Puma · Golf Balls & Golf Gloves
New Puma Pro Formation Hybrid Golf Glove
Golf glove with water-resistant coating, PFAS status unknown.
Puma does not disclose PFAS use in this glove. Water-resistant finishes on apparel often contain PFAS, but Puma provides no transparency here. No third-party verification available.
Still want this one anyway? Check the price on Amazon. We’d swap it.
Material
synthetic leather/microfiber with water-resistant treatment
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.
The full breakdown
What it's made of and why it matters
This glove uses synthetic leather (likely polyurethane or PVC) bonded to microfiber backing, with a water-resistant topical treatment applied to repel moisture. The water-resistant coating is the key unknown: most golf glove water treatments historically rely on fluorochemical (PFAS) formulations, though some brands have shifted to non-fluorine alternatives in recent years. Puma has not publicly disclosed the specific chemistry of their water-resistance system for this model, which is the primary safety gap here.
The brand's record and disclosure
Puma has committed to eliminating PFAS in apparel by 2025 as part of broader sustainability pledges, but does not provide product-level transparency for individual gloves or treatment details. No major safety recalls or contamination incidents have been reported for Puma golf gloves specifically. The brand's stance on water-resistant coatings remains opaque; they have not published third-party test data confirming PFAS absence in this product line.
How it compares in its category
Golf gloves with synthetic leather and water-resistant treatments are standard across the market. Competitors including Callaway, TaylorMade, and FootJoy face the same transparency challenges. Puma's approach is neither notably safer nor riskier than category norms, though some premium brands have begun publishing PFAS-free certifications; this product lacks that assurance.
If you buy it
Wash the glove regularly in cool water to reduce any potential chemical residue buildup on skin contact areas. Avoid prolonged heating (do not machine dry or expose to direct heat). Store in a dry place to prevent mold growth in the microfiber backing. Replace after 12-18 months of use or sooner if the synthetic leather shows peeling, cracking, or coating degradation, as compromised coatings may shed micro-particles.
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.”
Fluorochemical (PFAS) in water-resistant coating
Water-resistant golf glove treatments historically use fluorinated compounds; Puma has not disclosed whether this model uses fluorine-based or fluorine-free formulations. Unknown risk of skin exposure to PFAS residue during use.
Formaldehyde resins in synthetic leather bonding
Polyurethane and PVC synthetic leather often use formaldehyde-based adhesives or cross-linking agents during manufacture. No product-specific test data available; risk is typical for synthetic sports gloves but not quantified for this model.
Microfiber backing shedding and inhalation
No reported incidents of microfiber shedding from Puma golf gloves. Risk exists only if coating degrades significantly or glove is damaged; regular inspection minimizes exposure.
Azo dyes in synthetic leather or microfiber
Puma uses modern dyeing standards for apparel, and azo dye restrictions are now standard in the EU and enforced in most premium athletic brands. No specific safety alerts for this product.
Skin irritation from coating or dye residue
Some users may experience contact dermatitis from new synthetic gloves; typically resolves after a few washes. Risk is individual and not brand-specific.
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 Golf Balls & Golf Gloves
Bridgestone
Men's Pair Golf Gloves
Leather, synthetic leather, or textile blend
Lower PFAS concern, but brand provides no transparency.
⚠Risky category by default
Bridgestone
Soft Grip Golf Glove
Leather, synthetic grip material, textiles
Lower concern. Golf glove without known waterproofing or Teflon-family coating treatment.
⚠Risky category by default
Bridgestone
Lady Golf Glove
Synthetic leather or leather with standard stitching
Golf glove with typical materials, lower concern profile.
⚠Risky category by default
More golf balls & golf gloves 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.