Eco Spec
Evaluation Completed:
February 2, 2026
Evaluation Summary
Company Insights
Unfortunately, this company appears to be doing very little when it comes to ingredient safety and sustainability. We struggled to find credible information about almost any topic included in our evaluation. The company’s most recent annual social responsibility report included nearly identical content to what they feature on their website, most of which seems to focus on issues that are not material to the company and their products. With so many other options available we would likely choose paint from another company. This company offers families little in the way of ingredient safety and sustainability. Eco Spec is owned by the company Benjamin Moore. Hilde evaluates parent companies rather than individual brands. Learn more here.
Ingredient Safety
Foundational Gaps
Solid Baseline
Strong Performance
Hilde Likes
None Identified
Opportunities for Improvement
Benchmarking ingredient safety practices
We would like to see this company participate in the Chemical Footprint Project or similar initiative to help benchmark their policies and practices against other companies publicly share their results
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
Utilizing a restricted substances list
We think this company should develop and disclose a comprehensive list of the ingredients or chemicals that they restrict from their products and supply chain as well as the rationale behind their list
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
None Identified
Opportunities for Improvement
Additional disclosure needed on environmental efforts
We would appreciate more information from this company on their environmental impact reduction efforts to enhance our evaluation of their policies, practices, and impacts
Adopting strategies to increase circularity
We see a big opportunity for this company to reduce the environmental impact of their products and packaging by assessing the lifecycle and make more informed decisions about the ingredients and materials they use
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
Verification of environmental impact reduction efforts
This company should start using or expand their use of high-quality certifications related to strengthen their claims related to environmental impact reduction
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
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
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
None Identified
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.