Amika
Evaluation Completed:
November 17, 2025
Adults
Bathroom
Evaluation Summary
Company Insights
Amika is owned by the private equity firm Bansk Group. Read more about our approach to evaluating these kinds of companies here.
Our initial research into Amika looked promising: A certified B-corp company with some legit climate goal and packaging efforts. But with Hilde evaluations, we go deep AND wide. Sometimes that means a promising company may end up missing the mark on some issues that matter. That’s what happened in this case. Because we prioritize ingredient safety as a critical issue in our company ratings, Amika ended up scoring lower than we expected. We also found some gaps in other areas, particularly when it comes to people benefits and workers in their supply chain. We’ll keep an eye on this one moving forward though and cross our fingers that they catch up to the leaders in their industry.
Ingredient Safety
Foundational Gaps
Solid Baseline
Strong Performance
Hilde Likes
Basic ingredient transparency
This company appears to provide a basic level of ingredient transparency for products they make and/or sell
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
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
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
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
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
Opportunities for Improvement
Formalizing biodiversity protection efforts
We would like to see this company build on their initial efforts related to more sustainable raw materials production by establishing an internal biodiversity protection policy and goal
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)
Setting packaging sustainability targets
We think this company should start to set time-bound goals for reducing the environmental impacts of their packaging and publicly report on their progress towards them
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
Recognizing the need for responsible sourcing
This company appears to be taking some initial steps to help address how people in their supply chain are treated
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
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
Providing paid maternity leave
We would like to see this company adopt a paid maternity leave policy for their employees that goes beyond regulatory requirements and share it publicly
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
Commitment to ethical business practices
We value that this company is a certified B-Corp because it demonstrates a credible commitment to pursuing ethical business practices
Mission alignment with sustainability
We appreciate that this company has included safety and sustainability as part of their mission
Opportunities for Improvement
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
Securing sustainability data & reporting assurance
We think this company should strengthen the credibility of the data and information they report related to their sustainability performance by having it audited and assured by an independent external organization
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.