Farrow & Ball
Evaluation Completed:
August 6, 2025
Adults
Bathroom
Bedroom
Kitchen
Renovating
Moving
Evaluation Summary
Company Insights
Farrow & Ball is owned by the company Hempel. 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.
Hempel appears to have recently enhanced and expanded their sustainability efforts. We see some solid signs that the company is integrating sustainability into their strategy and operations. They are making some progress on their climate efforts. But the company doesn’t appear to offer much information about ingredient or chemical safety, a topic that is highly relevant given their products. And while the company seems to have real efforts underway on issues related to creating benefits for people we were unable to find the kind of substantiation we need. As a result, they didn’t score particularly well on some of our evaluation criteria in those categories. We did note that they have a rather unique ownership structure, which could allow the company to lean into sustainability in a faster and more effective way than other companies (should they so choose).
Ingredient Safety
Foundational Gaps
Solid Baseline
Strong Performance
Hilde Likes
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
Adopting a comprehensive approach to ingredient safety
We would like to see this brand adopt a precautionary safer chemicals policy, use a publicly available Restricted Substances List, address sources of contaminants, and use laboratory testing to ensure purity and assess compliance
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
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
Taking climate action seriously
This company has a great foundation in place when it comes to climate including measuring all greenhouse gas emissions, setting some near-term targets, and reducing their emissions over time
Using circular design thinking
We appreciate that this company appears to be integrating more circular approaches to designing and making products and packaging to help reduce environmental impacts
Opportunities for Improvement
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
Informed code of conduct
This company has a supplier code of conduct that is based on international guidance from credible sources
Opportunities for Improvement
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
Better claims substantiation for people benefits
More transparency by the company is needed related to their claims for people benefits topics because we were unable to find sufficient publicly available substantiation for some criteria
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
Alternative ownership structure
This company has a unique ownership structure that allows it to engage in sustainability and generate positive impacts that are unique, should they choose to do so
Sustainability data & reporting assurance
This company has an external firm audit and assure the data and information they report related to their sustainability performance
Strengthening commitment to ethical business
We note that at least one brand owned by this company is a certified B-Corp and applaud that achievement but believe it should be more broadly adopted across the company’s portfolio
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.