Our scoring methodology is public, consistent and based entirely on publicly available information. Here is exactly how we reach every score.
Every FabricMark review is based on publicly available information. We do not accept payment for reviews, we do not take information from brands at face value, and we do not require brands to participate in the review process. Our sources include brand sustainability reports and annual accounts, third-party audits including the Ethical Fashion Report and Good On You assessments, fabric composition data from brand websites and product labels, news and investigative journalism, and academic and NGO research on supply chain practices.
Quality is assessed across three dimensions: fabric composition, construction standards, and consistency across the range.
Fabric composition is the single most important quality indicator. We assess what proportion of a brand's range uses natural fibres (cotton, wool, linen, silk, cashmere) versus semi-synthetic (viscose, lyocell, modal) versus synthetic (polyester, acrylic, polyamide). A brand where natural fibres are the norm scores higher than one where synthetics dominate. We also assess fibre grade — 100% wool is not the same as a 20% wool blend.
Construction standards are assessed through product reviews, consumer feedback, and where possible direct product assessment. We look at seam quality, lining standards, finishing details and reported durability over time.
Consistency matters because many brands produce excellent quality in some lines and poor quality in others. A brand that delivers consistent quality across its range scores higher than one with extreme variation.
Ethics is assessed across labour rights, environmental practices and corporate governance.
Labour rights covers wages, working conditions and freedom of association in manufacturing. We reference the Ethical Fashion Report, Brand Benchmark, and investigative reporting. A complete ban on child labour is a baseline requirement. We also assess whether brands actively support living wages rather than merely legal minimum wages.
Environmental practices covers chemical management, water use, carbon emissions and textile waste. We reference GOTS, bluesign, OEKO-TEX and other certification bodies. We assess both published targets and demonstrated progress against those targets.
Corporate governance covers diversity at board level and whether sustainability commitments are backed by binding targets or are aspirational marketing.
Transparency is assessed on how openly a brand publishes supplier information, fabric data and sustainability progress. A brand that publishes its full supplier list, provides fabric composition data on all products, and reports publicly against specific sustainability targets scores 5. A brand that publishes almost nothing scores 1. This dimension rewards honesty, not performance — a brand can score highly on transparency while scoring poorly on ethics if they are honest about their shortcomings.
Price is not simply a statement of cost. We assess whether the price charged reflects the genuine quality of materials and construction. A brand charging premium prices for synthetic fast fashion scores poorly. A brand charging accessible prices for natural fibre garments scores well. We benchmark across the market to ensure consistency.
All reviews are updated every six months as a minimum. Reviews are also updated when a brand makes a material change — a new sustainability report, a significant supply chain incident, or a change in product quality. The review date is displayed on every brand page.
If you are a brand and believe our assessment contains an error of fact, contact us at editorial@fabricmark.co.uk with your evidence. We review all factual disputes and correct errors promptly. We do not change scores based on commercial pressure or brand relationships.