65/ 100
D
OverallF53/100
Under Armour Men's 3-Pack Performance Cotton Boxerjock

Under Armour · Waterproof Sports & Performance Undergarments

Under Armour Men's 3-Pack Performance Cotton Boxerjock

D · Elevated

Lower concern. Bare cotton-blend undergarment with no performance coating.

Verdict: SkipCotton-blend undergarment with no performance coating; no established hazards beyond routine textile dye/finish concerns common to the category.

Basic cotton blend boxers with no water-repellent or stain-resistant treatment mentioned. No PFAS disclosure from brand, but material itself carries minimal risk.

Still want this one anyway? Check the price on Amazon. We’d swap it.

Material

Cotton blend with elastane

Brand disclosure

Brand is silent on PFAS

Lab data

No public lab test

Why this grade

Safe base material

Made from a material with no inherent PFAS use (ceramic, mineral, or natural fiber).

Helps the grade

Category baseline

clothing is a category where PFAS exposure is more common.

Hurts the grade

No PFAS disclosure

No public statement about PFAS in this product.

Hurts the grade

The full breakdown

What it's made of and why it matters

This product is a cotton-elastane blend (likely 85-90% cotton, 10-15% spandex/elastane) with no water-resistant or moisture-wicking coating, which eliminates the primary vector for PFAS in performance apparel. The elastane provides stretch and shape retention; cotton is inherently breathable and low-risk. No fluorochemical treatments are typical for basic boxerjocks in this category, making chemical leaching during wear or laundering unlikely.

The brand's record and disclosure

Under Armour does not publicly disclose detailed chemical inventories or restricted substance lists specific to basic undergarments. The brand has no widely documented recalls or lawsuits tied to formaldehyde, azo dyes, or heavy metal pigments in base-layer products. Like most major athletic brands, Under Armour has faced scrutiny over supply-chain labor and sustainability but not product toxicity in this category.

How it compares in its category

Cotton-blend boxerjocks are among the lowest-risk textile products because they lack performance coatings, antimicrobial treatments, or heavy dyes. This product sits in the middle of the market: more affordable than premium merino or specialty fabrics, but equally compliant with standard dyeing and finishing regulations in the US and EU. No brands in this segment offer meaningfully superior chemical transparency.

If you buy it

Wash in warm water with standard detergent; elastane degrades in high heat and chlorine bleach, so avoid both. Expect the elastic to lose tension after 50-100 washes due to the nature of spandex, not chemical breakdown. Replace when waistband or leg openings no longer provide snug fit. Air dry when possible to extend elastane lifespan; machine drying on low heat is acceptable but accelerates wear.

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.”

None known

Formaldehyde resins (durable-press/wrinkle-resistance finishes)

Cotton-blend boxerjocks typically do not receive formaldehyde-based finishing treatments because elastic and comfort fit prioritize softness over wrinkle resistance. No public record of formaldehyde finish on Under Armour basic undergarments.

Possible

Azo dyes and heavy metals in dye pigments

All colored cotton textiles use synthetic dyes; concern is lowest for neutral or light colors (white, gray, black) and highest for deep reds, yellows, or oranges. Under Armour products sold in the US and EU are subject to OEKO-TEX or equivalent restrictions on banned azo compounds, but formal certification is not publicly stated for this line.

None known

Antimony in polyester fiber

This product is predominantly cotton with elastane, not polyester. Antimony is not a concern for this material composition.

Possible

Elastane (spandex) degradation and dermal irritation

Elastane fibers can degrade from UV exposure, heat, chlorine, and friction, potentially releasing microscopic fibers or oligomers. Skin contact irritation is rare but possible in individuals with sensitive skin or latex cross-reactivity; no specific reports for Under Armour products.

Possible

Microplastic shedding during washing

Cotton fibers themselves do not accumulate microplastics, but elastane shedding from repeated washing is a known environmental concern. Individual risk to wearer is minimal; environmental impact occurs post-consumer.

What we don’t know

This grade is a model-based estimate from public materials, coatings, and brand disclosure at 78% 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 & performance 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.