Plant-A Insights Group and GIST IMPACT have partnered with Newsweek for the third consecutive year to determine America’s Greenest Companies 2026. “America’s Greenest Companies 2026” recognizes the top 450 companies for their advancements in managing their sustainability footprint.
The methodology for America’s Greenest Companies 2026 is based on a three-part evaluation.
America’s Greenest Companies 2026 recognizes the top 450 U.S. companies for their environmental sustainability. The list is derived from research and analysis of public data from organizations in the United States, both public and private, that meet the minimum standards set by the European Union. These EU standards are widely regarded as the most advanced globally. Due to the inconsistencies in corporate reporting periods for ESG reports, only companies publishing recent sustainability data between January 1, 2024 and July 31, 2025 were considered in the study. This timeframe accounts for the time lag between an ESG report’s coverage year and its actual publication date, ensuring that only the most up-to-date disclosed data is included in the study.
The companies were evaluated and scored on more than 25 parameters based on the following 4 categories:
- Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions
- Water Usage
- Waste Generation
- Sustainability Data Disclosure and Commitments
Media Monitoring / validation. The Critical Mention Media Monitoring Platform from Onclusive was utilized to screen press coverage of all companies that were part of the study based on legal disputes that are relevant to the project. Newsweek and Plant-A reserve the right to remove companies from the ranking.
Validation: All winners scores/ sub-scores, and company details have been verified by the Plant-A research team and Newsweek editorial/ rankings team.
Request the detailed methodology document.
DISCLAIMER
- Data Accuracy and Reliability: Rankings are derived from data reported by companies in their disclosure statements, reports and websites. Although efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, discrepancies or incomplete data due to partial disclosures might impact results. Some metrics rely on voluntary reporting, leading to variations in data availability and comparability.
- Scope and Boundary of Assessment: The rankings focus on operational emissions and do not encompass upstream or downstream emissions. Product and service-related impacts on stakeholders are not considered. This is due to value chain disclosure limitations and the need for consistent assessment.
- Data Availability: Rankings are influenced by data availability and quality. Companies with comprehensive disclosures might have an advantage.
- Industry-Specific Factors: Industries possess distinct characteristics and emissions profiles that can influence rankings. While the methodology aims to be comprehensive, industry nuances might not be fully captured. Comparing companies from vastly different sectors might not yield meaningful results. This study uses the GIST Impact industry classification system for categorizing companies and evaluating deviation from industry benchmark.
- Data Lag: Rankings might be affected by data lag, potentially impacting comparisons with other companies' latest information and shifting the baseline for comparison of emission reductions.
- Company-Specific Factors: Unique company situations, such as acquisitions or strategic changes, might not be fully accounted for in the methodology.
- Scope of Metrics: The methodology concentrates on environmental metrics like GHG emissions, water usage, and waste generation, potentially overlooking other significant sustainability factors. This is driven by data availability and the need for consistency.
- Qualitative Impact: Certain impactful sustainability efforts, such as cultural shifts or stakeholder engagement, might not be quantified in the methodology.
- Comparison with Peers: Rankings are relative within the analyzed dataset. Changes in dataset composition can influence a company's rank, irrespective of consistent performance.
- Exclusion Criteria Interpretation: Exclusion criteria involve subjectivity, as activities or revenues could be interpreted differently among companies and industries.
- Weight Allocation: Indicator weight choice involves informed decision-making, but subjectivity might be present. Different weightings could lead to varied rankings.
- Contextual Considerations: Rankings do not account for contextual factors like geographical locations, regulations, or business strategy. They also do not consider accidental events or controversies. Rankings do not account for regional or local variations in environmental regulations, resources, or challenges faced by different companies.
- Emphasis on Latest Data: Rankings rely more on recent data to highlight the present scenario. Long-term efforts might not be fully captured, but emissions reductions from sustainability efforts are recognized.
- Complexities in Scoring: The final score and ranking might not fully encompass all aspects of a company's environmental efforts. Interpretation of data, weightings, and metrics can introduce subjective elements, and different stakeholders might assess the same data differently.
- Multiple Factors at Play: Rankings are influenced by various factors; lower-ranked companies might still have noteworthy sustainability initiatives.
- Investment and Progress: Rankings do not reflect a company's investments in sustainability, especially if results are yet to materialize.
- External Influences: External factors like global events, regulations, or economic shifts could impact rankings.
- Relative Nature: Rankings provide relative assessments within a specific dataset, not indicative of absolute sustainability excellence.
- Short-Term vs. Long-Term: Rankings might prioritize short-term achievements over long-term changes, both valuable but differing in timeline.
- Corporate Strategy: Rankings might not fully portray how a company's strategy impacts its commitment to environmental sustainability.
Rankings Placement
Placement in the Rankings (defined below) is a positive recognition based on research of publicly available data sources the time. Newsweek, Plant-A Insights Group LLC ("Plant-A"), and GIST Impact make no claim or warranty, either express or implied, with respect to the accuracy, completeness, or reliability of the information or data related to the companies examined. Nor do they warrant the fitness of this information for a particular purpose or guarantee that it is error-free. It is important to note that the absence of any particular company from this ranking does not constitute a dispute regarding the quality of those companies.
The underlying research is based on data provided by GIST Impact as available through July 31, 2025, at the close of its data collection period. Data published after this date may not be included in the analysis.
Intellectual Property Rights
All content within the rankings ("Rankings") is the exclusive property of Plant-A Insights Group LLC (“Plant-A”). This work, including all data, analyses, and derived rankings, is copyrighted under United States and international copyright laws. Unauthorized use, including but not limited to the publication, reproduction, modification, distribution, transmission, or display of any material without the prior written consent of Plant-A, is strictly prohibited.
Nature of the Rankings
The Rankings are prepared by Plant-A and reflect an editorial content piece, based on both primary and secondary market research. This includes publicly available data and specific data provided directly to Plant-A. These Rankings are published in conjunction with Newsweek and should be viewed as an editorial work, not as definitive financial or business guidance.
Data Accuracy and Periodicity
The Rankings are generated from data sources deemed reliable and are formed based on a methodological analysis of such data spanning the last 24 months. They are inherently a reflection of historical data and may not include subsequent developments, unforeseen events, or additional data not covered during the research period.
No Endorsement or Quality Assurance
Plant-A, Newsweek and GIST do not endorse or validate the business practices or the standing of the ranked companies. The inclusion or exclusion of any company in the Rankings should not be used as a basis for investment, business, or other decisions. All decisions based on any information presented in the Rankings should be made in conjunction with other available information and independent advice.
Disclaimer of Liability
Plant-A, Newsweek and GIST, and their respective officers, directors, employees, and agents (collectively, the "Plant-A Parties") disclaim all liability and responsibility for any errors or omissions in the Rankings or for any actions taken based on the contents of this publication. Plant-A, Newsweek and GIST do not guarantee the completeness or accuracy of the information contained in the Rankings.
By accessing, using, or relying upon the Rankings, you waive all claims and have no recourse against Plant-A Parties for any alleged or actual infringements of any rights of any party, including privacy rights, proprietary rights, intellectual property rights, rights of publicity, rights of credit for material or ideas, or any other rights, including the right to approval of uses such as copy that may be deemed to be distorted, derogatory, or offensive.
This disclaimer is intended to be as broad and inclusive as permitted under the law. If any portion hereof is held invalid or unenforceable, the remainder of the disclaimer shall nonetheless remain in full force and effect. This disclaimer constitutes the entire agreement between you and Plant-A regarding the use of the Rankings.
Copyright © 2026 Plant-A Insights Group LLC. All rights reserved
