FILA

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 FILA “Not Good Enough”. These are a few factors influencing its score:

• It uses few lower-impact materials.
• There’s no evidence it’s taking meaningful action to reduce or eliminate hazardous chemicals in manufacturing.
• There’s no evidence it’s taking meaningful action to reduce water use.
• There’s no evidence it’s taking actions to protect biodiversity in its supply chain.

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 FILA “Very Poor”. These are a few factors influencing its score:

• None of its supply chain is certified by crucial labour standards that help ensure worker health and safety, living wages, and other rights.
• It received a score of 11-20% in the 2023 Fashion Transparency Index.
• 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.
• It’s taken insufficient steps to remediate its links to cotton sourced from Xinjiang, a region in China at risk of Uyghur forced labour.

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 FILA “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, wool, and exotic animal hair.
• Responsible Down Standard certifies some of the down it uses.
• It doesn’t appear to use fur, angora, or exotic animal skin.
• It traces some animal-derived materials to the first production stage.

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