Crunchi
Evaluation Completed:
December 5, 2025
Bathroom
Adults
Evaluation Summary
Company Insights
Crunchi has a good approach to ingredient safety. We like their focus on this important issue and the fact that they have broadly adopted the use of a leading certification in the form of EWG Verified. We also appreciate their efforts to minimize plastic in their packaging and use some organic ingredients. But for a company who emphasizes sustainability in their mission, we found a surprising lack of attention on environmental impact and people benefits during our research. And while it’s not unusual to find a clean beauty company prioritizing ingredient safety, Crunchi performed poorly on all of the other issues included in our evaluation. We hope the company will build on their great ingredient safety efforts moving forward.
Ingredient Safety
Foundational Gaps
Solid Baseline
Strong Performance
Hilde Likes
Comprehensive approach to ingredient safety
This company has most or all of the elements we hope to see when it comes to ingredient safety
Reducing contamination in products
This company appears to take reasonable steps to identify and reduce sources of contamination that may impact raw materials, ingredients, and finished products
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
None Identified
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
Opportunities for Improvement
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
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
None Identified
Opportunities for Improvement
Crafting a strong Supplier Code of Conduct
We think this company should craft or revise their existing code of conduct to align with recognized international standards
Increasing supply chain transparency
We believe this company could be providing better transparency about where they source raw materials and where their products are manufactured
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
Systems change through advocacy
This company appears to be setting a leadership example for public policy advocacy on ingredient safety and sustainability issues at the state or federal level.
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
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.