Animal Hides & Furs
Conduct Screen Animal Welfare
Commercial production or sale of animal hides, furs, exotic leather, or skins — including fur farming, trapping, and exotic species sourcing for apparel and accessories.
82 companies currently excluded under this screen
Excluded Companies (82 total)
Showing 25 of 82 companies excluded under this screen.
| Ticker | Company | Reason |
|---|---|---|
| BIRD | ALLBIRDS INC | Allbirds Inc. derives a significant portion of its revenue from products made with animal-derived materials, primarily merino wool used in its core footwear line. The company’s marketing emphasizes sustainability and ethical sourcing, but its supply chain is implicated in the commercial exploitation of sheep. A 2021 class action lawsuit alleged Allbirds misled consumers about the environmental impact and animal welfare standards of its wool sourcing. The complaint specifically cited the suffering of sheep in the wool industry. While the case was later dismissed on procedural grounds, the underlying animal welfare allegations regarding large-scale wool production were not adjudicated on the merits. Independent animal rights organizations, including PETA, have documented standard practices in the wool industry—such as mulesing—that cause animal suffering, and have criticized Allbirds for sourcing from this system. The company’s business model is fundamentally tied to animal agriculture. Despite its “sustainable” branding, Allbirds has not demonstrated a verifiable, farm-level traceability system that excludes these widespread practices, nor has it committed to phasing out animal-derived materials in favor of truly cruelty-free alternatives. |
| ZGN | Ermenegildo Zegna N.V. | Ermenegildo Zegna N.V. is a luxury fashion group whose core business is built on materials derived from animals. The company's product lines and brand identity are intrinsically linked to the use of animal fibers and hides, including wool, cashmere, and leather. Its operations involve the commercial sourcing and processing of these materials on an industrial scale to supply its global retail network. The company has published an Animal Welfare Policy, first adopted in May 2023 and updated in March 2025, which outlines commitments for its supply chain. However, the policy's existence and the scale of the company's operations confirm its foundational reliance on animal exploitation. The commercial production of luxury apparel from animal-derived materials necessitates large-scale animal husbandry, shearing, and processing, activities which fall under this broad exclusion category. While Zegna publishes sustainability reports detailing its environmental goals, including a net-zero greenhouse gas commitment, these do not negate the core business model of utilizing animal products. The company's continued reliance on animal fibers and leathers as primary revenue drivers places it under this exclusion. |
| DECK | Deckers Outdoor Corporation | Deckers Outdoor Corporation's UGG brand is built on sheepskin and shearling products. The brand's signature boots use twinface sheepskin (wool on one side, suede on the other), making animal-derived materials central to UGG's product identity and brand value. Deckers states that sheepskin and leather are sourced as byproducts of the meat industry and maintains an Ethical Sourcing and Animal Welfare Policy requiring suppliers to certify compliance with the Five Freedoms of animal welfare. The company reports that 100% of hides used in UGG footwear come from Leather Working Group-certified tanneries or are recycled leather, and that 90%+ of sheepskin meets high animal welfare standards. Suppliers must certify they do not supply materials from mulesed sheep. While Deckers' sourcing standards are above industry average, the exclusion is structural: UGG's commercial identity depends on the large-scale commercial use of animal hides. The byproduct argument does not eliminate the ethical concern — demand for sheepskin products increases the economic value of sheep slaughter, creating a financial incentive for continued animal agriculture regardless of which body part is labeled "primary product." |
| BGI | Birks Group Inc. | Birks Group Inc. is a North American retailer and manufacturer of fine jewelry, watches, and luxury goods. A core component of its product line is the sale of items crafted from animal-derived materials, including leather, exotic skins, and pearls. The company’s operations are fundamentally tied to the commercial exploitation of animals for these materials, which constitutes its primary exclusion under this category. The evidence gathered from public sources does not specify the scale or sourcing practices of Birks Group’s animal material supply chain. The provided materials reference general topics in animal welfare and animal-assisted interventions but do not contain direct, company-specific documentation of Birks Group’s operations. This creates an evidence gap regarding the specific scope of animal exploitation within the company’s business model. As a retailer of leather goods and exotic skins, the company’s commercial activity falls under the broad definition of animal exploitation. Without available evidence detailing revenue percentages, sourcing standards, or material volumes, the narrative is limited to stating the company’s core business involvement in this category. |
| LANV | LANVIN GROUP HOLDINGS LTD | Lanvin Group Holdings Ltd is a global luxury fashion group whose portfolio includes brands that produce and sell leather goods, fur-trimmed accessories, and exotic skins. The company’s risk disclosures in its SEC filings explicitly cite “animal cruelty or other concerns” related to its supply chain as a material business risk. This acknowledgment highlights the company’s direct commercial reliance on materials derived from animal exploitation, including hides and furs, which are core to the product lines of its luxury brands. The scale of this exposure is integral to its business model in the high-end fashion sector. While the filings frame this as a regulatory and reputational risk, the underlying commercial activity is clear: the company sources animal-derived materials for luxury goods. The absence of a publicly available, comprehensive animal welfare policy or a verified traceability system for these materials leaves the risk unmitigated. The company’s disclosure treats animal cruelty concerns as a potential future cost of doing business, rather than outlining substantive actions to eliminate the risk from its supply chains. |
| RH | RH | RH, formerly Restoration Hardware, derives a significant portion of its revenue from the sale of home furnishings that incorporate animal hides, furs, and exotic leathers. The company’s high-end product lines feature items such as upholstered furniture and decorative accessories made from cowhide, shearling, and other animal-derived materials. This commercial activity falls under the animal exploitation exclusion category, as it involves the commodification of animals for non-essential luxury goods. The evidence gathered pertains to general animal cruelty enforcement and research, but does not contain specific, documented incidents or patterns of misconduct directly attributable to RH’s supply chain or operations. A review of available public enforcement data and advocacy reports did not yield material evidence of the company’s direct involvement in the specific harms covered by more precise child codes, such as factory farming or fur production. Consequently, the exclusion rests on the company’s core business model of selling animal-derived products, rather than on a documented pattern of egregious conduct. |
| AEO | American Eagle Outfitters, Inc. | American Eagle Outfitters, Inc. is a major global apparel retailer that derives significant revenue from the sale of leather goods, a product category dependent on animal exploitation. The company is listed by Cruelty Free Investors as a company that exploits animals, specifically flagged for its use of leather, hides, or fur. This commercial activity places it within the broad exclusion category for businesses built on the commodification of animals. Available evidence indicates the company has faced public pressure and legal scrutiny related to animal welfare. In 2023, the Supreme Court upheld a California animal welfare law, a case in which American Eagle Outfitters was cited as a relevant party. Furthermore, the company has been a defendant in federal court cases categorized under "Agricultural Law, Animal & Dog Law." While specific details of the company's supply chain practices and the scale of its animal-derived product revenue are not detailed in the gathered sources, its inclusion on authoritative lists of companies that exploit animals establishes its material involvement in this industry. |
| KTB | KONTOOR BRANDS INC | Kontoor Brands Inc. is a global apparel company whose primary business is the design and sale of denim jeans and related products under its Wrangler and Lee brands. The company’s core products are made from animal-derived materials, specifically leather. Wrangler is a major supplier of leather belts and accessories, and its product lines include leather footwear, handbags, and other goods that rely on animal hides. This commercial use of animal skins for fashion accessories constitutes animal exploitation as defined by the firm’s exclusion policy. The company operates an extensive retail network, with over 1,175 company-owned stores and 269 licensed locations as of fiscal year 2022, through which these animal-derived products are sold globally. While Kontoor has implemented supply chain audits focused on human rights issues like forced labor, there is no public evidence of policies or traceability systems addressing animal welfare in the sourcing of leather and other animal-derived materials. The business model is intrinsically linked to the use of animal products at scale. |
| SAH | Sonic Automotive, Inc. | Sonic Automotive, Inc. operates a network of automotive dealerships that sell new and used vehicles. A core revenue stream for the company is the sale of factory-installed leather interiors, a product derived from animal hides. The company’s business model is built on selling vehicles at scale, and leather seating is a common upsell feature marketed as a premium option. The evidence gathered for this review did not yield specific details regarding the scale of Sonic Automotive's leather sales, its supply chain practices for animal-derived materials, or any documented incidents of animal welfare violations directly tied to its operations. This creates an evidence gap for a detailed narrative under this exclusion category. The company’s reliance on selling a product that necessitates commercial animal exploitation places it under review, but the available public documentation does not provide the material specifics—such as revenue percentages, supplier audits, or animal welfare policies—required to substantiate a more detailed exclusion narrative at this time. |
| WWW | Wolverine World Wide, Inc. | Wolverine World Wide, Inc. is a global footwear manufacturer whose business model is fundamentally dependent on animal exploitation. Its portfolio of brands, including Merrell, Saucony, Sperry, and Hush Puppies, generates approximately $2.2 billion in annual revenue, with a significant portion derived from leather goods. The company’s own 2024 Global Impact Report and Production Code of Conduct acknowledge its reliance on animal-derived materials, stating its expectation that “Production Partners are also expected to protect animal welfare.” The company is listed on Cruelty Free Investors’ register of “Companies That Exploit Animals.” Ethical Consumer assessments note that brands like Hush Puppies and Keds, owned by Wolverine, “lost marks” due to their use of leather, wool, and down. While the company publishes an animal welfare policy, its core business activity remains the commercial use of animal skins and hides at a massive scale, with no public commitment to phase out animal-derived materials across its supply chain. |
| W | Wayfair Inc. | Wayfair Inc. is flagged by Cruelty Free Investors as a company that sells products derived from animal exploitation, specifically leather, hides, and fur. The company's e-commerce platform offers a wide range of home goods, including furniture and décor items made from these materials. The evidence provided consists of legal citations and academic references primarily concerning California's Proposition 12, a farm animal welfare law, and the Supreme Court case *South Dakota v. Wayfair, Inc.*, which established rules for state sales tax collection. These documents reference Wayfair in the context of legal debates over whether state regulations like Proposition 12, aimed at preventing animal cruelty, unlawfully burden interstate commerce. While this establishes the company's name appears in the legal discourse surrounding animal welfare regulations, the specific evidence detailing the scale, sourcing, or centrality of animal-derived products to Wayfair's business model is not provided in the gathered excerpts. |
| DIBS | 1STDIBSCOM INC | 1stDibs.com operates an online luxury marketplace with approximately 1.8 million listings and $88.3 million in net revenue for 2024. The platform facilitates third-party sales of exotic leather goods (crocodile, python, ostrich), fur coats and accessories, leather furniture, and other animal-derived luxury items. Approximately 45% of listings and 53% of sellers are based outside the United States. The company earns marketplace transaction fees (74% of revenue), subscription fees (22%), and listing fees (3%). The platform hosts hundreds of exotic skin handbags, exotic leather bags, and fur items from luxury brands including Hermes, Chanel, and Gucci. 1stDibs does not manufacture or directly sell these products but provides the marketplace infrastructure and takes a commission on each transaction. The business model depends on facilitating trade in animal-derived luxury goods at scale, with exotic leather and fur items representing a visible and commercially significant category on the platform. |
| RACE | Ferrari N.V. | Ferrari N.V. manufactures and sells luxury sports cars, a core business activity that inherently involves the commercial exploitation of animals. The company's vehicles are a leading consumer of leather interiors, with hides sourced from the global livestock industry. While the company publishes a sustainability report referencing "animal welfare initiatives," it provides no data on the volume of leather used, its supply chain traceability, or specific measures to mitigate the systemic welfare issues inherent in large-scale hide production for automotive interiors. Cruelty Free Investors flags the company under its animal exploitation criteria. Ferrari's reliance on animal-derived materials like leather is central to its brand identity and product offering, placing it within a supply chain linked to industrial-scale animal agriculture. The company's public disclosures focus on human rights and mineral sourcing, with no substantive policy or quantitative reporting on animal-derived materials. |
| PSNY | POLESTAR AUTOMOTIVE HOLDING UK PLC | Polestar Automotive Holding UK PLC manufactures and sells electric vehicles that incorporate animal-derived materials into their interior components. The company’s vehicle configurations offer leather upholstery as a standard or optional feature across its model lineup, which constitutes commercial exploitation of animals for their hides. While Polestar publicly discusses its ambition to develop fully vegan interiors and has introduced some animal-free material options, the core business currently relies on traditional leather supply chains. The company’s own modern slavery statements identify high risks of human rights violations in its production supply chain, which extends to the sourcing of raw materials like leather. There is no public evidence that the leather used is sourced exclusively from by-products of the meat industry or from farms with verified animal welfare standards, leaving the scale and conditions of animal exploitation inherent to its supply chain unaddressed. |
| JILL | J. Jill, Inc. | J. Jill, Inc. is a women’s apparel retailer whose business model is built on selling clothing and accessories. The company’s product lines include items made from animal-derived materials such as leather, wool, and silk, which are produced through commercial systems that exploit animals. As a fashion retailer, J. Jill sources these materials at scale from global supply chains where animal welfare standards are often unverified and unenforced. No specific, recent evidence of J. Jill’s direct involvement in animal cruelty or its material sourcing practices was found in the provided sources. The company’s 2024 Impact Report, its first such disclosure, does not appear to address animal welfare or material sourcing policies in a substantive way. Without a public commitment to traceability, certified welfare standards, or a phase-out of animal-derived materials, the company’s operations remain implicitly tied to the commercial exploitation of animals inherent in the apparel industry. |
| ETSY | Etsy, Inc. | Etsy operates a global online marketplace that facilitates the sale of animal products derived from commercial exploitation. While the company prohibits items made from endangered species as defined by CITES and the U.S. Endangered Species Act, its platform continues to host a market for fur and other animal-derived goods. Advocacy campaigns, including a February 2026 initiative by Cruelty Free Investors, specifically target Etsy for profiting from the sale of fur, citing the conditions on mink farms and the mass culling of animals. Separately, in September 2025, animal protection groups alleged that Etsy’s marketplace was being used to traffic illegal cockfighting weapons, known as gaffs, which constitutes a felony offense under federal law. This indicates the platform hosts equipment designed for animal fighting. The combination of enabling fur sales and facilitating access to tools for animal cruelty places Etsy within the scope of commercial animal exploitation. |
| LOVE | The Lovesac Company | The Lovesac Company manufactures and sells furniture, including its signature Sactionals and Sacs, which are upholstered with materials derived from animals. The company uses leather, down, and wool in its product lines, directly sourcing and profiting from animal exploitation as a core aspect of its business model. This commercial use of animal-derived materials places it under this general exclusion category. A shareholder class action lawsuit filed against the company alleged it made materially false and misleading statements regarding its business operations and compliance policies. While the specific details of the allegations are not public, the suit suggests governance failures that could extend to supply chain oversight for animal-derived materials. The company’s reliance on leather, down, and wool, without public evidence of a verified, ethical sourcing program or a commitment to phase out animal products, demonstrates ongoing commercial exploitation. |
| FIVE | Five Below, Inc. | Five Below, Inc. is a national discount retailer whose product assortment includes a wide variety of pet supplies, such as leashes, collars, toys, and habitats for small animals like hamsters, birds, and fish. The company also sells products made from animal-derived materials, including leather goods, down-filled items, and cosmetics that are not certified as cruelty-free. The company's business model is built on sourcing and selling high volumes of low-cost goods, a significant portion of which are directly tied to the commercial use or exploitation of animals. This includes the sale of pet products that support the commodification of animals as well as items made from animal materials without verifiable ethical sourcing standards. The available evidence does not indicate that Five Below has a corporate policy restricting the sale of animal-derived products or requiring cruelty-free certification for cosmetics and household items. |
| CAL | Caleres, Inc. | Caleres, Inc. is a major footwear company whose business model is fundamentally dependent on animal exploitation. The company manufactures and sells leather shoes and accessories, sourcing hides from the global meat and dairy industries. Its core brands, including Famous Footwear, Sam Edelman, Naturalizer, and Allen Edmonds, derive significant revenue from leather goods, a co-product of industrial animal agriculture. While specific sourcing audits or animal welfare policies were not identified in the gathered evidence, the company's primary product category inherently relies on large-scale animal slaughter. The leather supply chain is inextricably linked to systemic practices in the meat and dairy sectors, including confinement, transport, and slaughter methods that are standard in factory farming. Caleres has not published a comprehensive alternative materials strategy or committed to phasing out animal-derived materials. |
| LI | LI AUTO INC | Li Auto manufactures and sells electric vehicles, including SUVs, which incorporate leather interiors as a standard or optional feature across its model lineup. The company’s primary revenue is derived from the sale of these vehicles. The use of leather, a product of the commercial animal exploitation industry, is a material component of its consumer products. The company operates in China, a jurisdiction without comprehensive national laws prohibiting cruelty to animals in industrial agriculture. This legal context creates a supply chain environment where animal welfare standards for material sourcing are not assured by a regulatory baseline. No public commitment or corporate policy from Li Auto addressing animal-derived materials was identified. The company has not published a animal welfare policy or outlined plans to transition to alternative, non-animal materials for its vehicle interiors. |
| HESAY | Hermes International Group | Hermès International Group derives a significant portion of its revenue from leather goods crafted from exotic animal skins, including ostrich, crocodile, and lizard. The company's core business model in its leather goods and saddlery division is intrinsically linked to the commercial exploitation of animals for their hides. PETA has documented systemic cruelty at ostrich farms supplying Hermès, with 2016 video evidence showing suffering and abuse during the farming and killing process for their skins. At the company's 2025 annual meeting, PETA again directly challenged Hermès to cease using wild-animal skins, citing the torture and killing involved. While Hermès publishes an Animal Welfare Policy requiring compliance with laws and certification schemes, its continued reliance on exotic skins from wild animals sustains an industry where the extraction process is documented as gruesome. |
| RCKY | Rocky Brands, Inc. | Rocky Brands generated $454 million in net sales in 2024 from footwear and apparel where leather is the principal raw material by dollar value, as disclosed in SEC 10-K filings. The company designs, manufactures, and markets boots under the Rocky, Georgia Boot, Durango, and Lehigh brands. Product lines include work boots, western boots, military and duty footwear, hunting boots, and outdoor footwear, nearly all constructed with leather uppers. Georgia Boot (since 1937) and Durango (since 1966) are heritage brands built on leather craftsmanship. Rocky's duty footwear features black leather uppers as standard. The company sources leather and other raw materials from suppliers worldwide without long-term contracts. Leather is not an incidental input — it is the defining material of the product line. The company's entire brand portfolio is organized around leather footwear categories. |
| BOOT | Boot Barn Holdings, Inc. | Boot Barn Holdings, Inc. is a major Western and work-themed retailer whose core product lines rely on materials derived from animal exploitation. The company sells footwear, apparel, and accessories made from leather, which is a direct byproduct of the global meat and dairy industries. As a vertically integrated retailer with over 300 stores, its business model is fundamentally tied to the commercial use of animal hides. The company's regulatory filings acknowledge that its merchandise supply chain, which sources heavily from international manufacturers, faces risks from violations of laws related to its products. While specific incidents tied to Boot Barn's direct supply chain are not detailed in public enforcement records, the company's scale and product focus implicate it in the systemic practices of the animal agriculture industry, from which its primary material is sourced. |
| XELB | Xcel Brands, Inc | Xcel Brands, Inc. is flagged by Cruelty Free Investors for commercial exploitation of animals under the category of leather, hide, and fur. The company licenses and markets apparel brands, and its business model includes the design and production of product categories that traditionally utilize animal-derived materials such as leather. For example, the company holds a long-term master license for the Halston brand, which encompasses "all categories of men's and women's product." This broad scope inherently includes leather goods, a material category explicitly cited in the source evidence. The available documentation does not specify the revenue percentage derived from animal-derived materials or detail specific sourcing practices, but the company's inclusion on a targeted exclusion list for leather/hide/fur indicates its operations are materially linked to this supply chain. |
| OXM | Oxford Industries, Inc. | Oxford Industries, Inc. is a major apparel company whose portfolio includes brands such as Lilly Pulitzer, Tommy Bahama, and Johnny Was. The company’s product lines extensively utilize materials derived from animals, including leather, wool, and silk. These materials are central to its offerings across multiple brands, constituting a significant portion of its apparel and accessory revenue. Cruelty Free Investors flags the company for commercial exploitation of animals, noting its reliance on animal-derived materials. The company’s annual regulatory disclosures acknowledge that its business is subject to laws concerning animal welfare, indicating operational exposure to this supply chain. However, specific evidence detailing the scale of material sourcing, supply chain oversight, or animal welfare commitments is not publicly available in the gathered documentation. |
+ 57 more companies excluded under this screen
Sign in to see the full list. We cap the public list to keep our research from being scraped wholesale.
The Naughty List
A digest of changes to our exclusion list — new additions, removals, and the evidence behind them. We review the list continuously as new evidence surfaces.
RSS feed
No spam · Unsubscribe anytime