77/100
Strong across the board — well-made, safe to wear, and low planet cost.
↳ Daily wear, no caveats.
Why this material grade?
This product scored 77/100 on the material-quality rubric (durability, comfort, breathability, warmth, moisture-wicking, care-ease), based on its composition of 100% Hemp. Sustainability is scored separately as the Eco Rating.
B (70-84): Good material composition — above average across most axes.
Good quality, eco-friendly
Solid fabric with strong environmental credentials. Hemp (100%) is doing the heavy lifting. This is a smart buy.
Premium fabric, premium price
$108Better-than-typical fabric, but priced above the category median.
Fabric value only — compares material quality to price vs other shorts. Construction, fit, and brand aren't measured.
Breakdown
Composition
100% Hemp
All-natural fiber
Added Jun 4, 2026 · Data last updated Jun 4, 2026
Sustainability is scored separately — see the Eco Rating below.
Hemp requires 50% less water than cotton and needs no pesticides. It's one of the most sustainable fibers on the planet.
Network
Cost per wear
rough estimateReasonable cost-per-wear
How we got there
Base for Shorts: 120 expected wears.
× 1.30 for Hemp (high-durability fiber, durability 90).
= 156 expected wears. $108 ÷ 156 ≈ 69¢/wear.
Missing GSM — this is a category-level estimate, not garment-specific. Expect ±30% variance.
Real life is messier than a formula: how often you wash, how you wash, whether you wear it inside-out, dry on low — all of it shifts the number. This is the ceiling under reasonable care.
Care Guide
Decode symbols →Wash
cold (30°C)
Bleach
Oxygen only
Dry
line dry
Iron
high
Dry Clean
avoid
Best For
Excellent sustainability (95) and biodegradable — great eco choice
Good breathability (80) and moisture wicking (55) for light activity
Good comfort (60) and care ease (55) for casual wear
Good durability (90) and comfort (60) for office wear
Good durability (90) and breathability (80) for outdoor activities
Better Alternatives
Higher-rated shorts products — each card shows how much better this alt scores vs your current product.
Astrid Wild
Ingrid Merino Short Sleeve Burgundy
100% Merino Wool
Astrid Wild
Ingrid Merino Short Sleeve Black
100% Merino Wool
Astrid Wild
Ingrid Merino Short Sleeve Brown
100% Merino Wool
Astrid Wild
Aleksandra Merino Short Sleeve Black
100% Merino Wool
Tradeoffs
Health Impact
Microplastic shedding · skin-contact synthetic load · likely chemical treatments
Low health impact — predominantly natural fibers with no major treatment flags.
Minimal
0% synthetic
No flags
What this score doesn't measure
- ×Fiber grade. Staple length, micronaire, strength. "100% cotton" could be short-staple upland or long-staple Pima — same label, very different fabric.
- ×Yarn processing. Singles count, ply (single vs two-ply), spinning method (open-end vs ring-spun vs compact), mercerization. Invisible from any label.
- ×Knit / weave structure. Single jersey vs interlock, knit tightness. A loose knit pills; a tight knit lasts.
- ×Fabric weight (GSM). One construction signal among several — and high GSM can come from loose cheap yarn just as easily as from fine tight yarn. We have it for blank manufacturers, rarely for retail.
- ×Pre-shrink processing. Sanforized cotton shrinks ~1%; non-sanforized can shrink up to 10%. Not visible from the composition tag.
- ×Construction quality. Stitch density (SPI), seam types, collar geometry, manufacturing tolerances (AQL). These often matter more than the fiber itself.
- ×Specific chemical loads. Health Impact flags "likely PFAS / possible formaldehyde" from composition × category — we don't lab-test individual SKUs.
We rate the fabric, not the garment. Composition is the floor of what you're guaranteed to be getting — most shoppers don't have that.
Action