361°

Our “Planet” rating evaluates brands based on the environmental policies in their supply chains, from carbon emissions and wastewater to business models and product circularity. Here we rate 361° “Not Good Enough”. These are a few factors influencing its score:

• It uses some lower-impact materials including recycled materials.
• There’s no evidence it minimises textile waste in its supply chain.
• There’s no evidence it’s taking actions to protect biodiversity in its supply chain.
• There’s no evidence it takes action to minimise its packaging, which is a driver of plastic waste.
• There’s no evidence it’s taking meaningful action to reduce or eliminate hazardous chemicals in manufacturing.

Workers’ rights are central to our “People” rating, which assess brands’ policies and practices on everything from child labour to living wages and gender equality. Here we rate 361° “Very poor”. These are a few factors influencing its score:

• Most of its final production stage happens in China, an extreme risk country for labour abuse.
• It claims it has a Code of Conduct but does not publicly disclose it.
• The brand claims to audit some of its supply chain but doesn’t specify what percentage.
• There’s no evidence it provides financial security to its suppliers, which can result in poor working conditions and wages.
• There’s no evidence it supports diversity and inclusion in its supply chain.
• There’s no evidence it ensures workers are paid living wages in its supply chain.
• During the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, it did not disclose adequate policies or safeguards to protect workers in its supply chain from the virus.

Brands’ animal welfare policies and, where applicable, how well they trace their animal-derived products are the focus of our “Animals” rating. Here we rate 361° “Not Good Enough”. These are a few factors influencing its score:

• There’s no evidence it has an animal welfare policy.
• It appears to use leather.
• It doesn’t appear to use wool, down, angora, fur, exotic animal hair, or exotic animal skin.

Based on all publicly available information we’ve reviewed, we rate 361° “Not Good Enough” overall.