Which fashion brands are greenwashing?

Most major fashion brands overstate their sustainability efforts to some degree. Fibr's data shows that even brands positioning themselves as sustainable leaders (like Reformation at 57% average natural fibre) often have lower natural-fibre content than brands without sustainability branding (Bershka at 62.7%). 'Conscious' and 'committed' collections frequently use recycled polyester — still plastic, still shedding microplastics.

Is Reformation actually sustainable?

Partly. Reformation's 57% average natural fibre content is below Bershka (62.7%) and Zara (60.6%). However, only 5.3% of Reformation products are polyester-heavy, compared to 25-28% at other brands. Reformation is better at avoiding the worst synthetic products but uses more semi-synthetic blends than its marketing suggests. It's not as sustainable as it claims, but it's not the worst either.

Are H&M Conscious products actually better?

H&M's Conscious collection uses materials like organic cotton and recycled polyester, which are incrementally better than conventional alternatives. However, recycled polyester still sheds microplastics identically to virgin polyester. The bigger issue is that Conscious represents a small fraction of H&M's total output — the vast majority of products remain conventional fast fashion.

How can I verify a brand's sustainability claims?

Check the fabric composition of actual products — not marketing pages. Look at what fibre percentages appear on individual product labels. Tools like Fibr show this data on product images while you browse. Also look for third-party certifications (GOTS, OEKO-TEX) rather than brand-created labels. The product data never lies.

Does 'recycled polyester' mean sustainable?

No. Recycled polyester reduces petroleum use but sheds identical microplastics, doesn't breathe or absorb moisture, and is rarely recyclable again as clothing (textile-to-textile recycling rates are below 1%). It's a marginal improvement marketed as a major one. Brands use it because it's cheap and lets them claim sustainability without changing their business model.

Fashion Brand Sustainability Claims vs Actual Fabric Data

Every major fashion brand now has a sustainability story. Reformation says it's "making sustainable fashion accessible." H&M has its "Conscious" collection. Mango has "Committed." Zara has "Join Life." The language is polished, the green labels are prominent, and the marketing budgets are enormous.

But what does the actual product data say? Fibr has analysed 17,365+ products across major retailers, measuring real fabric composition. Here's how sustainability claims compare with reality.

The Data: What Brands Actually Sell

Before examining individual claims, here's the baseline — what each brand's product range actually contains:

Brand	Products Analysed	Avg Natural Fibre %	100% Natural	Polyester-Heavy
Bershka	9,339	62.7%	45.7%	25.6%
Zara	5,226	60.6%	43.4%	28.1%
Mango	2,246	59.3%	40.0%	25.6%
Reformation	399	57.0%	52.9%	5.3%

Already, something stands out: the brand that markets most aggressively on sustainability (Reformation) has the lowest average natural fibre percentage of the group. Let's dig deeper.

Brand-by-Brand: Claims vs Data

Reformation — "Sustainable Fashion" Pioneer

The claim: Reformation positions itself as the leader in sustainable fashion, with prominent environmental messaging, carbon footprint calculations for each product, and premium pricing justified by ethical production.

The data:

57.0% Average natural fibre — below Bershka, Zara, and Mango

52.9% Products that are 100% natural — highest of any brand analysed

5.3% Products that are polyester-heavy — far below competitors

The reality: Reformation's story is nuanced. Its average natural-fibre content is pulled down by heavy use of semi-synthetic fabrics — TENCEL, viscose, and recycled materials that aren't fully natural. On the positive side, it has the highest share of 100% natural products and by far the lowest share of polyester-heavy items. Reformation isn't as natural-fibre-forward as its branding suggests, but it does avoid the worst synthetic products better than anyone else in our data.

The gap: Reformation charges 3-5x the price of Zara or Bershka, partly justified by sustainability. But a consumer seeking natural-fibre clothing would find more options by percentage at Bershka — which has no sustainability positioning whatsoever. The premium buys you better labour practices and lower polyester exposure, but not necessarily more natural fabric.

H&M — "Conscious Choice" Collection

The claim: H&M's Conscious collection features products labelled with a green tag, marketed as made from "more sustainable materials" — typically organic cotton, recycled polyester, or TENCEL.

The reality: Several issues complicate the Conscious claim:

Recycled polyester is still polyester. It sheds identical microplastics, doesn't breathe, and isn't recyclable again as clothing. Calling it "sustainable" is a stretch.
Small fraction of total output. Conscious products represent a minority of H&M's range. The vast majority remains conventional fast fashion at high volume and low price.
The volume problem. H&M produces billions of garments annually. A "Conscious" sub-collection doesn't offset the environmental impact of that volume.
Regulatory action. Multiple countries' advertising regulators have challenged H&M's sustainability claims. In 2022, a class-action lawsuit alleged the brand's environmental scorecards were misleading.

H&M's Conscious line contains some genuinely better products (100% organic cotton pieces are a good buy). But the collection serves primarily as a marketing tool to make the broader brand seem greener than it is.

Mango — "Committed" Collection

The claim: Mango's Committed collection uses "sustainably sourced" materials and aims for 100% sustainable fibres by 2030.

The data: Mango's overall range averages 59.3% natural fibre, with 40% of products fully natural and 25.6% polyester-heavy. These are middle-of-the-road numbers.

The reality: "Sustainably sourced" is a flexible term. It can mean organic cotton (genuinely better), but it can also mean recycled polyester or BCI cotton (Better Cotton Initiative, which has been criticised for weak standards). Without product-level transparency about which specific materials qualify, the "Committed" label is hard to evaluate.

Mango's 2030 target is ambitious on paper. But if "sustainable fibres" includes recycled polyester, the target can be met without meaningfully reducing synthetic fabric usage.

Zara — "Join Life" Collection

The claim: Zara's Join Life label marks products made with more sustainable processes or materials.

The data: Zara averages 60.6% natural fibre overall, but the variation by category is extreme — from 99.1% in jeans to 19.1% in hoodies.

The reality: Zara's parent company Inditex publishes detailed sustainability reports and has made concrete material commitments. The problem is scale and category selectivity. Zara proves it can use natural fibres (jeans, T-shirts, shirts are all above 80% natural) but chooses not to in categories where polyester is cheaper (hoodies, outerwear, dresses). Join Life represents progress, but it coexists with 28.1% of products being polyester-heavy — the highest rate in our analysis.

Common Greenwashing Tactics in Fashion

Based on our data analysis, these are the most common ways brands overstate their sustainability:

1. "Recycled" Relabelling

Calling recycled polyester "sustainable" when it sheds identical microplastics and doesn't address the fundamental problems of synthetic clothing. This is the industry's most widespread greenwashing tactic.

2. Sub-Collection Marketing

Creating a small "conscious" or "committed" collection that gets disproportionate marketing attention while the vast majority of products remain unchanged. The green collection makes the entire brand seem sustainable.

3. Vague Commitments

"100% sustainable materials by 2030" — but defining "sustainable" to include recycled polyester, BCI cotton, and other incremental improvements that don't fundamentally change the product.

4. Process vs Product

Highlighting sustainable manufacturing processes (water savings, renewable energy) while the product itself is still polyester. The factory might be green, but the garment is still plastic.

5. Certification Inflation

Displaying multiple certifications and partnerships that sound impressive but may have weak standards or narrow scope. Not all certifications are equal — see our certifications guide for which ones actually matter.

How to Cut Through the Marketing

Check the fabric composition, not the marketing. A product's fibre content label is regulated and accurate. Marketing copy is not.
Ignore collection names. "Conscious," "Committed," and "Join Life" are marketing labels, not certifications. Look at individual product composition.
Be sceptical of "recycled polyester." It's incrementally better, not sustainable. If a brand's sustainability strategy centres on recycled polyester, they're not changing much.
Compare prices to fabric quality. If a brand charges premium prices for sustainability but has lower natural-fibre content than cheaper brands, you're paying for marketing.
Look for third-party certifications. GOTS (organic textiles), OEKO-TEX (chemical safety), and FSC (responsibly sourced viscose) are more meaningful than brand-created labels.
Use product-level data. Brand averages hide enormous variation. Check every individual product.