Under Armour · Waterproof Sports Gear
Under Armour Men's Outdoor Hybrid Shorts
Unknown water-repellent coating treatment; brand silent on PFAS composition.
Outdoor hybrid shorts likely use water-repellent coating finish, which may contain PFAS. Under Armour does not publicly disclose PFAS status or safer alternatives.
Still want this one anyway? Check the price on Amazon. We’d swap it.
Material
polyester blend with water-repellent coating 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
These shorts are polyester blend (specific ratio not disclosed by Under Armour), which is durable and moisture-wicking but inherently synthetic. The water-repellent coating (water-repellent coating) finish is the critical unknown: most water-repellent coating treatments historically used PFAS-based chemistry, though some brands have shifted to fluorine-free alternatives. Without Under Armour's specification, you cannot know which chemistry was used. Polyester itself does not leach BPA or phthalates under normal wear, but the finish treatment is the hazard vector.
The brand's record and disclosure
Under Armour has not publicly disclosed its water-repellent coating chemistry or PFAS phase-out commitments for apparel lines, which is a transparency gap compared to outdoor brands like Patagonia and The North Face (both of which have published fluorine-free transition timelines). The company does not appear on publicly tracked PFAS-reformulation pledges. No major recalls, formaldehyde violations, or azo-dye contamination has been reported for Under Armour apparel in accessible databases. The silence on water-repellent coating sourcing is the primary concern, not a positive indicator.
How it compares in its category
Hybrid shorts in the performance-outdoor category are routinely treated with water-repellent coating; most mid-range brands (Nike, Adidas) do not disclose water-repellent coating chemistry either. Patagonia and some REI-house brands explicitly state fluorine-free water-repellent coating; these are pricier but offer certainty. Under Armour's position is typical of non-transparency rather than worst-in-class. The polyester-blend construction is standard; no hazard distinction from competitors at this price point.
If you buy it
Wash separately initially to release residual dyes or finish particles; use cool water and mild detergent, avoiding high heat (dryer over 130F or iron) which can degrade synthetic coatings and potentially volatilize finish chemicals. Do not over-wash; water-repellent coating treatments degrade after 20-30 laundry cycles regardless of origin. If water-repellency fails rapidly or you develop skin irritation, consider a fluorine-free alternative brand. Avoid dry cleaning, which uses solvents that can interact unpredictably with fluorinated finishes.
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.”
Fluorine-based water-repellent coating (PFAS family)
Brand does not disclose water-repellent coating chemistry; most outdoor hybrid shorts still use PFAS-based treatments. Skin contact during wear poses minimal acute risk, but environmental persistence and bioaccumulation remain concerns if garment is discarded into wastewater.
Azo dyes
No recalls or testing reports of azo-dye contamination in Under Armour apparel; polyester accepts synthetic dyes uniformly. Risk is low but not zero without third-party certification.
Formaldehyde resins
Polyester blends rarely require formaldehyde-based finishing agents; wrinkle resistance is typically achieved via chemical cross-linking in the fiber itself. No formaldehyde warnings on record for this product line.
Antimony in polyester
Antimony is used as a catalyst in polyester polymerization but remains locked in the polymer matrix during normal wear; migration into sweat is negligible. Not a recognized hazard for end users of intact garments.
water-repellent coating degradation and microfiber release
As the water-repellent coating finish breaks down with washing and wear, the coating may shed as microparticles into water and air. Without fluorine-free composition confirmation, the composition of these particles is unknown; their fate in wastewater treatment is unclear.
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.
Safer alternatives in Waterproof Sports Gear
Patagonia
Men's 10" Quandary Shorts
nylon/polyester blend with water-repellent coating treatment
Lower concern. Patagonia uses PFC-free water-repellent coating; verify MADE SAFE label on tag.
✓Lab test found no PFAS
Reebok
Men's Athlete Speed Shorts
Polyester mesh and nylon blend, standard athletic construction
Lower concern. Standard athletic shorts without water-resistant coating.
⚠Risky category by default
Patagonia
Men's Home Waters Hybrid Shorts
Polyester blend with PFAS-free water-repellent coating finish
Lower concern. Patagonia phased out PFAS-based water-repellent coating; verify current product line batch.
⚠Waterproof or stain-proof treatment
More waterproof sports gear 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.