacts to ecosystems that provide important raw materials for their products
Science-based climate protection goal
We’re happy to see that this company has publicly committed to reducing their carbon footprint in ways that are aligned with the latest science
Opportunities for Improvement
Accelerate progress on packaging waste reduction
While we appreciate the initial progress, we think this company needs to take more aggressive action to reduce the potential environmental impacts associated with packaging waste
Increasing use of lower-impact raw materials
We would like to see this company increase their use of certified (e.g. USDA Organic) raw materials and ingredients
Reducing greenhouse gas emissions
This company needs to rapidly reduce GHG emissions to achieve the reductions necessary to protect people & the planet and achieve their goals
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
Solid responsible sourcing efforts
This company appears to identify the right priorities and have a credible approach to improving the sustainability of their supply chain.
Opportunities for Improvement
Committing to living wages
This company has the policies and resources in place to make a formal commitment to fair or living wages for their employees and the people in their supply chain
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
Public disclosure and reporting
This company provides helpful disclosure on their efforts through annual reporting on sustainability or ESG topics for consumers or other stakeholders
Opportunities for Improvement
Adopting a context-based approach to sustainability
We think this company is ready to take a leadership position by measuring and managing performance against planetary boundaries and thresholds to assess true operational sustainability
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.