Microsoft Sustainability Scorecard (2026): Grade B (76/100)

Microsoft Sustainability Scorecard (2026)

Reviewed by the eCycling Central editorial team on May 2026

Microsoft (PC + gaming, headquartered in United States) scores 76/100 on the eCycling Central Manufacturer Sustainability Scorecard. Grade: B.

Score breakdown

| Axis | Score | Grade | |---|---|---| | Take-back programme quality | 70/100 | B | | Right to Repair stance | 65/100 | C | | Product repairability (iFixit) | 55/100 | C | | WEEE / EPR compliance | 85/100 | A | | Material disclosure transparency | 85/100 | A | | Renewable energy commitment | 95/100 | A | | Composite | 76/100 | B |

What they do well

• Carbon negative by 2030 commitment
• Surface Laptop Studio 2 repairability improved (iFixit 7/10)
• Genuine Surface parts sold to independent repair shops

Where they fall short

• Initially opposed Minnesota HF 1337 RTR before relenting
• Older Surface devices: glued together, very low repairability

How Microsoft compares

The top-rated manufacturers in our 2026 scorecard are Fairphone (smartphones), Framework (laptops), Miele (appliances), and Bosch/Siemens (appliances). The lowest-rated tend to be sealed-construction wearable / audio brands where repairability is structurally limited.

For full rankings see the Manufacturer Sustainability Scorecard hub.

What this means for you as a consumer

A B grade indicates Microsoft performs in the top quartile of manufacturers we track. The score reflects publicly available information as of May 2026.

When deciding whether to buy, repair, or recycle a Microsoft product:

• Repair first if the product is under 5 years old and the repair cost is under 50% of replacement
• Use the manufacturer take-back programme when replacing — most Microsoft programmes are free in major markets
• Check Right to Repair coverage in your jurisdiction (we maintain a Right to Repair Tracker)

Methodology

We score 50+ major electronics and appliance manufacturers on six axes:

1. Take-back programme quality — existence, accessibility, fees, geographic coverage
2. Right to Repair stance — legislative endorsement vs opposition, parts-pairing practices
3. Product repairability — average iFixit scores across recent (2023+) flagship products
4. WEEE / EPR compliance — registration with national producer-responsibility schemes
5. Material disclosure transparency — published sustainability reports, BOM transparency
6. Renewable energy commitment — RE100 membership, operational vs supply chain commitments

Each axis is scored 0-100, then averaged to a composite. Letter grades: A 85+, B 70-84, C 55-69, D 40-54, F <40.

Disputes: manufacturers can challenge any rating via hello@ecyclingcentral.com. We update this page monthly.

Sources

• iFixit Repairability Scoring Database
• RE100 Member Database (https://www.there100.org)
• Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP) climate scores
• Public Interest Research Group (PIRG) Right to Repair Tracker
• Microsoft published sustainability reports (most recent available)
• EU EAR Producer Register (for European market compliance)
• EPA SmartWay records (for US-relevant brands)
• Court records on RTR opposition (Apple v Oregon SB 1596 et al.)