```html

PFAS in Waterproof Smartphone Cases: Which Brands Grade Best and Worst

Waterproof smartphone cases are engineered to repel water, which often means they contain water-resistant coatings or synthetic polymers that may include per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, or PFAS. Our analysis of major brands reveals a stark divide: Pelican and Mophie's newer flagship models earn grade B ratings, indicating lower concern based on available materials data, while Sea to Summit and several Mophie battery variants receive grade F ratings with higher estimated PFAS association. Understanding which cases present lower concern requires examining material composition, brand transparency claims, and independent sourcing information, not marketing alone.

This guide reviews 16 waterproof smartphone cases across three major brands using our model-based safety estimates, which rely on material disclosures, manufacturing practices, and third-party sourcing data rather than direct laboratory testing of finished products. We compare Pelican's protective approach, Mophie's battery-integrated designs, and Sea to Summit's outdoor-focused waterproof enclosures to help you choose a case that aligns with your PFAS awareness.

Product	Our PFAS Grade	Safety Score	Verdict
Pelican iPhone 15 Pro Protector	B	85/100	Lower concern, strong transparency
Mophie Juice Pack Battery Case for iPhone 15 Pro	B	85/100	Lower concern, dual function
Pelican Shield Phone Case for Samsung Galaxy S24 Plus	B	85/100	Lower concern, cross-platform
Mophie Juice Pack Battery Case for iPhone 15	B	85/100	Lower concern, standard iPhone
Mophie Juice Pack Battery Case for iPhone 15 Pro Max	F	50/100	Higher concern, avoid if possible
Sea to Summit Guide Waterproof Case	F	40/100	Higher concern, highest risk tier
Mophie Juice Pack for iPhone 16	F	40/100	Higher concern, avoid
Pelican Shield MagSafe Case for iPhone 17 Pro Max	F	50/100	Higher concern, newer model lag

The Grade B Leaders: Pelican and Mophie's Safer Options

The Pelican iPhone 15 Pro Protector and Mophie Juice Pack Battery Case for iPhone 15 Pro both score 85/100 on our model-based safety assessment, representing our highest-performing products in this category. These grade B ratings reflect lower concern based on available materials disclosure and sourcing transparency, though this is not a laboratory certification of PFAS absence. Neither brand claims their cases are PFAS-free in independent testing, but both have disclosed manufacturing practices that suggest reduced reliance on legacy PFAS chemistry.

Pelican iPhone 15 Pro Protector: Grade B

Pelican's iPhone 15 Pro case uses a combination of polycarbonate and thermoplastic polyurethane (TPU) materials, both of which the company sources through suppliers with restricted substance commitments. Pelican publicly states that it does not intentionally add PFAS to this model, though the company does not claim that PFAS-containing precursor chemicals are entirely absent during manufacturing.

Materials: Polycarbonate shell with TPU bumper and impact-absorption layers.

Brand Claims: Pelican markets this case as meeting MIL-STD-810G drop-test standards and as "non-toxic to intended users" based on material safety data sheets. The company does not claim PFAS-free status, which is a transparent approach.

Honest Pros: Military-grade drop protection, wireless charging compatible, available for multiple iPhone 15 variants including the standard iPhone 15, and strong supply-chain transparency.

Honest Cons: Does not offer battery charging functionality, may add noticeable bulk, and the lower concern grade still represents our model-based estimate rather than a laboratory result.

Mophie Juice Pack Battery Case for iPhone 15 Pro: Grade B

Mophie's Juice Pack line, when applied to iPhone 15 Pro models, combines a protective outer shell with an integrated battery unit. This grade B rating reflects the company's disclosed use of recycled plastics and its membership in electronics stewardship programs, which typically require supplier audits for restricted substances.

Materials: Hybrid plastic and rubber construction with embedded lithium-ion battery and copper charging contacts.

Brand Claims: Mophie states that new iPhone 15 variants use "recycled-content outer shells" and comply with electronics regulations including RoHS and REACH, but does not make explicit PFAS-free claims.

Honest Pros: Integrated wireless charging, 30 to 50 percent battery extension depending on model, lightweight compared to older Mophie designs, and available for iPhone 15 and iPhone 15 Pro standard sizes.

Honest Cons: Adds significant thickness to the device, the battery degrades over 300 to 500 charge cycles, price premium relative to protection-only cases, and recycled-content materials do not guarantee PFAS absence.

Grade B Across Other Flagship Models

The Pelican Shield Phone Case for Samsung Galaxy S24 Plus earns the same 85/100 safety score as Pelican's iPhone variant, indicating that the brand maintains consistent material standards across platform lines. This suggests that Pelican has standardized its supply chain for thermoplastic and polycarbonate inputs rather than varying formulations by device type, which is a positive transparency signal.

Why Grade F Models Fall Behind: Sea to Summit and Mophie Variants

Grade F ratings, ranging from 40/100 to 50/100, indicate higher concern based on our model-derived estimates of material composition and manufacturing sourcing. Products in this tier include the Sea to Summit Guide Waterproof Case, which scores 40/100, the lowest in our review.

Sea to Summit Guide Waterproof Case: Grade F (40/100)

Sea to Summit's waterproof enclosure relies on thermoplastic polyurethane (TPU) with a sealed seam design intended for outdoor hiking and water sports. The grade F rating reflects the company's heavy reliance on TPU, a material that historically has been formulated using C6 and C8 PFOA alternatives to achieve water and oil repellency. Sea to Summit does not publicly disclose its TPU supplier or chemical formulations.

Materials: 100 percent TPU construction with heat-sealed seams and a roll-top closure.

Brand Claims: Sea to Summit markets the case as "waterproof to 2 meters for 30 minutes" and suitable for swimming. The company does not address PFAS in any public material.

Honest Pros: Extremely affordable ($15 to $25), universal fit for most phones, genuinely waterproof for submerged use, and lightweight.

Honest Cons: High estimated PFAS association due to TPU material choice and lack of supplier transparency, no brand commitment to restricted substances, and the sealing design itself may require fluorinated compounds.

Mophie Juice Pack Models: Grade F (40/100 to 50/100)

Notably, several Mophie Juice Pack variants receive grade F ratings, creating an internal inconsistency within the brand. The Mophie Juice Pack for iPhone 16 and Mophie Juice Pack Case for Apple iPhone 17 Pro both score 40/100, suggesting that Mophie's newer product lines have not maintained the material standards of their iPhone 15 equivalents. This may reflect cost pressures, different manufacturing partners, or simply incomplete reformulation across the portfolio. The Mophie Juice Pack Battery Case for iPhone 15 Pro Max scores 50/100, in between.

This fragmentation is critical: buying a Mophie case based on the brand name alone does not guarantee a grade B outcome. Device compatibility and product-specific sourcing matter more than brand reputation in this category.

What to Avoid

Grade F products carry higher concern based on available data and should be deprioritized if alternatives exist. The Sea to Summit TPU Guide Waterproof Case for iPhone and its color variants, as well as the older Mophie Juice Pack Access Hardshell Battery Case for Apple iPhone 11, all carry F grades and reduced transparency around material sourcing. If you are buying a waterproof phone case and have PFAS awareness, avoid Sea to Summit products entirely and verify the specific Mophie model number before purchase, as the brand does not maintain consistent safety profiles across its range.

The Pelican Shield MagSafe Case for iPhone 17 Pro Max receives a grade F despite Pelican's generally strong profile. This suggests that newer device launches may outpace Pelican's ability to reformulate, or that MagSafe integration requires magnetic materials or adhesives not yet sourced to the brand's standard. Do not assume that Pelican's older models apply to their newest releases.

Material Science Context: Why TPU and PFAS Go Hand in Hand

Thermoplastic polyurethane is the industry standard for waterproof phone cases because it is flexible, durable, and water-repellent. However, achieving water and oil repellency in TPU typically requires PFAS-based surfactants or processing aids during polymerization. While some manufacturers have begun transitioning to shorter-chain PFAS (C4 to C6 alternatives) or entirely different chemistry, the transition is incomplete and not yet industry-standard. When a brand does not disclose its TPU supplier or formulation, the lower concern assumption is justified because most commercial TPU relies on legacy fluorinated chemistry.

Pelican and Mophie's grade B cases use polycarbonate and TPU blends where the TPU component is sourced from suppliers with explicit restricted-substance programs. This does not eliminate PFAS entirely, but it does reduce the likelihood of intentional high-fluorination formulations.

How Our Grades Work

Our model-based safety scores derive from four factors: material composition (40 percent weight), supplier transparency and restricted-substance programs (35 percent weight), brand PFAS-specific claims versus third-party verification (15 percent weight), and manufacturing region and regulatory compliance (10 percent weight). A grade B indicates lower concern based on available materials and data, not laboratory testing of the finished product. No smartphone case in our review has undergone independent PFAS extraction and analysis, so all grades are estimates. We distinguish brand-stated claims from verified ones: Pelican and Mophie claim compliance with RoHS and REACH, which are regulatory frameworks that restrict certain PFAS but do not eliminate all PFAS-related chemistry. We do not report these as independent lab verification.

Our Pick: Best Lower-Concern Option

The Pelican iPhone 15 Pro Protector is our recommended choice for PFAS-aware buyers. It earns a grade B at 85/100 safety based on our model, meaning lower concern derived from material sourcing transparency, supply-chain auditing, and the absence of integrated battery chemistry that complicates material control. Pelican has publicly committed to MIL-STD standards and materials compliance without making false claims about being PFAS-free. The case does not add battery weight, is wireless-charging compatible, and the company's cross-device consistency suggests systematic sourcing controls rather than model-by-model variability.

If you require integrated battery charging, the Mophie Juice Pack Battery Case for iPhone 15 Pro ties at grade B. Verify the product SKU carefully to ensure you are purchasing an iPhone 15 variant, not an iPhone 16 or 17 model, as Mophie's newer releases have not maintained the same sourcing standards.

Broader PFAS Awareness and Phone Case Context

Waterproof phone cases are a relatively minor PFAS exposure pathway compared to food packaging, cookware, and rain jackets. However, cumulative exposure matters, and a case in constant contact with skin and worn daily does present a dermal contact route. If you use a phone case for 2 to 3 years, selecting a lower-concern variant is a reasonable precaution without requiring you to avoid phone protection entirely.

FAQ

Do these grade B cases have no PFAS in them at all?

No. Our grade B rating means lower concern based on available materials data and supplier transparency, not PFAS absence. We have no laboratory results confirming zero PFAS in any finished phone case. Grades B and F are model-based estimates derived from material composition, sourcing claims, and manufacturing practices. Grade B indicates that available evidence suggests reduced intentional PFAS formulation and supplier auditing, which lowers concern relative to grade F. The distinction is important: lower concern is not the same as safe or PFAS-free.