PFAS score
Didriksons · Snow Pants
Trousers Didriksons Ara
Skip until Didriksons discloses water-repellent coating chemistry, silent stance on PFAS in waterproof apparel is a red flag.
Didriksons Ara trousers appear to use a water-repellent finish typical of outdoor apparel, which commonly relies on PFAS-based water-repellent coating treatments. The brand does not publicly disclose whether their water-repellent coating is PFAS-free, fluorocarbon-based, or what alternative chemistry they use.
Still want this one anyway? Check the price on Amazon. We’d swap it.
Material
Synthetic textile with water-repellent finish
Brand disclosure
Brand is silent on PFAS
Lab data
No public lab test
Why this grade
Waterproof / stain-resistant treatment
water-repellent coating treatments have historically used PFAS.
Category baseline
clothing is a category where PFAS exposure is more common.
No PFAS disclosure
No public statement about PFAS in this product.
What we don’t know
This grade is a model-based estimate from public materials, coatings, and brand disclosure at 45% 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 Snow Pants
Volcom
Men's NWRK Baggy Pant
Cotton canvas blend (standard apparel textile)
Lower PFAS concern for basic baggy pants; no special finishes flagged, but Volcom has made no public PFAS commitments.
⚠Risky category by default
Roxy
Women's Backyard Pant
Nylon/polyester blend with cotton (standard casual pants)
Lower PFAS concern, standard textile pant without water-resistant coating, but brand provides no transparency.
⚠Risky category by default
DC Shoes
DC Men's Primo Pant
Cotton/polyester blend twill pants
Lower concern for casual pants; no PFAS-prone treatments evident, but brand offers no transparency.
⚠Risky category by default
More snow pants 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.