Arm & Hammer · Deodorant
Arm & Hammer Ultramax Solid Antiperspirant Deodorant
Lower-concern solid deodorant; no known PFAS triggers, but cosmetics transparency remains limited.
Arm & Hammer Ultramax is a conventional solid antiperspirant without hallmark PFAS indicators like water-resistance coatings or nonstick treatments. The brand makes no PFAS claims either way.
Shop Arm & Hammer on Amazon →Material
Aluminum oxide, starch, talc, fragrance (typical solid antiperspirant base)
Brand disclosure
Brand is silent on PFAS
Lab data
No public lab test
Why this grade
Category baseline
cosmetics is a category where PFAS exposure is more common.
No PFAS disclosure
No public statement about PFAS in this product.
Safe base material
Made from a material with no inherent PFAS use (ceramic, mineral, or natural fiber).
The full breakdown
What it's made of and why it matters
Arm & Hammer Ultramax is a solid stick antiperspirant based on aluminum oxide (the active antiperspirant agent), cornstarch or other starches, talc, and fragrance compounds. Aluminum oxide at concentrations typical in antiperspirants (around 15-20% by weight) is recognized by FDA as safe for topical use and does not accumulate systemically at these exposure levels. Talc and starch are inert carriers; talc has a legacy of contamination concerns in some cosmetics, but modern talc in regulated US antiperspirants is required to be asbestos-free under FDA oversight.
The brand's record and disclosure
Arm & Hammer (Church & Dwight) does not publish a dedicated PFAS or chemical transparency statement for this product line. The brand has not faced major recalls or legal actions specific to this antiperspirant. As a mainstream consumer brand under FDA cosmetic regulations, formulations are technically registered with the agency, but full ingredient lists beyond the label are not routinely disclosed publicly. No certifications such as EWG Verified or NSF exist for this product.
How it compares in its category
Ultramax is a conventional aluminum-based solid antiperspirant, comparable to drugstore competitors like Degree, Axe, and Secret in both formulation and hazard profile. It is not aluminum-free or natural (which would use non-aluminum alternatives like baking soda or zinc ricinoleate). Solid sticks as a category pose lower dermal and inhalation risk than aerosol sprays, which can aerosolize talc and fragrance particles. This product sits squarely in the mass-market, regulated safety baseline.
If you buy it
Apply to clean, dry skin to minimize irritation and optimize efficacy. Do not apply to broken or irritated skin. Replace the stick when notably worn or discolored (typically every 2-3 months with daily use) to avoid bacterial colonization of the stick surface. Store in a cool, dry place away from direct heat or sunlight to prevent softening and degradation. Discontinue use if persistent rash, burning, or allergic reaction develops and consult a dermatologist if sensitivity is recurrent.
Beyond PFAS: other things we checked
Established hazard classes for this product type, assessed from public information. These never change the PFAS grade; a Likely flag caps the Verdict at “Buy with care.”
Talc contamination (asbestos risk)
FDA requires talc in cosmetics sold in the US to be asbestos-free and tested. No recalls or contamination reports are on record for Arm & Hammer Ultramax. Historical talc litigation has not implicated this brand's antiperspirant line.
Fragrance allergens and sensitization
Arm & Hammer Ultramax lists 'fragrance' without itemizing constituent fragrance chemicals. Fragrance compounds are a common source of contact dermatitis in antiperspirants. Individual sensitivity varies; reactions are typically localized to the axilla and are not systemic.
Aluminum absorption and systemic accumulation
Aluminum oxide in topical antiperspirants at standard concentrations does not penetrate intact skin significantly and poses no established link to Alzheimer's or other systemic disease at these exposure levels, per FDA and epidemiological consensus. Daily use does not result in measurable body burden increase.
Starch-based moisture retention and bacterial overgrowth
Starch carriers in solid antiperspirants can trap moisture in the stick, creating conditions favorable to bacterial or fungal colonization if stored in humid environments or left damp. This is a handling and storage issue, not a formulation defect, and is manageable by allowing the stick to dry between uses and replacing regularly.
Skin irritation from aluminum salts
Aluminum oxide can cause mild irritation, redness, or burning sensation in individuals with sensitive skin or if applied to freshly shaved areas. Reactions are generally reversible upon discontinuation. No idiosyncratic toxicity or severe adverse events are documented for this brand or formulation type.
What we don’t know
This grade is a model-based estimate from public materials, coatings, and brand disclosure at 72% confidence. It is not a lab result.
No independent PFAS lab test is on record for this exact product. A lab test could move the score in either direction.
The brand has not made a specific, verifiable PFAS-free statement, so part of this score reflects that missing disclosure rather than a confirmed material.
Formulations and coatings change between production runs. Always check the current label before buying.
Safer alternatives in Deodorant
Tom's of Maine
Deodorant
mineral-based, baking soda formulation
Lower concern, mineral-based formula with public PFAS-free positioning, though no independent third-party verification.
⚠Risky category by default
Tom's of Maine
Most-Loved Deodorant Bundle
mineral-based and plant-derived actives; stick formulation
Lower-concern deodorant; mineral-based formula with PFAS-free claim aligns with brand ethos, but no third-party verification found.
⚠Risky category by default
Tom's of Maine
Antiperspirant Deodorant
mineral-based active ingredients, plant-derived botanicals, no synthetic water-repellent coatings
Lower PFAS concern, mineral-based formula with MADE SAFE cert; antiperspirant category has minimal waterproof-coating risk.
✓Verified PFAS-free by a third party
More deodorant grades
How we score: every product runs through the same public 0–100 rubric based on materials, coatings, brand disclosure, lab findings, and recalls. See the full methodology → Spotted a mistake? Report an error.