Thuma
Evaluation Completed:
August 11, 2025
Adults
Bedroom
Moving
Evaluation Summary
Company Insights
Thuma makes furniture with a pleasing minimalist design. And their focus on material durability and circularity is appealing. Our research gave us some indication that there is a desire to credibly pursue ingredient safety and sustainability. But when it came down to finding the kind of substantiation and information we need to score our evaluation, we often came up empty handed. Given the products and claims, we really hope to see more substance from the company when it comes to issues like climate, biodiversity, and social impacts in the future.
Ingredient Safety
Foundational Gaps
Solid Baseline
Strong Performance
Hilde Likes
Limiting potential exposures
This company appears to take steps to try and limit exposure to hazardous ingredients by testing product emissions
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
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
Using recycled raw materials
Using recycled materials (e.g. aluminum, glass, plastic) for products or packaging often means lower environmental impacts across the lifecycle than virgin raw materials
Opportunities for Improvement
Increasing use of lower-impact raw materials
We would like to see this company increase their use of certified (e.g. USDA Organic) raw materials and ingredients
Launching climate protection efforts
We would like to see this company take credible actions to measure, reduce, and report on their greenhouse gas emissions
Solidifying biodiversity protection efforts
We appreciate that the company donates to organizations that are helping to protect or restore impacted ecosystems but we think the company should internalize those efforts by clearly articulating a biodiversity policy and goal
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
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
Verification of benefits for people efforts
This company should start using or expand their use of high-quality certifications related to strengthen their claims related to creating benefits for people
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
None Identified
Opportunities for Improvement
Integrating sustainability into the mission
This company could boost their credibility and accelerate meaningful action on sustainability issues by making it an explicit part of their mission, purpose, or values
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.