Sealy
Evaluation Completed:
March 17, 2025
Adults
Kids
Bedroom
Evaluation Summary
Company Insights
Sealy is owned by the company Somnigroup. 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.
We were interested in looking at this company because we noticed a number of their products available at Costco which we find to be more affordable for many products used in the home. In addition to owning a number of well-known brands, Somnigroup also does private label manufacturing for other brands. Overall, this brand appears to be focused on ensuring they are in compliance with legal and regulatory requirements. Our research found gaps in their approach to ingredient safety as well as benefits for people. But we did note that a few foundational pieces are in place related to reducing environmental impacts. We hope they’ll continue to build on their current efforts and start to tackle more advanced actions, particularly when it comes to protecting our climate and biodiversity.
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
Moving beyond basic restrictions
We would like to see this company adopt and disclose a more comprehensive approach to ingredient safety by moving beyond basic “free-from” claims for problematic ingredients and chemicals
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
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
Bolder action on climate impacts
We think this company should start measuring and reducing Scope 3 emissions along with publishing a decarbonization transition plan
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
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
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
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
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
None Identified
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.