The world's most in-depth and scientific reviews of tech gear

Home Master HydroPerfection Review

The HydroPerfection is a fantastic product but is prohibitively expensive
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Price:   $530 List | $435 at Amazon
Pros:  Great tasting water, excellent at removing lead and chlorine
Cons:  Very pricey
Manufacturer:   Home Master
By David Wise and Austin Palmer  ⋅  Apr 12, 2018
  • Share this article:
Our Editors independently research, test, and rate the best products. We only make money if you purchase a product through our links, and we never accept free products from manufacturers. Learn more
91
OVERALL
SCORE


RANKED
#4 of 12
  • Lead Removal - 25% 10
  • Chlorine Removal - 25% 10
  • Salt Removal - 25% 8
  • Taste - 15% 9
  • Flow - 10% 7

Our Verdict

While the HomeMaster HydroPerfection delivered an overall exceptional showing in our tests — even tying for the overall runner-up position — this product failed to merit an award. It is simply too expensive, performing essentially identically to under the sink filters that cost less than half and was outperformed by a pitcher filter that is close to $500 less expensive. Aside from its exorbitant price, this filter does a great job at removing both lead and chlorine from the water, making great tasting water. It does a respectable job at extracting minerals and has a solidly high flow rate.


Compare to Similar Products

 
Awards  Editors' Choice Award Editors' Choice Award Editors' Choice Award  
Price $530 List
$435.41 at Amazon
$35 List
$28.73 at Amazon
$38 List
$34.50 at Amazon
$200 List
$155.91 at Amazon
$260 List
$161.45 at Amazon
Star Rating
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Pros Great tasting water, excellent at removing lead and chlorineFantastic at removing impurities, makes great tasting water, inexpensiveGreat contaminant removal, fairly inexpensiveGreat at removing both lead and chlorine, makes great tasting waterPerformed well in our lead removal, chlorine removal, and salt removal tests
Cons Very priceySmaller capacity, takes some time to refill and refilterSlow flow rateMediocre flow rate, priceyLow flow rate, pricey
Bottom Line The HydroPerfection is a fantastic product but is prohibitively expensiveDoing a fantastic job in most of our tests, the ZeroWater combines an amazing performance with an even better priceThe ZeroWater 23-Cup Jug is the best bet for anyone who wants a little more filtered water on hand than the standard pitcher providesThe best filter for permanent installation that we have seen to dateThis relatively expensive under the sink model was outperformed by products that cost much less
Overall Score Sort Icon
100
0
91
100
0
94
100
0
93
100
0
91
100
0
90
Rating Categories Home Master... ZeroWater 10-Cup... ZeroWater 23-Cup Jug iSpring RCC7 APEC Essence ROES-50
Lead Removal (25%)
10
0
10
10
0
10
10
0
10
10
0
10
10
0
10
Chlorine Removal (25%)
10
0
10
10
0
10
10
0
10
10
0
10
10
0
10
Salt Removal (25%)
10
0
8
10
0
10
10
0
10
10
0
9
10
0
9
Taste (15%)
10
0
9
10
0
9
10
0
9
10
0
9
10
0
9
Flow (10%)
10
0
7
10
0
5
10
0
4
10
0
5
10
0
4
Specs Home Master... ZeroWater 10-Cup... ZeroWater 23-Cup Jug iSpring RCC7 APEC Essence ROES-50
Model TMHP 10 Cup Pitcher RCC7 Essence ROES-50
Replacement Schedule Filter Set changed annually
RO changed every 3 - 5 years
18,000 mg of disolved solids; 1-40 gallons 18,000 mg of disolved solids; 1-40 gallons Stage 1 - 3 every 6 months
RO every 2 - 3 years
Post carbon every 12 months
Stage 1, 2, 3 Pre-Filters Every 6 - 12 months
Stage 4 RO Membrane Every 2 - 4 Years
Stage 5 Carbon Post-Filter Every 2 - 4 Years
Replacement Cost Filter Set for $130
RO for $100
2 for $30
4 for $40
8 for $90
12 for $115
16 for $150
2 for $30
4 for $40
8 for $90
12 for $115
16 for $150
2 year supply for $100 Stages 1-3 for $27
RO for $45
Carbon for $10
Pure Water to Waste Water Ratio 1:1 N/A N/A ~1:3 ~ 1:5
Gallons Per Day (GPD) 75 N/A N/A 75 50
NSF/ANSI certified for lead removal N/A Yes Yes Yes No
NSF/ANSI certified for organic contaminants removal N/A No No Yes No

Our Analysis and Test Results

This filter tied with the iSpring RCC7 in terms of overall performance. The Home Master has a slightly higher flow rate, but didn't quite match the performance of the RCC7 when it came to extracting minerals from the water. However, we liked the RCC7 much more, as it costs about half as much as the HydroPerfection by Home Master. Both of these filters are outperformed by the ZeroWater 10-Cup Pitcher, which costs significantly less than both.

The HydroPerfection is an excellent filter  but it is quite pricey.
The HydroPerfection is an excellent filter, but it is quite pricey.

Performance Comparison


To see which water filter is really the best, we bought all of the top models and compared their performance side-by-side. We grouped our tests into five weighted testing metrics, with the results of the HydroPerfection explained below.

The Home Master HydroPerfection does a great job of removing lead but it is exceptionally expensive compared to the other models.
The Home Master HydroPerfection does a great job of removing lead,but it is exceptionally expensive compared to the other models.

Lead Removal


For this metric, responsible for 25% of the final score, we spiked the isolated water supply for our testing apparatus with lead until it reached a concentration much higher than the acceptable level for drinking water as stated by the EPA. We ran this tainted water through each filter, then sent the sample off to an independent lab for water quality testing. We also sent a sample of our supply water, to determine just how high the concentration of lead was.

The lab results showed that the concentration of the supply water hit about 2.3 ppm — levels over 150 times what the EPA considered to be acceptable. The Home Master HydroPerfection did a great job at removing all of this lead, dropping it down to about 0.002 ppm. This translates to removing 99.91% of the lead, leaving the filtered water with lead concentration levels about 7.5 times less than what is considered to be acceptable. This phenomenal performance earned the Home Master a 10 out of 10 in this metric, putting it at the top of the group.

This filter matched the performance of the top models when it came to removing chlorine.
This filter matched the performance of the top models when it came to removing chlorine.

Chlorine Removal


For our Chlorine Removal metric, also responsible for a quarter of the overall score, we used chlorine bleach as our experimental contaminant, again adding it to the separate supply for our water filter testing assembly. We did two different trials for this metric, one with very high levels of chlorine and one with more moderate. We used indicator strips to measure the chlorine content, finding it to be around 1370 ppm in the first test and between 20-50 ppm for the latter. For reference, pools usually have 1-4 ppm.

The Home Master did an excellent job in both of these tests, removing essentially all of the chlorine. In both cases, our tests strips failed to register the presence of any chlorine, earning this filter top marks — a 10 out of 10.

The performance fell a little bit when it came to filtering out minerals.
The performance fell a little bit when it came to filtering out minerals.

Salt Removal


Moving on to dissolved salts, we repeated a similar procedure to the previous metrics, this time substituting table salt as our test contaminant. This metric is also accountable for 25% of the total score. We mixed salt into our experimental water supply until our Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) meter registered about 445 ppm. We then ran this water through each filter and measured the concentration of salt in the results.

The Home Master did well, but failed to claim the top spot, earning an 8 out of 10 for its performance. This filter pulled about 89% of the salt from the water, leaving about 49 ppm behind.

Taste


For our taste test, worth 15% of the overall score, we scored each filter on its performance in two different tests. For the first, we ran purified water through each filter, then had a panel taste the filtered water, to see if there were any undesirable or unsavory flavors added to the water by the filter. The Home Master scored very well, with our panel noting that the filtered water was identical to the purified water.

For the second test, we made a batch of exceptionally nasty tasting water using chlorine bleach and salt, then ran this through each of the products in our test. The Home Master again did very well, with our panel all agreeing that the water produced was quite tasty and definitely drinkable. This performance earned this filter a 9 out of 10 in our taste test.

Flow


For the final metric, responsible for the residual 10% of the overall score, we evaluated and scored the flow rate for each filter. We did this by conducting a single time trial of how long it took each water filter to fill up a quart container. The Home Master HydroPerfection finished out with a strong showing, earning a 7 out of 10 for its performance. This filter took about 21 seconds to fill the container — a little more than twice as long as the unimpeded faucet.

Value


This product is a terrible value, being the most expensive of the test and performing similar or worse to products that cost half as much.

Conclusion


The combination of an exceptionally high list price and an undistinguished performance make it hard to recommend this product. There are other options that are a much better value, whether you are looking at other under the sink filters or filter pitchers.


David Wise and Austin Palmer