We buy all the products we test — no freebies from companies. If you purchase through our links, we may earn a commission, which helps support our testing.
If you're reading this, you probably have some concerns about the quality of your tap water. Or maybe you just don't know what exactly is in your water, and want some peace of mind. Clean water is a no-brainer for taking care of your health and hydration, and a home water filter is the best way to get there.
The Pur Plus 11-Cup Pitcher is the best filter for most people — it's compact, convenient, and its filtration rivals that of premium reverse osmosis (RO) models.
Our favorite under-sink filtration system is the APEC ROES-50 Essence Series. It received nearly perfect scores in contaminant removal and also offers compelling long-term annual costs.
We bought 13 top water filters in a range of different styles, from pitchers to under-sink models, and tested their ability to reduce contaminants and produce clean-tasting water. We ran both tap water and a sample with a high concentration of contaminants through each filter and sent the output to an independent water quality lab to measure the effectiveness of each filter.
The water quality lab tests examined filter performance for critically important contaminants such as: PFAS (forever chemicals), Heavy Metals (like lead), and other critical contaminants. We also evaluated annual operating costs, ease of installation, and daily ease of use.
Quick Picks
Here's a quick list of our favorite Water Filter recommendations.
The PUR PLUS 11-Cup Pitcher is our favorite filter for most people — it's convenient, affordable, and delivers seriously clean water. This simple pitcher not only eliminated that yucky chlorinated taste from our tap but also protected us from common harmful contaminants like lead, arsenic, PFAS “forever chemicals,” and microplastics. It's also backed by an impressive list of certifications. As one tester put it, “My water tastes so much better, and I feel so much safer drinking it.” We also like that it's compact and doesn't require any complicated installation, perfect for renters or city-dwellers with limited space. Whether you're worried about old pipes, industrial runoff, water treatment chemicals, or simply want better-tasting water, the PUR Pitcher is an easy upgrade, though it won't catch everything.
SPECIFICATIONS
Filter Type
Pitcher
Installation Difficulty
Low
Estimated cost per year (40 gal/month)
$108
Estimated cost per year (160 gal/month)
$432
Wastewater Generated
No
If you're impatient or have several mouths to feed, though, the PUR Pitcher may not be the best fit. It took about 30 minutes to filter a gallon of water, which is slower than most filters. One reviewer noted, “It isn't the fastest pitcher around, but I was happy to trade a little patience for cleaner water.” Filter replacements can also get expensive if your household slams through water, making the PUR PLUS Faucet or APEC RO System more economical. Still, for singles, couples, and most households with average water use, the PUR Pitcher delivers outstanding filtration in a simple, fridge-friendly package.
If you can make permanent changes to your plumbing, the APEC ROES-50 Essence Series is the crème de la crème of water filtration. This reverse osmosis (RO) system installs under your sink and provides filtered water on demand. It reduces PFAS, microplastics, and heavy metals like lead and arsenic to undetectable levels while also picking up a whole slew of contaminants like nitrates and fluoride typically left behind by standard pitchers. Our tester said, “What I love about the APEC is that it doesn't care how dirty your water is, it just stops everything.” While the upfront cost is high, it's suprisingly economical for larger households in the long run. If you drink from a well or have serious water concerns, the APEC is one of the most reliable and affordable long-term solutions.
SPECIFICATIONS
Filter Type
Under Sink Reverse Osmosis
Installation Difficulty
High
Estimated cost per year (40 gal/month)
$75
Estimated cost per year (160 gal/month)
$75
Wastewater Generated
3:1 ratio wastewater-to-filtered
The downside is that it has a hefty upfront cost, requires a complicated install, and takes up a ton of space, which could be a dealbreaker in small homes. You may also end up having to hire a professional to tap into your plumbing or drill a hole in your countertop, which adds to the cost. One tester added, “I always dread filter change time - it's cramped and awkward under the sink.” If you like the idea of an RO system, but want something that takes up less space, is easier to maintain, and wastes less water, the Waterdrop G3P600 may be worth the extra cost. However, for those wanting premium water quality without the Waterdrop's $500 price tag, the APEC is our top recommendation.
The Amazon Basics 10-Cup Pitcher is a cheap and easy way to get cleaner, better-tasting water on a tight budget. For a small investment of around $20 and with upkeep costs of around $50 a year, one reviewer said, “I think the Amazon Basics is one of the best values out there.” While it's not meant to address serious contamination concerns, it's perfect for renters, apartment dwellers, or small households that simply want better-tasting water, and maybe some moderate health risk reduction along the way. It took up minimal space in our fridge, and its spout cover helped keep debris or odors from entering our clean water. It even tells you when it's time for a new filter and accepts multiple brands, so you can always shop around for the best price.
SPECIFICATIONS
Filter Type
Pitcher
Installation Difficulty
Low
Estimated cost per year (40 gal/month)
$44
Estimated cost per year (160 gal/month)
$176
Wastewater Generated
No
However, if you have Flint, Michigan levels of contamination, the Amazon Pitcher may not be adequate. Our tester said, “I was impressed by its ability to clear lead and PFAS from our samples, but without a certification, it's hard to say if that'll be enough for the worst conditions.” Its compact size can also be a problem for households that use a lot of water. If you want higher-quality filtration without the constant refills, you might consider the budget-friendly PUR PLUS Faucet. But if your goal is better-tasting water — not maximum filtration — the Amazon gets the job done with minimal effort and fees.
The Travel Berkey is the type of water filtration system you buy once and use for a lifetime. Its durable stainless steel body trumps flimsy plastic pitchers. And its years-long filter life can save you hundreds (and maybe even thousands) of dollars in the long run. One reviewer said, “What I love about the Berkey is that the filters can last a full decade, offering huge long-term money savings.” We also like its large 1.5-gallon capacity, which makes it more convenient to use for large families. In terms of contaminant removal, the Berkey removed 100% of lead, PFAS, and chlorine from our test samples, making it a great choice for users looking to improve taste or concerned about aging pipes or municipal water contaminants.
SPECIFICATIONS
Filter Type
Dispenser
Installation Difficulty
Medium
Estimated cost per year (40 gal/month)
$41
Estimated cost per year (160 gal/month)
$41
Wastewater Generated
No
With an MSRP north of $300, the Berkey is quite expensive. Its filters also require frequent cleaning. Our tester noted, “While it feels more cumbersome to clean the filters than replace them, I appreciate the reduced waste.” Our biggest concern, however, is Berkey's uncertified claims. Despite promising to remove arsenic, uranium, and fluoride, none of these contaminants were removed from our test samples. If those impurities are priorities, we suggest using Berkey's PF-2 filter, or considering the APEC ROES-50 Essence Series, which is the most affordable reverse osmosis system in our lineup. Still, for households focused on the fundamentals, the Berkey delivers long-lasting performance.
The Travel Berkey is a big investment at first, but it is a great value in the long term. Credit: Matt Lighthart
The Travel Berkey has a larger storage capacity than most gravity-fed filters. Credit: Matt Lighthart
Wingnuts screw on the upper tank of the Travel Berkey to hold the dual filters in place. While simple to unscrew, it takes longer than placing a drop-in style filter commonly used in pitchers. Credit: Matt Lighthart
It's a tough sell to fit the Travel Berkey in your fridge. You'd lose alot of shelf space. Credit: Matt Lighthart
This model did a fantastic job of removing chlorine from drinking water. Credit: Abriah Wofford
Most Convenient Undersink Filter That Doesn't Sacrifice Performance
The Waterdrop G3P600 is a sleek RO system that removes just as many health-related contaminants as the top-scoring APEC ROES-50, but is far more convenient to use. In addition to near-flawless filtration and superb taste, it offers several modern amenities that make it easy for homeowners to live with. Its tankless design provides unlimited clean water for high-demand households, saves valuable under-sink space, and generates far less wastewater than traditional RO systems, making it much more eco-friendly. We also love its simple, twist-and-pull filter changes and built-in reminders that make routine maintenance quick and carefree. Our tester said, “I almost jumped for joy! Who knew RO filter changes could be this easy?”
SPECIFICATIONS
Filter Type
Under Sink Reverse Osmosis
Installation Difficulty
Medium/High
Estimated cost per year (40 gal/month)
$145
Estimated cost per year (160 gal/month)
$145
Wastewater Generated
1:2 ratio wastewater-to-filtered
That said, this level of convenience doesn't come cheap. The initial price tag is steep, and while we think some confident DIYers can handle the install, others may need to hire a professional to drill into their plumbing or countertop, which adds to the overall cost. Still, as one reviewer put it, “I'd rather spend a little extra for water I trust and a system I actually enjoy using.” If you're looking for something cheaper and simpler that still provides relatively clean water on-demand, check out the PUR PLUS Vertical Faucet. But for users who want broad contaminant removal without the headache, the Waterdrop G3P600 is tough to beat.
The PUR PLUS Vertical Faucet hits a sweet spot between performance, convenience, and price. It attaches to your faucet and delivers clean water on demand — no pitcher refills or complicated installs needed. It's certified to trap an outstanding 60+ contaminants, including lead, PFAS, microplastics, chlorine, and certain weed killers, medications, and disinfecting byproducts. That's serious filtration for a nifty little gadget on your sink. We also like that it's one of the cheapest filtration systems to maintain, costing less than $100 a year. If you're a renter or homeowner who can't commit to a full under-sink system, we think the PUR Faucet is a fantastic choice to help ease concerns about aging pipes, water treatment chemicals, and a growing list of “emerging contaminants.”
SPECIFICATIONS
Filter Type
Faucet
Installation Difficulty
Medium
Estimated cost per year (40 gal/month)
$59
Estimated cost per year (160 gal/month)
$90
Wastewater Generated
No
The biggest downside is that it won't fit all sinks. The PUR PLUS only works with standard faucets that have a removable aerator, so pull-out and sprayer-style faucets are out of luck. The filter is also a little bulky and can crowd smaller sinks, though as one tester noted, “I love how easy it is to snap off when I need to wash the dishes or switch back to regular tap when I need a faster flow.” If your faucet isn't compatible, consider the large-capacity Brita Ultramax Dispenser with Elite Filter, which cuts down on the refills. If it does fit, though, it's one of the simplest and most affordable ways to get cleaner water on demand.
If you've had your water tested and know it's free of heavy metals, the Waterdrop WD-10UA Under Sink is a wonderfully affordable and convenient way to reduce your exposure to PFAS and microplastics, two growing concerns in our tap. In our tests, it removed 93% of PFAS and nearly 100% of microplastics, making it a top performer in both categories. It also helps improve taste. Contaminant removal aside, our tester said, “The Waterdrop Under Sink is one of the easiest filters I've used, and one of the cheapest to maintain.” Unlike a pitcher that needs to be refilled daily, the Waterdrop provides fast-flowing, clean water straight from your faucet. It takes up little space under the sink, and basically disappears into your daily life, adding a basic element of protection for those who don't have lead concerns.
SPECIFICATIONS
Filter Type
Under Sink
Installation Difficulty
Medium
Estimated cost per year (40 gal/month)
$33
Estimated cost per year (160 gal/month)
$33
Wastewater Generated
No
The Waterdrop 10UA is one of the most convenient filters to use day to day, but some minor installation is required to get started. Our tester said, “I found the process relatively quick and simple compared to other undersink models, so long as you have the correct-sized adapters to fit your plumbing.” It's also important to note that this system doesn't filter out other contaminants like metals, nitrates, or fluoride that may run dangerously high in your local tap. Still, if you live in a newer home and want something simple to improve taste and remove PFAS and microplastics, the Waterdrop is one of the best long-term values.
The Waterdrop WD-10UA fits anywhere, is easy to set up, and provides filtered water on demand any time you turn on the faucet.
Product Comparison Table
How We Tested
We purchased each water filter we tested ourselves, ensuring no influence from manufacturers through free or sample models. We've tested dozens of water filtration systems since 2019, and we've honed our methods year after year to deliver the most accurate results.
A few of the gravity filters we tested. Credit: Matt Lighthart
Water Quality Lab Testing
The most important task of a water filter is to effectively remove harmful contaminants and impurities, such as heavy metals (like lead and arsenic), forever chemicals (PFAS), microplastics, and other chemicals (like fluoride and nitrates).
We focused our testing on contaminants that are routinely categorized as the most hazardous and the most commonly found in tap water, and are therefore the biggest risk factor for most people. However, your actual likelihood of exposure to these contaminants varies depending on where you live and whether you draw from a city water source or from a well. You can search by zipcode to find out what's in your water according to the Environmental Working Group.
To test this, we bought, assembled, and installed each filter at our testing facility, and ran two types of water samples through each filter: a highly contaminated “super” sample with elevated levels of contaminants, and a standard tap water sample to mimic typical household conditions. This dual-sample approach allowed us to see both worst-case performance and everyday effectiveness. We commissioned independent water-quality testing from Tap Score to measure the concentration of each contaminant before and after filtration to determine how effectively each system reduced or eliminated these substances.
We tested filtered water for common contaminants using an independent lab, conducted taste tests, and measured for total dissolved solids. Credit: Matt Lighthart
While water quality is easily the most important factor when purchasing a filter, daily upkeep and cost are worth considering as well. We checked how undersink models affected the flow rate of your kitchen faucet, measured pitchers to see if they would actually fit in the fridge, and calculated the cost of replacement filters over the course of a year. To learn more about our procedures, check out our How We Test article.
Our water filter rating scores are divided into six different metrics:
Lead & Metals Removal (25% of overall score weighting)
Forever Chemicals (PFAS) Removal (20% of overall score weighting)
Microplastics Removal (15% weighting)
Fluoride & Nitrates Removal (15% weighting)
Taste & Chlorine (15% weighting)
Daily Use & Upkeep Cost (10% weighting)
Using the models side by side helped us tease out the minute differences between models. Credit: Matt Lighthart
We went through the full installation process for each of the undersink filter systems. Credit: Matt Lighthart
We did blind taste tests with our team of water connoisseurs. Credit: Matt Lighthart
Why Trust GearLab
Our testing team includes professionals in science research and engineering. Graham Faulknor has a degree in mechanical engineering with extensive experience in testing and measurement. He contributed significantly to the development of our water filter testing plan and analysis of our findings. Austin Palmer is a Senior Review Analyst for GearLab, and has been testing tech and home products on our in-house team for over 10 years. He brings a keen eye for detail and precision to this review. Lissette Velasquez studied chemistry in college and has worked as a research scientist for over a decade. She helps transform our data-heavy results into plain-spoken language, making it easy for readers to make informed decisions.
Pair this article with our buying advice article to make the best decision for your needs. Credit: Abriah Wofford
A small subset of our blind taste test. Credit: Graham Faulknor
We built a custom test counter to conduct true side-by-side tests. Credit: Graham Faulknor
Analysis and Test Results
In the following section, we will take you through each of the key tests we performed, and the results for each water filter, to help you determine the best water filter for your needs.
Worse Value
Better Value
What's the Best Value?
When it comes to getting the best value in a water filter, there can be a big difference between upfront costs and ongoing costs when you factor in the price and frequency of replacement filters. We took this into account when making recommendations for the products that will stretch your dollar the furthest.
For smaller 1-2-person households, or people who rent their home (and can't DIY the kitchen sink), pitcher filters are the natural option, and the Amazon Basics pitcher provides the best value here. It has the lowest sticker price of any filter we tested, and the ongoing cost of replacing filters is lower as well, helped by the fact that it accepts multiple filter brands, allowing you to shop around and see where you can find the best bargain. It works best if lead and PFAS are your main contaminant concerns.
The affordable drop in filters are what help the long term cost of the Amazon Basics stay low. Credit: Matt Lighthart
For households larger than 4 people that use more drinking water per day, the story changes. In this case, undersink filter systems give you the better bang for the buck in terms of cost per gallon filtered at higher usage rates. The APEC ROES-50 Essence Series is excellent at removing pretty much all contaminants from your tap water, and it also has one of the most affordable annual costs for households that use more than 160 gal/month (this is a generous estimate for a family of 4 using the water for cooking and drinking purposes). Just be prepared to get out your toolbox to install this undersink unit.
The APEC ROES-50 keeps costs low by forgoing some modern conveniences that other RO systems have. Credit: Matt Lighthart
We also have to give a shoutout to the Travel Berkey. Though expensive up front, the Travel Berkey offers great long-term value, as the filters last up to 6000 gallons (or 10 years) with a little maintenance. Plus, this no-install model is renter-friendly.
The Travel Berkey has long-lasting filters that make it more affordable over years of use. Credit: Abriah Wofford
Lead & Metals
This metric covers the removal of metals that are commonly found in tap water. These include: lead, arsenic, uranium, and lithium. By now, most people know that lead in your water is bad news, but what about the others?
Heavy metals are naturally occurring substances; what makes them “heavy” is their high density. Not all metals are bad for you; in fact, some, like iron and zinc, are healthy in small amounts. Others can be toxic even at low levels. We prioritized testing for four metals that 1) have the most adverse health effects, and 2) most commonly occur at elevated levels in drinking water.
All of these metals are naturally present in the environment and can enter groundwater sources through erosion, making it especially important to have your water tested if you have a private well. Lead gets into your drinking water primarily through old plumbing. Arsenic, uranium, and lithium can all enter water sources via mining or agricultural runoff, and improper disposal of industrial waste. All of these metals are also naturally present in the environment and can enter groundwater sources through erosion.
In addition to its permanent neurological impacts on kids, lead can lead to reproductive issues and has negative cardiovascular effects on adults. Arsenic may cause skin cancer and cause developmental issues in children. Uranium can cause kidney damage and cancer, and too much lithium may lead to thyroid and kidney issues. No one wants these metals in their drinking water, but you should be especially concerned if you draw water from a private well, or live near an industrial site, a mine, or an area with heavy agriculture.
% Removal of Lead & Other Metals
Product
Lead
Arsenic
Uranium
Lithium
APEC Essence ROES-50
100
100
100
100
iSpring RCC7AK RO
100
100
100
100
Waterdrop G3P600 RO
100
100
100
100
Culligan Zerowater Pitcher
100
100
98
80
Pur Plus Pitcher
100
100
100
28
Amazon Basics
97
0
94
5
Brita Large Pitcher
94
5
95
0
Brita Metro
94
0
96
0
Travel Berkey
100
10
36
0
Pur Plus Faucet Mount
100
6
12
0
Brita Faucet Mount Elite
100
0
7
0
Brita UltraMax Elite
99
0
5
0
Waterdrop 10UA Under Sink
0
12
31
0
The reverse osmosis filters — the APEC ROES-50 Essence Series, iSpring RCC7AK, and Waterdrop G3P600 RO — are the only ones that succeeded at reducing all of the heavy metals we tested for. However, lead is the primary concern for most households, and many filters were able to reduce lead to undetectable levels. These include the Culligan with Zerowater and the PUR PLUS pitchers, which both earned near perfect marks with the other metals as well.
Most of the other filters removed most of the lead from our sample water, even if they struggled with arsenic, uranium, and lithium. One notable poor performer in this metric is the Waterdrop WD-10UA Under Sink, which did little to reduce any of the heavy metals tested at the lab. It is important to note that the certifications on this model can be confusing. It is certified to be made without lead, not certified to remove the substance from drinking water.
Using filtered water can help improve the taste of your morning coffee or tea, and softer water is easier on your appliances. Credit: Matt Lighthart
Forever Chemicals (PFAS)
There's a lot of buzz going around about “forever chemicals”, but what exactly are they, and why do they matter so much?
PFAS are a group of man-made chemicals used in many consumer goods because they have spectacular oil, water, and heat-resistant properties. Likely the most notorious use of forever chemicals is in non-stick pans, but their stable and durable nature makes them useful in water repellent or clothing, stain-resistant carpet, and grease-resistant food packaging (like your takeout box). Manufacturers began using PFAS in consumer products in the 1940's, but as awareness of health risks emerged, usage has declined. Regulations to limit levels of PFAS in drinking water were put into place in 2024.
[faq=Where do they come from?]
These can enter water sources via improper disposal of industrial waste. While drinking water is the most common source of exposure, you can also come into contact with these chemicals by wearing clothing with durable water-repellent (DWR) coatings or by eating food from disposable takeout containers.
[faq=How am I affected?]
They earned the nickname “forever chemicals” because they take many years to break down, and can build up in people, animals, and the environment over time. They stick around the environment for decades, and can take years to leave the body if ingested. According to the CDC, long-term exposure to these chemicals may weaken the immune system and increase the risk of certain cancers, among other things.
The Brita Elite Advanced Faucet filter reduced PFAS to undetectable levels in our water samples. Credit: Matt Lighthart
If you take a look at this map, it won't take you long to figure out that PFAS are pretty much everywhere. Levels vary from site to site, but with a mindset of “better safe than sorry”, why not use a filter that removes as much of these chemicals as possible?
% PFAS Removal
Product
Total Reduction
PFNA Reduction
PFBA Reduction
APEC Essence ROES-50
100
100
100
Brita Faucet Mount Elite
100
100
100
Pur Plus Faucet Mount
100
100
100
Travel Berkey
100
100
100
Waterdrop G3P600 RO
100
100
100
Pur Plus Pitcher
97
96
100
Waterdrop 10UA Under Sink
93
92
100
iSpring RCC7AK RO
91
90
100
Brita UltraMax Elite
91
89
100
Amazon Basics
87
85
100
Culligan Zerowater Pitcher 10-Cup
87
85
100
Brita Large Pitcher (10 cup)
73
69
100
Brita Metro
54
51
72
We tested for two subtypes of these forever chemicals, PFNA and PFBA, and combined the results to form the overall scores.
The filters that were able to reduce PFAS to undetectable levels were the APEC ROES-50 Essence Series, the Brita Elite Advanced Faucet, PUR PLUS Vertical Faucet, the Travel Berkey, and the Waterdrop G3P600 Reverse Osmosis System. Most of these are undersink reverse osmosis, or faucet-mounted models, with the exception of the Travel Berkey, which is a countertop dispenser. If you live in an area that has higher levels of PFAS in the water, we recommend any of these models.
Reverse osmosis systems like the Waterdrop G3P600 do a fantastic job of removing PFAS from drinking water. Credit: Matt Lighthart
The best-performing pitcher in terms of PFAS removal is the PUR PLUS, which showed a 97% reduction overall. If you aren't able to install an undersink filter and don't have enough counterspace for the Berkey, this is the filter we recommend.
Every filter we tested reduced PFAS by at least 50%. However, the worst-performing filters in this metric were the Brita Metro, which only reduced levels by 54%, and the Brita Large 10-Cup Pitcher, which did slightly better with a 73% reduction in PFAS levels. If preventing “forever chemicals” from entering is your top priority, these filters will help somewhat, but there are better options out there.
Though simple, the Waterdrop WD-10UA did a surprisingly good job at removing both forever chemicals and microplastics from our test samples.
Microplastics
Plastic is used for a multitude of things in our daily lives. As it breaks down, tiny particles can enter natural water systems and eventually end up in your drinking glass.
The most essential definition of microplastics is simply plastic particles that are smaller than 5 millimeters in length. However, the microplastics that make it into your drinking water are generally much smaller, harder to detect, and more difficult to filter out.
Plastic is ubiquitous in our environment today, and as plastic waste degrades, these particles enter water sources through surface runoff (like rain) and wastewater discharge from treatment plants. Much of this exposure is unavoidable. However, one notable source that you can avoid is bottled water; microplastics can leach into the water through the packaging itself.
There is not enough research yet to say for sure what the possible health concerns of ingesting microplastics are, but some research suggests that microplastics in the body can be linked to inflammation, changes in the gut biome, and disrupted hormone metabolism.
A look at the faucet attachment point of the Brita Elite. This model removed most of the microplastics we added to our water samples. Credit: Matt Lighthart
Because microplastics are found in a range of sizes, we ranked filters based on the smallest particle size they are able to catch, and what percentage of that particle they allow to pass through.
Microplastic Removal By Particle Size
15.0+ Microns
15.0 - 5.0 Microns
5.0 - 2.5 Microns
Overall Rating
Pur PlusFaucet Mount
1
2
3
4
5
Pur Plus Pitcher
1
2
3
4
5
Brita Faucet Mount Elite
1
2
3
4
5
Waterdrop 10UA Under Sink
1
2
3
4
5
Brita UltraMax Elite
1
2
3
4
5
Brita Large Pitcher
✖
1
2
3
4
5
Culligan Zerowater Pitcher
✖
✖
1
2
3
4
5
Amazon Basics
✖
✖
1
2
3
4
5
Travel Berkey
✖
✖
1
2
3
4
5
Brita Metro
✖
✖
✖
1
2
3
4
5
A surprising winner is the Waterdrop 10UA Under Sink, which filtered out most particles down to the smallest size tested by the lab, 2.5 microns.
If your water concerns are limited to microplastics and PFAS, the Waterdrop WD-10UA is a space efficient option that will do the job. Credit: Matt Lighthart
Again, RO systems take the lead here, because most models have membranes that filter down to 0.0001 microns, ensuring that virtually no plastic remains in your water after filtering. Other top performers include both the pitcher and faucet-mount models from PUR.
On the low side, the Travel Berkey removed only the largest 15-micron particles in the test sample, and the Brita Metro didn't even catch most of those. In short, we would not recommend either of these filters if removing microplastics is something you're concerned about.
The Culligan with Zerowater pitcher has a hefty (and pricey) drop-in filter that effectively removed nitrates, fluoride, and sulfates from drinking water in our testing. Credit: Matt Lighthart
The filter on the Pur Plus pitcher removed more than 90% of nitrates, one of the more concerning contaminants, from our test sample. Credit: Matt Lighthart
Fluoride & Nitrates
For this metric, water containing fluoride, nitrates, and sulfate levels was passed through each of the filters, and the resulting samples were examined independently by Tap Score. Filters were ranked according to their ability to remove these three contaminants.
Fluoride is a naturally occurring mineral, most widely known for its role in preventing tooth decay, and usually occurs at low levels in most water sources. Nitrates are also naturally occurring nutrients that can be found in groundwater aquifers and rainfall. At low levels, they help support plant growth and are often used in man-made fertilizers. However, at higher levels, nitrates are toxic to humans and the environment. Sulfates are chemical compounds that form naturally in the environment from dissolved minerals such as gypsum or Epsom salts.
Fluoride levels run naturally high in the well water of some arid regions. However, most of us are familiar with it because small amounts are intentionally added by many public water supplies to prevent tooth decay, a strategy which is endorsed by the American Dental Association. Besides drinking water, low levels of fluoride can be found in most dental products (toothpaste, floss, mouth rinse), seafood with edible shells or bones, and some teas. Water sources can have elevated nitrate levels due to runoff from agricultural or animal farms, faulty septic systems, and discharge from wastewater treatment plants. Sulfates most often enter drinking water as it passes through the earth and comes into contact with certain minerals, and man-made sulfates are often used in soaps, shampoos, and household cleaners.
The amount of fluoride added to public water is optimized to prevent tooth decay, and when consumed at intended levels, it does its job fantastically. However, the concern is that combined intake from multiple sources may lead to overexposure to the mineral, which may be linked to some cognitive health defects in children.
The potential health effects of nitrates in adults include increased occurrences of certain cancers, such as ovarian, thyroid, colorectal, bladder, and kidney. In infants, exposure to nitrates most often occurs when formula is mixed with tap water. Excessive amounts can cause methemoglobinemia, better known as blue baby syndrome, a disorder in which the blood is not able to carry enough oxygen throughout the body. If you live in an area with a lot of farming/animal activity, or draw water from a private well, it is likely worth getting your water tested, especially if you have kids in your household.
Sulfates are the least concerning of the bunch, but if you drink water with higher levels of sulfates than you are used to, it can have a temporary laxative effect. It is worth noting that your body can naturally adjust to different sulfate levels within a few days. Sulfates can also give water a slightly bitter taste and “rotten egg” smell.
Fluoride, Nitrates, & Sulfate Removal
Product
Fluoride
Nitrate
Sulfate
Culligan Zerowater Pitcher
100
100
100
iSpring RCC7AK RO
99
95
99
APEC Essence ROES-50
98
95
99
Waterdrop G3P600 RO
85
94
99
Pur Plus Pitcher
14
91
64
Waterdrop 10UA Under Sink
0
77
9
Brita Metro
0
61
6
Amazon Basics
0
58
0
Brita Large Pitcher
0
46
0
Pur PlusFaucet Mount
0
32
7
Travel Berkey
0
19
0
Brita Faucet Mount Elite
0
3
0
Brita UltraMax Elite
0
0
0
Standard carbon filters do not remove any of these three contaminants; they can only be removed by dense ion-exchange filters, reverse osmosis, or distillation, which accounts for the disparate removal rates among the tested filters.
Most of the filters we tested struggled to remove these notoriously tricky contaminants. However, all the RO systems did great, removing upwards of 90% of each contaminant in most cases. The Culligan with Zerowater 8-Cup Pitcher is another outstanding performer here, reducing fluoride, nitrates, and sulfates to undetectable levels, earning the top score for the group.
If your main concern is nitrates, the PUR PLUS Pitcher and Waterdrop 10UA Under Sink can help, at least to some degree. They removed a respectable 80-90% of nitrates, which is perfect for municipal water drinkers wanting extra peace of mind. That said, their filters have limited capacity, so for the worst well-water conditions, we'd stick with an RO system.
The Waterdrop G3P600 produced some of the best-tasting water in the group. Credit: Matt Lighthart
Taste & Chlorine
In addition to removing harmful contaminants that may be lurking in your water, many filters can also improve the taste and smell of your drinking water. And the better your water tastes, the more likely you are to keep sipping and stay hydrated throughout the day. Chlorine is a disinfectant added to municipal water sources by water processing plants. It is an efficient way to kill harmful bacteria and viruses, and is a standard part of water treatment. While levels added by treatment plants are considered safe by the CDC, chlorine can affect the taste and smell of your water. All of the filters we tested removed 100% of the chlorine in our water, which is good news, because who likes drinking water that tastes like taking a gulp of your local pool?
Taste is subjective, but there are some common issues that can affect the cosmetic purity of your water. The table below can help you identify the issue and find the type of filter that might help improve the taste or odor of your tap water.
Taste and Odor Concerns
If your tap water tastes or smells like...
The likely culprit is...
Will a basic pitcher fix it?
The Best Filter Type to Buy
A Swimming Pool (Bleach/Chemical)
Chlorine added by your city for disinfection
Yes
Any standard carbon pitcher or faucet filter
Sucking on a Penny (Metallic/Harsh)
Iron or Copper leaching from older household pipes
Yes
Any standard carbon pitcher or faucet filter
Chalk (Thick, Heavy, or Coats your mouth)
Hard Water (High calcium and magnesium levels)
Yes (mostly)
A standard pitcher typically removes 70-90% of hardness, making it taste much crisper. Too much can harm an RO system
Salty, Slick, or Brackish
Sodium (Usually from a home water softening system)
No
Reverse Osmosis (RO) system
Flat, Dead, or Mildly Sour
Water is too pure. You are missing minerals.
Yes
Switch to a basic filter, or an RO with an alkaline remineralizer
Through a combination of taste tests done by our staff and scouring user reviews, we collected opinions on the taste of the filtered water that came out of each of the models in our lineup. The Waterdrop G3P600 Reverse Osmosis System and the APEC ROES-50 Essence Series tied for first place in this metric. Both are RO systems and remove just about everything in your water that could be causing taste/odor issues. The most common complaint about these models is that they remove too much, including the minerals that give water a “crisp” spring-water flavor. In this case, you may want to get a remineralization add-on to improve taste, like that included with the iSpring.
Outside of RO systems, the PUR PLUS 11-Cup Pitcher is the pitcher model that earned the most positive flavor reviews, followed by the Brita Ultramax Dispenser. All the other filters we tested received generally positive taste feedback, though not every user agreed that they made a profound difference.
We love the PUR PLUS Pitcher's small, space-saving design. Credit: Matt Lighthart
The Pur Plus is easily snapped onto many kitchen faucets. Credit: Matt Lighthart
Priming the filter on the Travel Berkey to get it ready for its first use. Credit: Matt Lighthart
Daily Use & Upkeep Cost
Contaminant removal is the first thing to consider when looking at home water filters (rightly so), but once you narrow it down to 2-3 options that fit your needs in that area, you can then decide what kind of maintenance and costs you are willing to deal with. To test this metric, we used filter prices and replacement schedules to estimate the yearly cost for different usage rates. We took into account install difficulty, how annoying it is to swap out the filters, and how easily you can get a glass of clean water once the initial setup is done.
The big divide here is between pitcher models and undersink models. In short, pitchers have a low up-front cost, filter changes are easy peasy, and they require very little prep before you can start using them. The downside is the ongoing cost of filter replacements, especially if you go through a lot of water. The price per filter is low, but they need to be replaced about every 2 months, even sooner if you have more than 2 people in your household. Undersink filters take some elbow grease and DIY know-how to install for the first time. But after that, these systems disappear into the background.
Setup and Maintenance
Setup Time
Setup Effort
Maintenance Effort
Maintenance Frequency
Overall Rating
Brita UltraMax Elite
Short
Low
Low
120 gallons, approx 6 months
1
2
3
4
5
Amazon Basics
Short
Low
Low
40 gallons, approx 2 months
1
2
3
4
5
Brita Faucet Mount Elite
Short
Medium
Low
100 gallons, approx 4 months,
sooner with hard water
1
2
3
4
5
Brita Large Pitcher
Short
Low
Low
40 gallons, approx 2 months
1
2
3
4
5
Brita Metro
Short
Low
Low
40 gallons, approx 2 months
1
2
3
4
5
Pur Plus
Medium
Low
Low
40 gallons, approx 2 months
1
2
3
4
5
PUR PLUS Faucet Mount
Short
Medium
Low
100 gallons, approx 3 months
1
2
3
4
5
Waterdrop 10UA Under Sink
Medium
Medium
Low
8000 gallons or 1 year
1
2
3
4
5
Culligan Zerowater Pitcher
Medium
Low
Low
When TDS reads 006. Commonly 2-4 weeks
1
2
3
4
5
Waterdrop G3P600 RO
Long
Medium High
Low
6 months - 2 years depending on filter component
1
2
3
4
5
Travel Berkey
Medium
Medium
Moderate
6000 gallons per set, approx 4 years
1
2
3
4
5
iSpring RCC7AK RO
Long
High
High
6 months - 3 years depending on filter component
1
2
3
4
5
APEC Essence ROES-50
Long
High
High
6 months - 4 years depending on filter component
1
2
3
4
5
Post-installation, all of the undersink filters easily beat out pitcher models for daily ease of use. Since filtered water comes from a faucet, getting clean water is as easy. Filter changes are more complicated, but modern systems like the Waterdrop G3P600 Reverse Osmosis have quick-twist filter cartridges that make changes almost as easy as with pitcher models.
Among the pitchers we tested, ease of use is pretty similar. Most accept drop-in filters, need to be filled up once or twice a day, and run through the dishwasher every week or so. The Brita Ultramax Dispenser stands out for its large capacity, longer-lasting filters, and convenient spigot.
Faucet-mount filters fall nicely in the middle. The installation is pretty quick, and after that, using them is as easy as turning on your tap. However, the clunky addition to your kitchen faucet may be a turn-off for some people, and sometimes gets in the way of doing dishes. Of the two faucet filters we tested, we prefer the PUR PLUS Vertical because it is slightly cheaper and has a quick-release system that makes it easy to pop off when you want to use the sink for dishes or other cleaning.
Flushing Your Filter
All manufacturers recommend that you flush the filters each time you install a fresh one. This means discarding the first 1-3 full tanks of filtered water. However, during testing, we found that many of the filters actually need to be flushed many more times to fully remove any residual materials from the manufacturing process.
While it costs a bit more than other RO systems, the ease of filter changes on the Waterdrop may make it worthwhile for some users. Credit: Matt Lighthart
The upfront cost of undersink models is a bit higher, but the filters last much longer, and the cost per year is typically lower overall. Those who go through a lot of water (eg, you use it for cooking/filling the coffee maker, or have a large family) will get the best bang for their buck here. The Waterdrop WD-10UA is by far the most affordable, but its filtration performance is limited to PFAS and microplastics. For a cost-effective option that does well across the board, the APEC ROES-50 is a great choice.
Estimated Cost Per Year
Product
40 gal/month
120 gal/month
Waterdrop 10UA Under Sink
33
33
Travel Berkey
41
40
PUR PLUS Faucet Mount
59
90
APEC Essence ROES-50
75
75
iSpring RCC7AK RO
95
95
Amazon Basics
44
176
Waterdrop G3P600 RO
145
145
Brita Large Pitcher (10 cup)
60
240
Brita Metro
60
240
Brita UltraMax Elite
66
264
Brita Faucet Mount Elite
78
288
Pur Plus
108
432
Culligan Zerowater Pitcher 10-Cup
240
960
Most pitcher filters have similar price tags; the difference shows up in replacement filter costs, and the Amazon Basics Pitcher is the winner here, with lower long-term costs than average. Though the Culligan with Zerowater 8-Cup Pitcher has a comparable sticker price, it is the most expensive filter we tested over the long term. This is due to expensive replacement filters that need to be replaced pretty frequently.
Undersink models require you to tap into your plumbing, and can be a bit of a chore during the initial installation. Credit: Matt Lighthart
How to Choose a Water Filter
There is more than one great filter out there that you can rely on to produce clean drinking water. But different models have features that will make them better suited to your lifestyle, whether you've got a busy household that needs to stay hydrated, you're moving into a college dorm, or you're a new homeowner looking to do some DIY work.
Which Contaminants Are the Most Important To Remove?
There's a lot of stuff that could be floating around in your water. What it is, how much of it there is, and whether you should be worried about it depend largely on where you live. In other words, for someone living in a rural area with a lot of agriculture, nitrates from fertilizer runoff might be a primary concern, whereas someone living in a 100-year-old apartment building in a big city might be more concerned about lead entering their water through outdated plumbing. Doing the research to find out what's in your water can help you know what to prioritize when choosing the filter that will work best for cleaning up your tap water.
Since water sources in different locales may contain very different concentrations of any given contaminant, to reach our final rankings, we prioritized the removal of contaminants that A) have the most harmful potential health effects on humans and B) are most likely to be found in tap water sources across the U.S. We rewarded filters that removed the highest percentage of these specific harmful materials, and for most water sources, our list covers the heavy hitters of water contamination. However, if you do the research, you're likely to see many contaminants we don't discuss in the metrics above but that we may have tested for. If you're curious, you can see the complete results in the Appendix section of this review.
If you don't have the time or motivation to dive into the research, get a reverse osmosis filter. These remove just about everything that can be found in water, whether you know about it or not.
If your home and budget allow, a reverse osmosis system like the Waterdrop G3P600 will be your best best against most contaminants. Credit: Matt Lighthart
Pitcher vs Undersink vs Faucet: Which Style Is Right For Me?
As you saw above, you can get really great filtration performance from both pitcher filters and undersink filters with the right model, so the deciding factor here is how well each system fits your lifestyle.
If you know you're going to be in the same home for a while and are okay with a little upfront time and monetary investment, an undersink system will be easier and more cost-effective in the long run, and you'll get marginally cleaner water than from even the top-performing pitcher filters. And you'll get that clean water on demand, no refilling a pitcher multiple times a day, and no waiting for a slow drip to fill the tank. The hidden caveat to consider is wastewater. All reverse osmosis filters we tested create wastewater. Some, like the Waterdrop G3P600 Reverse Osmosis System, are more efficient, producing only half a gallon of wastewater for every gallon of filtered water. Others are less efficient, such as the APEC ROES-50 Essence Series, which produces 3 gallons of wastewater for every gallon of filtered water.
A small pitcher that fits in your fridge is the most practical option for many people. Credit: Matt Lighthart
However, for one reason or another, an undersink model won't work for everyone. Maybe you're renting and don't want to install a permanent filter and faucet mount that you can't take with you, maybe you don't have the cash to splurge up front on a pricey RO system, maybe your conscience bugs you every time you think about wastewater. Whatever the case, a pitcher-style filter may be the better choice for some users. Because they are super portable and super simple, they can be moved easily from house to house, to a college dorm, or even taken on a road trip if you don't trust the water where you're headed. Just be aware that if you go through a lot of water each day, frequent filter changes add up and can be more expensive in the long run, and the daily task of filling the pitcher is just another chore to add to your to-do list. Pitchers are generally better for 1-2 person households for these reasons.
Faucet mounts may be a good middle ground for some users. Most have a tool-free, non-permanent install, while still offering the ease of on-demand filtered water. Just note that the clunky devices can be an eyesore in the kitchen, and some users complain that they get in the way when doing dishes.
This Brita is fridge-friendly and is even narrow enough to fit in the door shelf of some fridges. Credit: Matt Lighthart
Snap-on or twist-on faucet filters can be a great way to get filtered water straight from your tap, without the complicated installation. Credit: Matt Lighthart
FAQs
You can't (and shouldn't) always rely on marketing claims to let you know which filter will do the best job. Look for third-party certifications that guarantee a filter does everything that it says it will. There are rigorous standards and third-party certifications established by the National Sanitation Foundation (NSF) to look for when choosing a water filter. Some refer to what a filter removes from your water, while others simply refer to the materials a filter is made with or without. The important ones to look for are:
NSF/ANSI 42: This standard focuses on aesthetic effects, like taste and smell. It guarantees that a filter reduces impurities that are non-health related, such as chlorine and sediment.
NSF/ANSI 53: This standard focuses on contaminants that may be dangerous to your health, including heavy metals and forever chemicals.
NSF/ANSI 401: This standard covers emerging compounds, or trace amounts of contaminants like prescription drugs, pesticides, and over-the-counter medications.
It is worth noting that certifications are granted on a contaminant-by-contaminant basis, and just because a filter has an NSF/ANSI 53 certification does not mean it removes all the contaminants listed in that standard. So, look for specific wording like “is certified by the WQA to reduce lead, PFAS, and chlorine.” A caveat here: stating a product was tested to meet NSF certification standards is not the same as stating a product is certified to meet NSF standards.
Reverse osmosis (RO) is often considered the gold standard for water purity. This technology forces water through a semi-permeable membrane, essentially a microscopic filter, that removes contaminants at a molecular level. These super-fine membranes are the heart of RO technology, as their pore size is so small (down to 0.001 microns) that they capture slippery contaminants that other filters can't. On top of this, most RO models include multiple stages of filtration, first passing water through a coarser filter to remove sediment, and then through a carbon block filter before it reaches the fine membrane. Stages beyond this are for polishing flavor, and sometimes adding back healthy minerals.
Since these systems rely on pressure to force the water through the tight membrane, you won't find this level of filtration in pitcher-style gravity filters. You can sometimes find countertop RO systems, but these require electricity to operate. More commonly, you will see this filtration technology in undersink models, which rely on your home's water pressure.
Flow rate is mostly a matter of convenience - how long does it take you to fill your cup? Pitcher and countertop models rely on slower gravity filtration to fill the holding tank. If the tank is full, you can pour water as needed. However, if you empty your pitcher (which happens quickly in a busy household) and have to wait for gravity to do its job, you could wait anywhere from 2 to 15 minutes to fill your cup, depending on the filter. With faucet-mount models, a reduced flow rate can be annoying when filling a large stock pot for cooking, but it is generally less problematic. The faucet filters we tested have some of the fastest flow rates of the bunch. Flow rate is also less of an issue in undersink systems. You may experience a slightly slower flow rate from the dedicated faucet, but it is generally not noticeable when filling your glass.
No matter your reason for wanting a filter, there is one out there to fit your needs and budget. Credit: Matt Lighthart
Conclusion
There are a myriad of reasons you may be looking for a home water filter, but at the end of the day, we all want the same thing: to fill up our cups without wondering what we're drinking throughout the day. Unfortunately, it can be a complicated process to find out what's in your water, what model can get it out of your water, and if it's going to be a pain in the rear to use every day. We have put in months of time, research, and hands-on testing to help you find the answer, because the safety of your drinking water is something you shouldn't have to question.
Clean water should be a given, but when it's not, a great water filter can give you some peace of mind. Credit: Matt Lighthart
Appendix
For those who are interested, the detailed results of the independent water quality tests from Tap Score are listed in the tables below. Note that if removal rates differed across testing rounds, we present the worst performance for each filter.
Contaminant Removal Data
Contaminant
Antimony (ppm)
Arsenic Removed
Arsenic (ppm)
Barium Removed
Barium (ppm)
Beryllium (ppm)
Boron Removed
Boron (ppm)
Cadmium (ppm)
Calcium Removed
Calcium (ppm)
Chromium (Total) (ppm)
Cobalt (ppm)
Copper (high) Removed
Copper (high) (ppm)
Copper (Tap) Removed
Copper (Tap) (ppm)
Fluoride Removed
Fluoride (ppm)
Iron Removed
Iron (ppm)
Lead Removed
Lead (ppm)
Lithium Removed
Lithium (ppm)
Magnesium Removed
Magnesium (ppm)
Manganese Removed
Manganese (ppm)
Mercury (ppm)
Molybdenum Removed
Molybdenum (ppm)
Nickel Removed
Nickel (ppm)
Nitrate (as N) Removed
Nitrate (as N) (ppm)
pH Effect
Selenium (ppm)
Strontium Removed
Strontium (ppm)
Sulfate Removed
Sulfate (ppm)
Thallium (ppm)
Titanium Removed
Titanium (ppm)
Uranium Removed
Uranium (ppm)
Vanadium Removed
Vanadium (ppm)
Zinc Removed
Zinc (ppm)
EPA Limit MCL (Health)
0.006
-
0.01
-
2
0.004
-
None
0.005
-
None
0.1
None
-
1.3 (Action Level)
-
1.3 (Action Level)
-
4
-
None
-
0.015 (Action Level)
-
None
-
None
-
None
0.002
-
None
-
None
-
10
None
0.05
-
None
-
None
0.002
-
None
-
0.03
-
None
-
None
EPA Secondary SMCL (Aesthetic)
None
-
None
-
None
None
-
None
None
-
None
None
None
-
1
-
1
-
2
-
0.3
-
None
-
None
-
None
-
0.05
None
-
None
-
None
-
None
6.5â€"8.5
None
-
None
-
250
None
-
None
-
None
-
None
-
None
California HGL (Health Goal)
0.001
-
0.000004
-
2
0.0007
-
1
0.00004
-
None
0.02
None
-
0.17
-
0.17
-
1
-
None
-
0.0002
-
None
-
None
-
None
0.0012
-
None
-
0.012
-
10
None
0.03
-
0.9
-
None
0.0001
-
None
-
0.00043
-
0.015
-
None
Amazon Basics
Not in Source
0.00%
0.00299
92.10%
0.00647
Not in Source
41.00%
9%
Not in Source
89.00%
4.52
Not in Source
Not in Source
95.00%
< 0.0006521
100.00%
Not Detected
0.00%
0.351
100.00%
Not Detected
97.23%
0.0072
0.00%
0.0371
80.00%
1.88
100.00%
Not Detected
Not in Source
48.39%
0.00112
100.00%
Not Detected
48.00%
0.00112
Neutral (No Change)
Not in Source
90.00%
0.0503
0.00%
22.4
Not in Source
12.00%
0.00107*
94.00%
0.000557*
63.00%
0.003*
6.00%
0.00893*
APEC Essence ROES-50
Not in Source
100.00%*
Not Detected
100.00%
Not Detected
Not in Source
100.00%
Not Detected
Not in Source
100.00%
Not Detected
Not in Source
Not in Source
100.00%
Not Detected
-
-
98.74%
0.43 (from 34)
100.00%
Not Detected
100.00%
Not Detected
100.00%
Not Detected
100.00%
Not Detected
100.00%
Not Detected
Not in Source
100.00%
Not Detected
100.00%
Not Detected
100.00%
Not Detected
Slightly Acidic
Not in Source
100.00%
Not Detected
100.00%
Not Detected
Not in Source
100.00%
Not Detected
100.00%
Not Detected
100.00%
Not Detected
100.00%
Not Detected
Brita Faucet Mount Elite
Not in Source
0.00%
0.00256
100.00%
Not Detected
Not in Source
11.18%
14%
Not in Source
4.26%
38.2
Not in Source
Not in Source
100.00%
Not Detected
100.00%
Not Detected
0.00%
0.31
88.22%
0.53
100.00%
Not Detected
0.00%
0.07
0.00%
9.48
100.00%
Not Detected
Not in Source
17.97%
0.00178
58.33%
0.0015
32.52%
1.66
Neutral (No Change)
Not in Source
54.00%
0.22
0.00%
24.1
Not in Source
12.40%
0.00106*
6.69%
0.00893
41.94%
0.00461
10.97%
0.00844*
Brita Large Pitcher (10-Cup)
Not in Source
0.00%
0.00435
87.18%
0.0105
Not in Source
28.57%
2%
Not in Source
79.17%
8.31
Not in Source
Not in Source
85.00%
1.2
100.00%
Not Detected
0.00%
0.32
86.67%
0.6
93.85%
0.016
0.00%
0.038
65.21%
3.26
0.00%
0.00161*
Not in Source
52.53%
0.00103
76.39%
0.00085
46.02%
1.22
Neutral (No Change)
Not in Source
0.00%
0.02
0.00%
22.9
Not in Source
1.65%
0.00119*
95.32%
0.000448*
54.02%
0.00372*
44.51%
0.00526*
Brita Metro
Not in Source
0.00%
0.00258
89.22%
0.00883
Not in Source
32.14%
2%
Not in Source
81.67%
2.2
Not in Source
Not in Source
86.25%
1.1
100.00%
Not Detected
0.00%
0.32
98.53%
0.066
93.46%
0.017
0.00%
0.0391
74.78%
0.58
100.00%
Not Detected
Not in Source
35.94%
0.00139
69.44%
0.0011
61.38%
0.95
Neutral (No Change)
Not in Source
0.00%
0.019
6.01%
21.9
Not in Source
0.83%
0.0012*
96.01%
0.00015
41.82%
0.00064
16.14%
0.00795*
Brita UltraMax Elite
Not in Source
0.00%
0.00266
80.46%
0.016
Not in Source
0.00%
3%
Not in Source
10.13%
21.55
Not in Source
Not in Source
66.25%
2.7
100.00%
Not Detected
0.00%
0.33
100.00%
Not Detected
99.27%
0.0019
0.00%
0.0391
0.00%
5.06
100.00%
Not Detected
Not in Source
9.22%
0.00197
0.00%
0.0036
0.00%
2.47
Neutral (No Change)
Not in Source
3.00%
0.097
0.00%
23.4
Not in Source
Added*
0.00181*
5.12%
0.00908
27.00%
0.00593
52.32%
0.00452*
Culligan ZeroWater Pitcher (8-Cup)
Not in Source
100.00%
Not Detected
100.00%
Not Detected
Not in Source
100.00%
Not Detected
Not in Source
99.92%
0.02
Not in Source
Not in Source
92.00%
0.0018*
91.74%
0.0018*
100.00%
Not Detected
100.00%
Not Detected
100.00%
Not Detected
80.00%
0.00774
99.30%
0.066*
100.00%
Not Detected
Not in Source
100.00%
Not Detected
100.00%
Not Detected
100.00%
Not Detected
Alkaline Swing
Not in Source
100.00%
Not Detected
100.00%
Not Detected
Not in Source
13.00%
0.00105*
100.00%
Not Detected
100.00%
Not Detected
48.00%
0.00492*
iSpring RCC7AK RO
Not in Source
100.00%*
Not Detected
100.00%
Not Detected
Not in Source
N/A*
Acidic water caused spike in AK filter
Not in Source
61.67%
4.6, uses AK filter
Not in Source
Not in Source
100.00%
Not Detected
-
-
99.26%
0.25 (from 34)
100.00%
Not Detected
100.00%
Not Detected
100.00%
Not Detected
86.52%
0.31
100.00%
Not Detected
Not in Source
100.00%
Not Detected
100.00%
Not Detected
100.00%
Not Detected
Alkaline (Remineralized)
Not in Source
90.20%
0.0098
100.00%
Not Detected
Not in Source
100.00%
Not Detected
100.00%
Not Detected
N/A*
Acidic water caused spike in AK filter
100.00%
Not Detected
Pur Plus Pitcher
Not in Source
100.00%
Not Detected
82.78%
0.0141
Not in Source
8.00%
11%
Not in Source
91.80%
3.27
Not in Source
Not in Source
100.00%
Not Detected
100.00%
Not Detected
13.96%
0.265
100.00%
Not Detected
100.00%
Not Detected
28.00%
0.0281
88.47%
1.08
100.00%
Not Detected
Not in Source
97.70%
0.00005
100.00%
Not Detected
91.87%
0.2
Neutral (No Change)
Not in Source
91.80%
0.0393
64.70%
5.61
Not in Source
5.79%
0.00114*
100.00%
Not Detected
100.00%
Not Detected
0.00%
0.0105
Pur Plus Faucet Mount
Not in Source
0.00%
0.0043
100.00%
Not Detected
Not in Source
25.00%
9%
Not in Source
13.53%
34.5
Not in Source
Not in Source
100.00%
Not Detected
100.00%
Not Detected
0.00%
0.345
100.00%
Not Detected
100.00%
Not Detected
0.00%
0.06
0.00%
10.1
100.00%
Not Detected
Not in Source
23.04%
0.00167
100.00%
Not Detected
32.30%
1.53
Neutral (No Change)
Not in Source
71.19%
0.138
7.30%
21.6
Not in Source
Added*
0.0048*
12.12%
0.00841
52.64%
0.00376
34.81%
0.00618*
Travel Berkey
Not in Source
10.02%
0.00413
35.65%
0.0527
Not in Source
83.00%
2%
Not in Source
0.25%
39.8
Not in Source
Not in Source
93.16%
0.00096
100.00%
Not Detected
0.00%
0.33
4.44%
4.3
100.00%
Not Detected
0.00%
0.0388
0.00%
9.46
0.00%
0.00174*
Not in Source
3.69%
0.00209
100.00%
Not Detected
19.51%
1.98
Neutral (No Change)
Not in Source
0.00%
0.477
0.00%
22.2
Not in Source
3.31%
0.00117*
36.00%
0.00613
83.88%
0.00128
18.99%
0.00768*
Waterdrop 10UA Under Sink
Not in Source
11.98%
0.00404
28.45%
0.0586
Not in Source
28.95%
0.108
Not in Source
5.26%
37.8
Not in Source
Not in Source
100.00%
Not Detected
100.00%
Not Detected
0.00%
0.412
99.71%
0.013
0.00%
0.27
0.00%
0.0379
1.28%
9.25
0.00%
0.0042*
Not in Source
0.00%
0.0036*
0.00%
0.0036
77.00%
0.512
Neutral (No Change)
Not in Source
0.00%
0.459
10.00%
21
Not in Source
2.00%
0.00119*
31.00%
0.00663
63.00%
0.00296*
0.00%
0.011
Waterdrop G3P600 RO
Not in Source
100.00%*
Not Detected
88.33%
0.0014
Not in Source
100.00%
Not Detected
Not in Source
87.50%
1.5
Not in Source
Not in Source
96.38%
0.29
-
-
85.00%
5.1 (from 34)
99.71%
0.013
100.00%
Not Detected
100.00%
Not Detected
92.61%
0.17
100.00%
Not Detected
Not in Source
100.00%
Not Detected
100.00%
Not Detected
100.00%
Not Detected
Acidic (Stripped)
Not in Source
88.00%
0.012
100.00%
Not Detected
Not in Source
100.00%
Not Detected
100.00%
Not Detected
100.00%
Not Detected
87.44%
0.0049
—Graham Faulknor, Austin Palmer, Abriah Wofford, and Lissette Velasquez
