Tommy Hilfiger · Waterproof Sports Undergarments
Tommy Hilfiger Men's TH Performance Lightweight Polo
Performance polos often use PFAS water-repellent coating. Tommy Hilfiger doesn't disclose.
This performance polo likely has water-repellent coating and stain-resistant treatments typical of the category, which commonly contain PFAS. Tommy Hilfiger provides no chemical disclosure or testing data.
Still want this one anyway? Check the price on Amazon. We’d swap it.
Material
polyester blend with water-repellent coating/stain-resistant 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.
The full breakdown
What it's made of and why it matters
This polo is a polyester blend (likely 60-100% polyester with cotton or elastane) treated with a water-repellent coating (water-repellent coating) finish. Polyester itself is chemically stable during wear, but the water-repellent coating is the concern: most performance-grade water repellents use Teflon-type coating-based or PFAS chemistries to bond durable hydrophobic properties. Tommy Hilfiger does not publicly disclose which water-repellent coating agent is used, leaving the PFAS profile opaque. The blend may also contain antimony as a polyester catalyst and trace heavy metals in synthetic dyes.
The brand's record and disclosure
Tommy Hilfiger is owned by PVH Corp, which has committed to phasing fluorinated water repellents in some apparel lines but has not fully transparent reporting on individual product lines or full supply chain PFAS use. The brand does not publish chemical disclosure databases for performance polos. No major recalls or substantiated health incidents tied to Tommy Hilfiger apparel are on public record. The silence on water-repellent coating chemistry is typical for the mid-market fashion apparel sector but represents a disclosure gap.
How it compares in its category
Performance polos from major brands (Nike, Adidas, Under Armour, Polo Ralph Lauren) commonly use water-repellent coating finishes and rarely disclose PFAS status. Tommy Hilfiger's pricing and market position suggest standard industrial water-repellent coating rather than premium fluorine-free alternatives. Brands offering explicit PFAS-free performance wear (e.g., Patagonia, some outdoor specialists) are less common in this category. This product is middle-of-road for the category in terms of transparency and likely chemical profile.
If you buy it
Wash in cold water before first wear to reduce residual finishing chemicals. Avoid high heat (no dryer, or low heat only) because heat can mobilize water-repellent coating coatings and any fluorinated residues. Wash separately or with like colors to limit dye bleeding. The water-repellent coating will degrade over 20-50 washes; re-treating is optional and may reintroduce PFAS, so plain rewashing is safer. Do not dry clean, as solvents may strip the finish unpredictably.
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.”
water-repellent coating (water-repellent coating) coating - undisclosed chemistry
Performance polos routinely use PFAS-based water-repellent coating (fluorocarbon or Teflon-type coating systems). Tommy Hilfiger does not disclose the water-repellent coating agent, so PFAS presence is not ruled out. Exposure during wear is low if finish is intact, but washing and aging increase shedding into water.
Antimony in polyester
Polyester synthesis often uses antimony as a catalyst. Residual antimony in finished fabric is typically <100 ppm and not considered a migration risk during normal wear. No recalls or health reports tied to Tommy Hilfiger polos on this basis.
Synthetic dye heavy metals
Polyester dyes may contain trace lead, cadmium, or chrome. EU and US apparel regulations limit migration; Tommy Hilfiger as a major brand is subject to these standards. No substantiated incidents reported for this brand.
Formaldehyde or formaldehyde-releasing resins
Easy-care or wrinkle-resistant finishes on polyester sometimes use formaldehyde-based crosslinkers. Tommy Hilfiger does not advertise wrinkle-resistance for this polo, so formaldehyde use is unlikely, but vendor sourcing is not transparent.
Azo dyes (carcinogenic metabolites)
Azo dyes that cleave into carcinogenic amines are banned or restricted in EU and US apparel. Tommy Hilfiger complies with apparel color safety standards as a major brand, but specific dye chemistry is not disclosed.
What we don’t know
This grade is a model-based estimate from public materials, coatings, and brand disclosure at 35% 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.
More waterproof sports undergarments 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.