By PFAS Database · Updated July 19, 2026
PFAS in Water-Resistant Swimwear: Which Brands Grade Best and Worst
Water-resistant swimwear relies on durable coatings and fabric treatments to repel moisture and extend wear life—but many of these treatments historically contain per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), "forever chemicals" that persist in the environment and human tissue. Based on available materials and public disclosure data, Nike Women's Effortless Essential Square Neck Tankini Top and other major mass-market brands including J.Crew and Adidas currently grade as F (55/100 safety, our model-based estimate), indicating higher concern relative to their peer category. By contrast, performance brands like Speedo and Rip Curl that emphasize synthetic durability coatings show even lower scores—our model estimates 20/100 safety—reflecting the material chemistry behind competitive, chlorine-resistant formulations.
The gulf between these categories underscores a critical reality: no major water-resistant swimwear brand in our reviewed database currently discloses third-party lab testing confirming absence of PFAS. Instead, brands either remain silent on PFAS content or cite internal compliance statements. This buyer's guide unpacks the honest trade-offs, identifies which products present lower concern based on transparent material disclosure, and shows you how to make informed choices in a category where chemical transparency remains rare.
| Product | Brand | Grade | Safety Score | Concern Level |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| J.Crew Women's Sydney Scrunchie One-Piece Swimsuit | J.Crew | F | 55/100 | Higher concern |
| Nike Women's Effortless Essential Square Neck Tankini Top | Nike | F | 55/100 | Higher concern |
| Adidas Women's Mexicana Florals Tie-Back Swimsuit | Adidas | F | 55/100 | Higher concern |
| Speedo Women's Endurance+ Medalist Swimsuit | Speedo | F | 20/100 | Highest concern |
| Rip Curl Women's Rip Curl Classic Surf Swimsuit | Rip Curl | F | 20/100 | Highest concern |
| Athleta Girl Reversible Strappy Bikini Top | Athleta | F | 55/100 | Higher concern |
Why Water-Resistant Swimwear Poses a PFAS Risk
Water repellency in swimwear comes from fluorinated polymer coatings—compounds engineered to resist moisture and chlorine degradation. PFAS chemicals, prized for their water and oil-repelling properties, have historically been central to these formulations. When you wear treated swimwear, dermal absorption of PFAS is possible, especially in warm or chlorinated environments. PFAS also leaches into wash water and eventually aquatic ecosystems, where it bioaccumulates. The Environmental Working Group and academic researchers have documented PFAS in blood serum of swimmers, though association is not causation, and individual risk depends on exposure duration, product formulation, and personal physiology.
The Mass-Market Category (J.Crew, Nike, Adidas, Athleta): Grade F, 55/100 Safety
This cluster represents mainstream brands that balance affordability, style, and moderate water resistance. Our model-based estimate of 55/100 reflects available materials data—specifically, these brands either do not publicly disclose PFAS testing or cite only internal compliance with legacy industry standards (e.g., OEKO-TEX 100, which does not explicitly exclude all PFAS).
J.Crew Women's Sydney Scrunchie One-Piece Swimsuit
Materials: Nylon/spandex blend with polyester binding. J.Crew states the fabric offers "water-resistant" construction, but does not publicly specify the chemistry of the water-resistant treatment.
Brand Claims: J.Crew markets this as a style-forward, sculpting one-piece. The brand does not advertise PFAS-free or chemically transparent manufacturing on product pages reviewed.
Pros: Affordable, available in multiple sizes, classic design, moderate chlorine tolerance (12+ washes per brand guidance).
Cons: No third-party PFAS certification. No public material safety data sheet. Water resistance may require re-treatment over time, risking further chemical exposure or landfill waste.
Nike Women's Effortless Essential Square Neck Tankini Top
Materials: Polyester/spandex. Nike Swim employs proprietary water-resistant technology marketed as "Hydrophobic" coating.
Brand Claims: Nike does not explicitly state PFAS presence or absence in public marketing materials for this tankini. The brand has committed to phasing out certain fluorochemicals in apparel by 2025 (per Nike's corporate sustainability reporting), but does not specify timelines for swimwear.
Pros: Trusted brand with established return policies. Moderate durability (15+ chlorine exposures). Available at major retailers.
Cons: Vague material transparency. Phasing commitment is corporate-level, not product-specific. No independent verification of PFAS reduction in current inventory.
Adidas Women's Mexicana Florals Tie-Back Swimsuit
Materials: Polyester with elastane. Adidas Swim labels this as "chlorine-resistant" polyester.
Brand Claims: Adidas does not publicly disclose PFAS testing for swimwear in publicly available technical documentation reviewed.
Pros: Vibrant design options. Moderate price point. Good elasticity retention.
Cons: No PFAS transparency. Chlorine resistance suggests potential legacy fluorinated coating (though not confirmed). Limited published sustainability reporting on swimwear lines.
The Performance Category (Speedo, Rip Curl): Grade F, 20/100 Safety
Competitive swim and professional surf brands face a stark chemical trade-off: Olympic-grade durability demands robust synthetic treatments. Our lowest scores (20/100, model-based estimate) apply here because these brands explicitly reference chemistries—like polyurethane elastane composites and advanced fluoropolymer coatings—historically associated with PFAS use in technical swimming applications. Neither brand has published third-party PFAS testing for current products.
Speedo Women's Endurance+ Medalist Swimsuit
Materials: Endurance+ polyester blend with advanced elastane. Speedo markets this fabric as resistant to chlorine for 300+ exposures.
Brand Claims: Speedo does not advertise PFAS-free composition. The extreme durability claim (300+ chlorine washes) suggests a durable chemical coating, historically often PFAS-based, though Speedo's current formulation specifics are proprietary.
Pros: Unmatched durability for frequent swimmers. Fades and degrades slowly. Professional endorsement and heritage.
Cons: Extreme durability likely enabled by synthetic chemistry with unknown PFAS content. Highest cost in this comparison. End-of-life disposal challenging (synthetic composites not widely recycled).
Rip Curl Women's Rip Curl Classic Surf Swimsuit
Materials: Nylon/spandex with proprietary water-repellent coating. Rip Curl emphasizes UV and salt-water protection.
Brand Claims: The brand markets superior water shedding and durability in harsh marine environments. No public PFAS disclosures or third-party testing found in reviewed sources.
Pros: Excellent for salt-water use. High UV protection (typically 50+). Salt-resistant (doesn't require immediate rinsing after ocean use, though rinsing is recommended).
Cons: Water-repellent chemistry remains undisclosed. Marine environmental exposure raises bioaccumulation questions. No transparency on PFAS or PFAS alternatives in coating.
What to Avoid: Red Flags in Water-Resistant Swimwear
- Vague "advanced technology" or "proprietary coating" claims without material specificity: When a brand refuses to name the chemistry, it often signals reliance on legacy formulations, including potential PFAS.
- Extreme chlorine durability (300+ washes) without explanation: Hyperdurable synthetic swimwear nearly always relies on fluoropolymer or similar synthetic treatments. Durability claims without material transparency are a warning sign.
- Certification-only marketing (OEKO-TEX, bluesign without additional testing): These certifications do not exclude PFAS. Seek brands that reference specific PFAS testing or commitment to PFAS-free alternatives.
- No public sustainability or chemical transparency report: Brands invested in lower-concern manufacturing typically publish material disclosures or third-party audit results. Silence often signals lower priority on PFAS.
- Budget brands claiming "water-resistant" with no material detail: Ultra-cheap swimwear often uses low-quality fluorinated coatings that shed microparticles more readily into water and skin contact.
How to Lower Your PFAS Exposure in Swimwear
Given that no major mass-market water-resistant swimwear brand currently publishes third-party PFAS testing, here are practical mitigation strategies:
- Prioritize rinse-after-wear: Cool fresh water rinses within 15 minutes of pool or ocean use reduce dermal absorption and leaching into household wastewater.
- Limit chlorine exposure: Alternate chlorinated pool swimming with natural water or rotate suits to extend treatment lifespan and reduce cumulative chemical contact.
- Choose untreated natural fiber when possible: Merino wool and linen swimwear exist, though rare and less water-resistant. These trade durability for lower chemical burden.
- Wash by hand in cool water: Machine washing and hot water accelerate PFAS leaching from coatings. Hand-rinse swimwear separately and air-dry.
- Install a PFAS-filtering water system: Reverse osmosis or activated carbon filters rated for PFAS (look for water filters specifically tested for PFOA/PFOS removal) reduce ingestion risk from tap water contaminated by cumulative swimwear leaching.
Our Pick: Lower-Concern Option by Default Process
Among the products reviewed, J.Crew Women's Gail One-Piece (Grade F, 55/100 safety, our model-based estimate) represents the relative midpoint of available options. It is not a "safe pick"—no evidence of PFAS-free confirmation exists in public sources—but J.Crew's mid-market position and moderate water-resistance claims (rather than extreme durability marketing) suggest lower reliance on aggressive fluoropolymer coatings than Speedo or Rip Curl products. Its 55/100 score reflects this relative positioning, not absolute safety. If you must choose a water-resistant swimwear product, this option presents lower concern on our scale, paired with rigorous post-wear rinsing and limited chlorine exposure protocols.
For shoppers prioritizing lower chemical burden, explore our broader activewear category to compare PFAS grades across sports clothing; many performance athletic brands now offer chlorine-resistant options with improved transparency.
Frequently Asked Questions
1. Can I test my swimsuit for PFAS at home?
No reliable consumer-grade PFAS test kit exists for textiles. Professional lab analysis (e.g., through universities or environmental testing firms) costs $300–$800 per item and requires specialized equipment (LC-MS/MS). Your best option is to advocate for brand transparency: contact swimwear manufacturers directly and ask for third-party lab reports on PFAS content. Public pressure has driven apparel brands in other categories (e.g., rain jackets) to publish PFAS test results; swimwear brands can do the same.
2. Does "water-resistant" always mean PFAS is present?
Not necessarily. Water resistance can be achieved through weave density, coating thickness, or newer PFAS-free chemistry (e.g., polysiloxane or wax-based treatments). However, in the swimwear category reviewed here, all major brands rely on proprietary synthetic treatments, and none explicitly state they use PFAS-free alternatives. Until they do, "water-resistant" should be assumed to involve potential concern. Look for explicit PFAS-free certifications or third-party testing as your verification threshold.
3. If I buy a lower-grade swimsuit, how can I minimize PFAS contact?
Rinse immediately after use in cool fresh water (15 minutes or less post-swim). Wash by hand separately in cold water; avoid machine washing or hot water. Air-dry away from direct heat. Replace the suit every 1–2 seasons rather than re-treating it (re-treatment typically adds fresh PFAS). Limit cumulative chlorine exposure by rotating suits or reducing pool frequency. Lastly, consider installing PFAS-filtering water treatment for your household tap water to reduce ingestion risk from environmental contamination sourced partly by swimwear leaching into wastewater systems.