Under Armour · Waterproof Sports Bags
Under Armour No Weigh Backpack Duffle
Skip until brand discloses waterproofing chemistry.
Under Armour does not disclose PFAS status or water-repellent coating chemistry for this duffle. Water-resistant backpacks typically use fluorinated treatments, but no confirmation available for this model.
Still want this one anyway? Check the price on Amazon. We’d swap it.
Material
Polyester nylon with water-resistant coating
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 duffle combines polyester and nylon fabrics with an applied water-resistant coating of undisclosed chemistry. Polyester and nylon themselves are stable synthetics with low leaching risk during normal use. The coating is the material uncertainty: water-resistant finishes on textiles commonly use PFAS or other durable hydrophobic agents to repel moisture, and Under Armour has not publicly disclosed which chemistry they employ here. Without that information, the actual hazard profile of the coating remains unverified.
The brand's record and disclosure
Under Armour has not published detailed waterproofing chemistry disclosures for their apparel lines, nor have they signed the ZDHC (Zero Discharge of Hazardous Chemicals) Gateway or similar textile-supply transparency initiatives. The brand does not currently highlight PFAS avoidance in their sustainability messaging. No recalls or formal safety alerts specific to this product line have been publicly recorded, but the absence of transparency is itself a red flag for consumer decision-making.
How it compares in its category
Sports duffles in this price range typically use polyester or nylon with water-resistant coatings; most brands do not disclose coating chemistry. Under Armour's approach is standard industry practice, not exceptional. Competitors like Patagonia and REI Co-op have begun phasing PFAS from apparel, though full elimination across product lines remains incomplete. This duffle sits in the mainstream, non-transparent segment rather than the emerging leader category on chemical disclosure.
If you buy it
Wash separately from other clothes in cool water and dry on low heat or air-dry; heat can stress synthetic coatings. Avoid dry cleaning, which may employ additional chemical treatments. Do not machine-dry at high temperatures, as this accelerates coating degradation and potential microfiber shedding. Replace if the water-resistant coating visibly peels or degrades. Store in a dry place to minimize mold risk in the interior, which can occur if moisture is trapped under the coating.
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.”
Undisclosed water-resistant coating chemistry (suspected PFAS risk)
Polyester-nylon textiles with water-resistant finishes frequently use PFAS or similar persistent chemicals. Under Armour's silence on this product's specific treatment means the hazard cannot be ruled out. Contact with skin or off-gassing during storage or use are the primary exposure routes.
Formaldehyde in synthetic fabric finishing resins
No recalls or reports of formaldehyde-resin issues in Under Armour apparel have been established. Polyester and nylon do not inherently contain formaldehyde, but some fabric finishes can. No evidence suggests this product uses such treatments, but brand disclosure would clarify.
Azo dyes (carcinogenic colorant precursors)
Under Armour is not known to use restricted azo dyes in their standard product lines, and polyester-nylon blends are commonly dyed with compliant colorants. No public incidents or warnings for this product exist, though full supply-chain verification is not publicly available.
Microfiber shedding from synthetic fabrics
Coating degradation and secondary chemical leaching
Water-resistant coatings on textiles deteriorate with age and washing, potentially releasing residual monomers or treatment chemicals. The specific risk depends on the coating chemistry, which Under Armour has not disclosed. Users should monitor the coating condition and replace the item if peeling or breakdown is visible.
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 Waterproof Sports Bags
Garmin
Carrying Case
Neoprene or polyester case, material unspecified
Unknown material raises concern; no PFAS disclosure from Garmin.
⚠Risky category by default
Patagonia
Guidewater Sling
recycled polyester with water-repellent coating finish
Lower concern; brand committed to PFAS-free water-repellent coating, but verify current batch
⚠Waterproof or stain-proof treatment
More waterproof sports bags 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.