🕷️ Crawler Inspector

URL Lookup

Direct Parameter Lookup

Raw Queries and Responses

1. Shard Calculation

Query:

Response:

Calculated Shard: 38 (from laksa132)

2. Crawled Status Check

Query:

curl -X POST \
  'http://laksa038.int.ahrefs:8124/' \
  -H 'Content-Type: text/plain' \
  -H 'X-ClickHouse-Database: crawler3' \
  -H 'Authorization: Basic YXBpOg==' \
  -d 'SELECT getAhrefsURLFromUnparsed(src_unparsed) AS found_url, ifNull(toUnixTimestamp(download_stamp), 0) AS crawl_time, ifNull(toUnixTimestamp(props_url_first_seen), 0) AS first_indexed_time, download_http_code AS http_code, src_unparsed AS src_unparsed, src_root_hash AS src_root_hash, history_drop_reason AS history_drop_reason, meta_title AS meta_title, meta_descriptions AS meta_descriptions, attrs_boilerpipe_text AS attrs_boilerpipe_text, attrs_markdown AS attrs_markdown, attrs_readable_markdown AS attrs_readable_markdown, meta_canonical AS meta_canonical FROM crawler3.page_info_local FINAL PREWHERE (src_root_hash, src_unparsed) IN ((getAhrefsRootHashFromUnparsed(getAhrefsUnparsedNoserviceFromURL(\'https://www.techgearlab.com/topics/kitchen/best-water-filter\')), getAhrefsUnparsedNoserviceFromURL(\'https://www.techgearlab.com/topics/kitchen/best-water-filter\'))) FORMAT JSONEachRow'

Response:

{"found_url":"https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/topics\/kitchen\/best-water-filter","crawl_time":1775447897,"first_indexed_time":1586967855,"http_code":200,"src_unparsed":"com,techgearlab!www,\/topics\/kitchen\/best-water-filter s443","src_root_hash":"5555427083778775638","history_drop_reason":null,"meta_title":"The Best Water Filters of 2026 | Lab Tested & Ranked","meta_descriptions":["Clean water is a no brainer when trying to take care of your health and hydration. We bought the 13 top water filters in a range of different styles, from..."],"attrs_boilerpipe_text":"The Best Water Filters\nFull results from testing 13 top products are in our\nProduct Comparison Table\nand\nAnalysis & Test Results\nsections.\nYour browser does not support charts\n×\nBest Pitcher Filter\nPur Plus 11-Cup Pitcher\n81\nOVERALL\nSCORE\nCritical Contaminant Removal\n9.6\nSecondary Contaminant Removal\n6.5\nTaste\n8.6\nMaintenance and Setup\n8.3\nOperating Cost\n5.8\nPROS\nGreat contaminant removal\nGood taste\nFilter change light\nRemoves microplastics\nCONS\nSmall fill opening\nMore costly than others over time for filters\nSlower to filter than some other pitchers\nThe\nPur Plus 11-Cup Pitcher\nstands out because it delivers filtration performance nearly on par with what we expect from under-sink reverse osmosis (RO) systems without requiring a complicated install. This would be a great choice for renters or others who want cleaner water without embarking on a DIY project. The 3-in-1 PUR PLUS filter is NSF-certified for lead, microplastics, chlorine, and more than 20 chemical and physical impurities, providing an impressive level of purification. In testing, it lived up to its certifications, removing nearly all major contaminants, including 100% of lead, arsenic, and uranium, plus over 96% of PFNA, making it one of the most capable pitcher filters we have used. It has a slim, fridge-friendly shape and a built-in filter change indicator that removes the guesswork from maintenance.\nSPECIFICATIONS\nType\nPitcher\nEstimated cost per year (40 gal\/month) \n$108\nCertifications\nWQA certified to reduce lead\nNSF certified to reduce microplastics\nEstimated cost per year (160 gal\/month)\n$432\nWastewater Generated \nNo\nIts downsides are relatively minor but worth considering: filtration is slower than some competing pitchers, and replacement filters cost more than the average pitcher, which can add up quickly if your household goes through a lot of water. For anyone who wants serious contaminant reduction without stepping up to an RO system, the\nPur Plus 11-Cup Pitcher\nis the most well-rounded, high-performance choice. If you're shopping around for a pitcher-style filter, you should also take a look at the\nCulligan with Zerowater 8-Cup Pitcher\n, which did a great job with trace elements and minerals, and the\nAmazon Basics 10-Cup Pitcher\n, which provides a good value in the pitcher category.\nRead more:\nPur Plus 11-Cup Pitcher review\nThe Pur Plus provides some impressively clean water for a pitcher style filter.  \nCredit: Matt Lighthart\nBest Reverse Osmosis System\nAPEC ROES-50 Essence Series\n89\nOVERALL\nSCORE\nCritical Contaminant Removal\n10.0\nSecondary Contaminant Removal\n9.8\nTaste\n8.8\nMaintenance and Setup\n3.6\nOperating Cost\n8.0\nPROS\nExcellent contaminant removal\nNSF certified in multiple categories\nCONS\nTakes up significant under-sink space\nWastes water\nFilter changes are less convenient than other RO systems\nThe\nAPEC ROES-50 Essence Series\nis a straightforward, highly capable reverse-osmosis (RO) system that delivers some of the most impressive filtration results in water quality tests. Reverse osmosis works by pushing water through an ultrafine membrane that blocks contaminants at the molecular level, producing exceptionally clean, low-TDS water — and in water quality lab tests, the ROES-50 excelled at exactly that. It brought every critical contaminant we measured, including lead, PFNA, arsenic, and uranium, down to undetectable levels and posted nearly perfect scores for secondary contaminants like zinc and copper as well. It has a no-frills design, but this system produces excellent-tasting water thanks to its carbon polishing stage, earning high marks in blind taste tests and frequent praise from long-term users.\nSPECIFICATIONS\nType\nUnder Sink Reverse Osmosis\nEstimated cost per year (40 gal\/month) \n$75\nCertifications\nWQA\nEstimated cost per year (160 gal\/month)\n$75\nWastewater Generated \n3:1 ratio wastewater-to-filtered\nThe main hesitation many have with the\nAPEC ROES\nis that installing an under-sink system requires some DIY skills and some modifications to your kitchen. It also requires a more significant upfront investment; therefore, this model is best suited for those who own their home and plan to use the filter system for many years. If this is the case it is a great value. The classic five-stage layout is a bit old-school, but it's also one of the reasons this model is such a strong value: replacement filters are inexpensive, long-lasting, and easy to buy individually. That said, maintenance is more hands-on than modern RO units, and the system takes up a lot of under-sink space. It also produces a lot of wastewater, an inevitable trade-off with RO designs. Still, for shoppers prioritizing maximum contaminant removal without spending premium RO money, the\nROES-50\nstands out as a top performer. If you like the idea of RO-quality water but want a sleeker, easier-to-maintain setup, consider the\nWaterdrop G3P600 tankless system\n— it performs nearly as well with far less bulk under your sink.\nRead more:\nAPEC ROES-50 Essence Series review\nThough the APEC produces excellent quality water, filter changes are pretty inconvenient.  \nCredit: Matt Lighthart\nBest Value Pitcher\nAmazon Basics 10-Cup Pitcher\n73\nOVERALL\nSCORE\nCritical Contaminant Removal\n6.6\nSecondary Contaminant Removal\n7.5\nTaste\n7.0\nMaintenance and Setup\n8.5\nOperating Cost\n8.2\nPROS\nAccepts multiple filter brands\nBudget friendly\nSpout cover\nCONS\nNo flip top\nNo PFAS or heavy metal certification\nNot NSF certified for many serious contaminants\nLeached some aluminum into our water\nThe\nAmazon Basics 10-Cup Pitcher\ndelivers far better filtration performance than its price tag suggests, making it one of the best-value options for everyday use. It didn't come back with the strongest filtration results, but for a budget pitcher, it isn't too shabby. It removed 97.2% of lead, and 100% of uranium. It produced an impressive 84.88% cut in PFAS, even though it is not certified to remove this. For households with typical tap water concerns, those numbers put it well ahead of many inexpensive competitors. Upfront cost is slightly lower than other models, but where this pitcher really stands out is its long-term affordability. Most pitcher systems lock you into proprietary filters with fixed pricing and limited buying options. The Amazon Basics model accepts multiple filter brands, meaning you can comparison shop, switch filter types as needed, and take advantage of bulk deals. Replacement filters are inexpensive to begin with, and that flexibility can help drive yearly costs even lower if you're a savvy shopper.\nSPECIFICATIONS\nType\nPitcher\nEstimated cost per year (40 gal\/month) \n$44\nCertifications\nWQA certified against NSF Standards 42, 53, and 372\nEstimated cost per year (160 gal\/month)\n$176\nWastewater Generated \nNo\nThe\nAmazon Basics\nis not certified to remove many trace elements and minerals, and its PFAS removal was lower than we would prefer. If those are a concern for you, this might not be the best option. While it's not certified for all contaminants, its performance with common pollutants like lead makes it reliable for general day-to-day use. It's not going to match the performance of a RO system, but for casual filtration on a budget, it does a decent job. For anyone who wants clean, better-tasting water without the long-term expense, this pitcher offers unmatched cost control. If you need stronger filtration and can stretch the budget, the\nPur Plus 11-Cup\nis the top-performing pitcher overall. And if you want the convenience of purified water straight from the tap (but no install), the\nPur Plus Vertical Faucet Filter\noffers better contaminant removal.\nRead more:\nAmazon Basics 10-Cup Pitcher review\nThe Amazon Basics pitcher has a simple design that is compatible with filters from multiple brands, allowing you to shop around for the ones that fit your filtration needs and budget.  \nCredit: Matt Lighthart\nBest Long Term Value\nTravel Berkey\n76\nOVERALL\nSCORE\nCritical Contaminant Removal\n8.2\nSecondary Contaminant Removal\n7.9\nTaste\n6.3\nMaintenance and Setup\n6.3\nOperating Cost\n8.8\nPROS\nGood performance with lead and PFAS\nFilters last a long time\nLess plastic in the construction\nCONS\nBig initial investment\nLarge size won't fit in fridge\nFilters require upkeep\nThe\nTravel Berkey\nis a stainless steel gravity filter that has a high 1.5-gallon capacity, and shows excellent results when it comes to critical contaminants, removing 100% of PFAS and lead, as well as effectively removing many trace elements and minerals. It comes at a high up-front cost, almost on par with reverse osmosis systems. However, with filters that last up to 4 years, you'll make up the difference in replacement costs; our team estimated annual costs to be about $41, even at high-volume usage. This is significantly less than all other pitchers in our lineup, which makes it a great choice for large households that want a filter that can take care of most critical contaminants with minimal maintenance and low long-term costs.\nSPECIFICATIONS\nType\nDispenser\nEstimated cost per year (40 gal\/month) \n$41\nCertifications\nExceeds EPA and ANSI\/NSF Standard 53 protocols\nEstimated cost per year (160 gal\/month)\n$41\nWastewater Generated \nNo\nThe filters last a long time, provided they are properly maintained. You have to remove and scrub them every 6 months or so to keep them in working condition, and our testing team noted that this is more of a pain than simply dropping in a fresh filter every month or two. We like the spigot spout, but note that the unit must be placed on a stand or ledge in order to dispense water. It is also too tall to fit in the fridge, so you have to be ok with room-temperature water. If you're looking for a large capacity and low cost filter that doesn't depend on plumbing or electric hookups, the Travel Berkey is the way to go, but if you want filtered water straight from the tap, consider an under-sink system like the\nAPEC ROES-50 Essence Series\n, which is the most affordable RO system in the lineup.\nRead more:\nTravel Berkey review\nThe Travel Berkey is a big investment at first, but it is a great value in the long term.  \nCredit: Matt Lighthart\nThe Travel Berkey has a larger storage capacity than most gravity-fed filters.  \nCredit: Matt Lighthart\nWingnuts 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.  \nCredit: Matt Lighthart\nIt's a tough sell to fit the Travel Berkey in your fridge. You'd lose alot of shelf space.  \nCredit: Matt Lighthart\nThis model did a fantastic job of removing chlorine from drinking water.  \nCredit: Abriah Wofford\nFavorite Modern Reverse Osmosis System\nWaterdrop G3P600 Reverse Osmosis System\n89\nOVERALL\nSCORE\nCritical Contaminant Removal\n10.0\nSecondary Contaminant Removal\n9.4\nTaste\n8.8\nMaintenance and Setup\n6.4\nOperating Cost\n6.4\nPROS\nEasier to maintain than most RO systems\nGreat PFAS and lead removal\nProduces less waste water\nCONS\nMore expensive than most filters\nInstallation is a DIY home project\nThe\nWaterdrop G3P600 Reverse Osmosis System\nperforms just as well as our Editors' Choice RO filter in critical contaminant removal, and has an additional alkaline remineralization stage that improves flavor and adds back some essential trace minerals to your water (which accounts for its lower score in removing secondary contaminants). In addition to near-flawless filtration, this system is one of the easiest RO systems to use after initial installation. It has modern features that make it easy to use and maintain on a daily basis. The tankless design takes up much less space under your sink, and filter changes require a simple twist and pull to remove them from dedicated slots. Overall, the unit is a bit bulky, but its completely enclosed design means you don't have a bunch of tubes and wires hanging around, and it's still smaller than a storage tank. Wastewater is an inevitable byproduct of reverse osmosis systems, but the Waterdrop produces about a quarter of the amount produced by competing models.\nSPECIFICATIONS\nType\nUnder Sink Reverse Osmosis\nEstimated cost per year (40 gal\/month) \n$145\nCertifications\nNSF\/ANSI certified against Standards 42, 58, and 372\nEstimated cost per year (160 gal\/month)\n$145\nWastewater Generated \n1:2 ratio wastewater-to-filtered\nThe downside is primarily the cost and the more involved installation. It is the most expensive unit in our lineup, and like all RO systems, it requires you to do some plumbing work and drill a hole into your countertop to install the separate faucet. If you choose to hire a professional to do this work, it pushes the cost up even higher, and is likely only something that you'll want to commit to if you own your home and plan to use the filter for many years. However, after this initial push, the ongoing costs are less than a pitcher, and maintenance is relatively easy compared to other under-sink filters. If you like the idea of on-demand filtration, but are renting or can't justify the high cost of the Waterdrop, then a faucet filter like the\nPur Plus Vertical Faucet\nis a good alternative.\nRead more:\nWaterdrop G3P600 RO review\nSwapping filters on the Waterdrop G3P600 is as easy as a slide and twist motion.  \nCredit: Matt Lighthart\nBest Faucet\nPur Plus Vertical Faucet\nDeal Alert:\non sale for 39% off at Amazon\nSee Deal\n73\nOVERALL\nSCORE\nCritical Contaminant Removal\n7.1\nSecondary Contaminant Removal\n7.3\nTaste\n6.5\nMaintenance and Setup\n8.4\nOperating Cost\n8.2\nPROS\nFiltered water is available immediately\nReduces lead and PFNA to undetectable levels\nCONS\nSlower flow compared to unfiltered tap\nDoesn't fit all faucet types\nBulky\nThe\nPur Plus Vertical Faucet\nis an ideal solution for anyone looking to improve their tap water without committing to an under-sink system or dealing with constantly refilling pitchers. Faucet filters like this one deliver water immediately, avoid counter clutter, and don't require permanent plumbing changes, making them perfect for renters or small kitchens. This vertical design, while slightly bulky, fits most faucets and includes a simple one-click installation that makes setup and filter changes easy. In testing, the Pur Plus Vertical Faucet excelled at reducing lead and PFAS to near-undetectable levels while removing chlorine to improve taste. It also performed well on common heavy metals like barium, copper, zinc, and iron, ensuring a safe, clean pour for daily drinking and cooking.\nSPECIFICATIONS\nType\nFaucet\nEstimated cost per year (40 gal\/month) \n$59\nCertifications\nWQA and NSF certified to reduce 70 contaminants including lead, microplastics, mercury, chlorine taste and odor, DEET, and TTHM\nEstimated cost per year (160 gal\/month)\n$90\nWastewater Generated \nNo\nIt is not designed to filter fluoride, arsenic, or high uranium levels, so households with extreme contamination concerns may need a more robust system. It also requires you to remove the aerator on your faucet and replace it with an adapter, and our tester worried about thread damage on the faucet head. You can avoid this with a pitcher-style option, and the\nPur Plus 11-Cup Pitcher\nremains our top pick for critical contaminant removal while being simple to use and maintain.\nRead more:\nPur Plus Vertical Faucet  review\nThe PUR Plus is a renter-friendly option for on-demand filtered water.  \nCredit: Matt Lighthart\nBest Pitcher for Secondary Contaminant Removal\nCulligan with Zerowater 8-Cup Pitcher\nPROS\nFilters a wide range of contaminants for a pitcher\nLow-effort setup\nFits in the fridge\nCONS\nFilters have a short lifespan\nCostly to maintain long-term\nTakes a long time to filter water\nThe\nCulligan with Zerowater 8-Cup Pitcher\nprovides a great balance of critical\nand\nsecondary contaminant removal, coming in just behind competitors like the\nPur Plus 11-Cup Pitcher\nthanks to its superior performance with trace elements and minerals. While both pitchers excel at removing critical contaminants like lead and arsenic, this Culligan model consistently scored higher in reducing metals such as nickel, iron, and barium, making it an excellent choice for households with older plumbing or questionable municipal water. The star of the system is its 5-stage Zerowater filtration, which strips contaminants down to near-zero levels and even includes a built-in TDS meter so you can verify performance in real time. In testing, it removed 100% of lead, uranium, and mercury. Taste results were solid—clean, crisp water with chlorine and chemical notes fully removed.\nSPECIFICATIONS\nType\nPitcher\nEstimated cost per year (40 gal\/month) \n$240\nCertifications\nNSF\/ANSI 42, 53, and 401\nEstimated cost per year (160 gal\/month)\n$960\nWastewater Generated \nNo\nWhere this pitcher falters is the long-term cost. Its impressive performance comes at the price of very short filter life — often only two to four weeks — and the replacements are expensive. For heavy water drinkers or families, long-term operating costs can reach several hundred dollars per year, far higher than the average pitcher. It also didn't remove as much PFAS as we would like, only reaching 87% removal. If your priority is more on trace element and mineral removal (like iron, copper or zinc), this is the one to get. If you'd prefer lower maintenance and lower cost, consider the\nAmazon Basics 10-Cup\nor\nPur Plus 11-Cup Pitcher\n, or step up to a budget-friendly RO system like the\nAPEC ROES-50\n.\nRead more:\nCulligan with Zerowater 8-Cup Pitcher review\nThe Culligan with Zerowater did a great job with many contaminants across the board.  \nCredit: Matt Lighthart\nProduct Comparison Table\nDisplaying 1 - 13 (scroll right to see all products)\n< Previous\n|\n|\nNext >\n \n#1\nCompare:\nAPEC ROES-50 Essence Series\n#2\nCompare:\nWaterdrop G3P600 Reverse Osmosis System\n#3\nCompare:\niSpring RCC7AK\n#4\nCompare:\nPur Plus 11-Cup Pitcher\n#5\nCompare:\nCulligan with Zerowater 8-Cup Pitcher\n#6\nCompare:\nTravel Berkey\n#7\nCompare:\nAmazon Basics 10-Cup Pitcher\n#8\nCompare:\nPur Plus Vertical Faucet\n#9\nCompare:\nBrita Elite Advanced Faucet\n#10\nCompare:\nBrita Metro\n#11\nCompare:\nBrita Large 10-Cup Pitcher\n#12\nCompare:\nBrita Ultramax Dispenser with Elite Filter\n#13\nCompare:\nWaterdrop WD-10UA Under Sink\nAwards\nBest Reverse Osmosis System\nFavorite Modern Reverse Osmosis System\n \nBest Pitcher Filter\n \nBest Long Term Value\nBest Value Pitcher\nBest Faucet\n \n \n \n \n \nPrice\n$231 USD List\nCheck price at Amazon CA\n$539 USD List\n$242 USD List\nCheck price at Amazon CA\n$25 USD List\n$28 USD List\n$362 USD List\nCheck price at Amazon CA\n$26 USD List\n$22 USD List\nCheck price at Amazon CA\n$33 USD List\nCheck price at Amazon CA\n$26 USD List\nCheck price at Amazon CA\n$37 USD List\nCheck price at Amazon CA\n$50 USD List\nCheck price at Amazon CA\n$56 USD List\nCheck price at Amazon CA\nOverall Score \n89\n89\n84\n81\n78\n76\n73\n73\n72\n66\n66\n66\n53\nStar Rating\n1\n2\n3\n4\n5\n1\n2\n3\n4\n5\n1\n2\n3\n4\n5\n1\n2\n3\n4\n5\n1\n2\n3\n4\n5\n1\n2\n3\n4\n5\n1\n2\n3\n4\n5\n1\n2\n3\n4\n5\n1\n2\n3\n4\n5\n1\n2\n3\n4\n5\n1\n2\n3\n4\n5\n1\n2\n3\n4\n5\n1\n2\n3\n4\n5\nBottom Line\nThe APEC ROES-50 is a dependable, no-frills RO system that delivers outstanding contaminant removal and great-tasting water, but it takes up a lot of space\nThe Waterdrop G3P600 is a high-performance, tankless reverse‑osmosis system that brings virtually all major contaminants to undetectable levels, though comes with higher installation and filter costs\nThe iSpring RCC7AK is a high-performing RO system that removes a wide range of contaminants while its remineralization stage improves both taste and pH balance\nDelivers nearly RO-level contaminant removal in an easy-to-use pitcher, though slower flow and higher filter costs may be a drawback for heavy users\nDelivers purified water with standout contaminant removal, but requires frequent filter replacements and has higher ongoing costs than average\nA filter system with a high upfront cost, but extremely low maintenance, low long-term cost, and a durable, long-lasting body\nA budget-friendly pitcher that delivers solid everyday filtration and great value, but falls short on serious contaminant removal\nAn affordable, renter-friendly option for anyone who wants filtered water without the hassle of under-sink installation\nA convenient pick for anyone who wants clean, filtered water straight from the tap without the hassle of refilling pitchers or dealing with complex installation\nA convenient, space-saving pitcher that's great for individuals or small households, but its filtration falls short on health-related contaminants\nHigh-capacity, easy-to-use pitcher that improves convenience but offers limited contaminant removal\nA practical, affordable option for households with generally safe tap water looking for improved taste and large‑capacity convenience\nA middle-tier filter that works if you have few concerns about contaminants, but you want improved taste or clarity\nPros\nExcellent contaminant removal, meets multiple NSF standards, Water Quality Association certified\nTankless design, changing filters is easy, built-in TDS meter, filtered PFNA to undetectable levels, more efficient with wastewater than other RO systems\nExcellent contamination removal, NSF certified, longer filter life\nGreat contaminant removal, good taste, filter change indicator, removes microplastics\nFilters a wide range of contaminants for a pitcher, low-effort setup, TDS meter included\nFilter lasts a long time, reduces lead and PFNA to undetectable levels, needs fewer daily refills\nAccepts multiple filter brands, budget friendly, spout cover\nFiltered water is available immediately, reduced lead and PFNA to undetectable levels\nProvides filtered water instantly, removes PFNA effectively, completely removes lead\nSmart filter alert, easy to fill, slim and compact design\nQuick filter change, flip-up lid for filling, fits in fridge doors or shelves\nElite filter lasts longer than standard, reduces some PFAS, excellent lead removal, convenient spigot\nReduces PFNA to near-undetectable levels, fast flow\nCons\nTakes up significant under-sink space, wastes water, filter changes are less convenient than other RO systems\nInstall is more involved, requires under sink electricity, expensive\nTakes up a lot of under-sink space, wastes water, filter changes aren't as easy as other systems, doesn't completely remove PFNA\nSmall fill opening, more costly than others over time for filters, slower to filter than some pitchers\nFilters have a short lifespan, costly to maintain long-term, takes a long time to filter water\nBig upfront cost, doesn't fit in the fridge, requires a stand or edge placement to dispense water\nNo flip top, no PFAS or heavy metal certification, not NSF certified for many serious contaminants, leached some aluminum to our water\nSlower flow compared to unfiltered tap, doesn't fit all faucet types, bulky\nSlower flow than tap water, does not fit all faucet types, bulky design\nExposed spout may absorb fridge odors, removes fewer contaminants, limited PFNA reduction, added trace aluminum in testing, poor performance with acidic compounds\nNo cover over the spout, less effective at removing lead and other contaminants, limited PFNA removal, some aluminum added to test water, doesn't filter acidic compounds well\nAdds aluminum to contaminated water, doesn't filter copper well, large size, must be placed at an edge or raised to fill cups\nNo lead filtering, doesn't filter acidic compounds well, requires a second unit to use for both hot and cold lines\nRating Categories\nAPEC ROES-50 Essence...\nWaterdrop G3P600 Rev...\niSpring RCC7AK\nPur Plus 11-Cup Pitcher\nCulligan with Zerowa...\nTravel Berkey\nAmazon Basics 10-Cup...\nPur Plus Vertical Fa...\nBrita Elite Advanced...\nBrita Metro\nBrita Large 10-Cup P...\nBrita Ultramax Dispe...\nWaterdrop WD-10UA Un...\nCritical Contaminant Removal\n(35%)\n10.0\n10.0\n9.4\n9.6\n9.1\n8.2\n6.6\n7.1\n7.2\n5.4\n5.4\n6.1\n3.8\nSecondary Contaminant Removal\n(25%)\n9.8\n9.4\n9.2\n6.5\n9.3\n7.9\n7.5\n7.3\n6.9\n7.1\n7.3\n4.8\n4.0\nTaste\n(20%)\n8.8\n8.8\n8.4\n8.6\n6.1\n6.3\n7.0\n6.5\n6.8\n6.6\n6.4\n7.7\n6.2\nMaintenance and Setup\n(10%)\n3.6\n6.4\n3.6\n8.3\n8.1\n6.3\n8.5\n8.4\n8.7\n8.5\n8.5\n9.5\n8.1\nOperating Cost\n(10%)\n8.0\n6.4\n7.6\n5.8\n2.3\n8.8\n8.2\n8.2\n7.0\n7.6\n7.6\n7.3\n9.0\nSpecifications\nAPEC ROES-50 Essence...\nWaterdrop G3P600 Rev...\niSpring RCC7AK\nPur Plus 11-Cup Pitcher\nCulligan with Zerowa...\nTravel Berkey\nAmazon Basics 10-Cup...\nPur Plus Vertical Fa...\nBrita Elite Advanced...\nBrita Metro\nBrita Large 10-Cup P...\nBrita Ultramax Dispe...\nWaterdrop WD-10UA Un...\nType\nUnder Sink Reverse Osmosis\nUnder Sink Reverse Osmosis\nUnder Sink Reverse Osmosis\nPitcher\nPitcher\nDispenser\nPitcher\nFaucet\nFaucet\nPitcher\nPitcher\nDispenser\nUnder Sink\nEstimated cost per year (40 gal\/month)\n$75\n$145\n$95\n$108\n$240\n$41\n$44\n$59\n$78\n$60\n$60\n$66\n$33\nCertifications\nWQA\nNSF\/ANSI certified against Standards 42, 58, and 372\nNSF\/ANSI 58\nWQA certified to reduce lead\nNSF certified to reduce microplastics\nNSF\/ANSI 42, 53, and 401\nExceeds EPA and ANSI\/NSF Standard 53 protocols\nWQA certified against NSF Standards 42, 53, and 372\nWQA and NSF certified to reduce 70 contaminants including lead, microplastics, mercury, chlorine taste and odor, DEET, and TTHM\nIAPMO R&T certified against NSF\/ANSI Standard 53\nNSF International certified against NSF\/ANSI Standard 53\nWQA certified against NSF\/ANSI Standards 42, 53, and 401\nWQA certified against NSF Standards 42 and 53\nWQA certified against NSF Standards 42 and 53\nIAPMO R&T certified against NSF\/ANSI Standard 53\nNSF International certified against NSF\/ANSI Standard 53\nWQA certified against NSF\/ANSI Standards 42, 53, and 401\nIAPMO R&T certified against NSF\/ANSI Standard 42 and 372\nEstimated cost per year (160 gal\/month)\n$75\n$145\n$95\n$432\n$960\n$41\n$176\n$90\n$288\n$240\n$240\n$264\n$33\nWastewater Generated\n3:1 ratio wastewater-to-filtered\n1:2 ratio wastewater-to-filtered\n2:1 ratio wastewater-to-filtered\nNo\nNo\nNo\nNo\nNo\nNo\nNo\nNo\nNo\nNo\nReplacement Schedule\nStages 1, 2, 3: 6-12 months\nStage 4: City: 2-4 years, Private well: 2 years\nStage 5: 2-4 years\nActivated Carbon: 12 months\nPre-sediment and Carbon Block: 6 months\nRO Membrane: 24 months\nStages 1, 2, 3: 6-12 months\nStage 4: 1-3 years\nStage 5: 12 months\nStage 6: 6-12 months\n151 L | 40 gallons (approx 2 months)\nWhen included TDS meter reads 006 (approx 2-4 weeks depending on water quality)\n11356 L | 3000 gallons (approx 4 years)\n151 L | 40 gallons (approx 2 months)\n379 L | 100 gallons (approx 3 months)\n379 L | 100 gallons (approx 4 months)\n151 L | 40 gallons (approx 2 months)\n151 L | 40 gallons (approx 2 months)\n454 L | 120 gallons (approx 6 months)\n30283 L | 8000 gallons (approx 12 months)\nReplacement Cost\n1 full set - $85\nStage 1, 2, 3 set - $30\nStage 4 - $10\nStage 5 - $40\nSingle filters - $30\nRO membrane - $110\n1 year supply set (without membrane) - $90\nSingle Filters - $19-$38\n1 year supply complete set - $80\n1 pack - $10 ($13)\n3 pack - $23 ($27)\n2 pack - $36\n12 pack - $160\n2 pack - $166\n3 pack ~ $13\n6 pack ~ $22\n1 pack - $19\n6 pack - $75\n1 pack - $18\n2 pack - $30\n1 pack - $8\n6 pack - $30\n1 pack - $8\n6 pack - $30\n1 pack - $20\n2 pack - $33\n1 pack - $33\nHow We Tested\nWe 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.\nWater Quality Lab Testing\nThe majority of a filter's score hinges on its effectiveness in removing various contaminants and impurities. To ensure the accuracy of our ratings, we commissioned professional water-quality testing at an an\nindependent water-quality lab\n. We focused on three major categories of contaminants: PFAS (forever chemicals), Critical Contaminants, and Heavy Metals. We ran two types of water samples through each filter: a highly contaminated “\nsuper\n” sample with elevated levels of each contaminant, and a standard tap water sample to mimic typical household conditions. We measured the concentration of each contaminant before and after filtration to determine how effectively each system reduced or eliminated these substances. This dual-sample approach allowed us to see both worst-case performance and everyday effectiveness.\nWe tested filtered water for common contaminants using an independent lab, conducted taste tests, and measured for total dissolved solids.  \nCredit: Matt Lighthart\nIn addition to lab analysis, we used a Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) meter and chemical indicator strips to further assess the efficiency of each filter. For the taste metric, we assembled a panel of judges to do a blind taste test and rank each water sample. They evaluated whether the filter introduced any unpleasant taste to clean water and assessed its ability to remove undesirable flavors and odors.\nFinally, we evaluated each filter's user experience, taking into account factors such as installation, maintenance, operating costs, and efficiency. This comprehensive approach ensures our reviews are thorough, reliable, and beneficial to users seeking the best water filtration system for their home. To learn more about our procedures, check out our\nHow We Test article\n.\nOur water filter rating scores are divided into\nsix different metrics\n:\nCritical Contaminant Removal\n(35% of overall score weighting)\nHeavy Metal and Trace Element Removal\n(25% of overall score weighting)\nTaste\n(20% weighting)\nSetup and Use\n(10% weighting)\nMaintenance and Setup\n(10% weighting)\nOperating Cost\n(10% weighting)\nWhy Trust GearLab\nOur testing team includes professionals in environmental research, engineering, and journalism.\nGraham Faulknor\nhas 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 brings substantial experience to the team when designing, analyzing, and communicating our findings.\nAustin Palmer\nis 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.\nSam Hill\nis a journalist based in the Pacific Northwest who focuses his writing on a mix of environmental and tech topics. He leverages his extensive experience in the industry to break down complex topics into clear, understandable results.\nPair this article with our buying advice article to make the best decision for your needs.  \nCredit: Abriah Wofford\nA small subset of our blind taste test.  \nCredit: Graham Faulknor\nWe built a custom test counter to conduct true side-by-side tests.  \nCredit: Graham Faulknor\nAnalysis and Test Results\nIn 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\ndetermine the best water filter for your needs\n.\nYour browser does not support charts\n×\nWorse Value\nBetter Value\nWhat's the Best Value?\nWhen it comes to getting the best value in a water filter, the list price of the product doesn't tell the whole story. A higher sticker often means more filtration stages, but that doesn't always translate to better results. What really matters is how well the filter actually removes contaminants. Additionally, there can be a big difference between upfront costs and ongoing costs when you factor in the cost of filter replacements.\nSome simple pitchers or faucet filters can outperform pricier under-sink systems while keeping your annual filter costs low. But for high-volume users, undersink models are going to offer the best value. The\nAPEC ROES-50 Essence Series\nor the\niSpring RCC7AK\nare fantastic options. The APEC ROES-50 is the overall winner here with a slightly higher score in secondary contaminant testing and cheaper long-term operating costs — it is especially cost-effective when you look at annual operating costs for those households with a need for higher volumes of filtered water.\nFor pitchers, the\nPur Plus 11-Cup Pitcher\nis an excellent value and top performer for 1-2 person households. It's a pretty average price in the pitcher-style filter lineup, but it competes with some RO systems when it comes to filter quality. If you don't have major health concerns when it comes to water quality, the\nAmazon Basics 10-Cup Pitcher\nis also a great little budget pitcher. It provides serviceable filtering for most households and is one of the lower-cost pitchers out there due to its ability to use filter replacements from multiple brands.\nSee more details below in the\nOperating Costs section\n.\nHeading Into the Great Outdoors?\nThen it's best to leave all of these products behind. Under-the-sink or faucet-mount filters aren't suited to the backcountry, and filter pitchers are designed to improve the taste and quality of already-potable water, not to render lake or stream water safe to drink. That task is better left to a\nwater filter specifically designed for the backcountry\n. To ensure the filter you are considering is up to the task you have in mind, we recommend that you always consult the manufacturer's specifications.\nUsing filtered water can help improve the taste of your morning coffee or tea, and softer water is easier on your appliances.  \nCredit: Matt Lighthart\nContaminant Removal\nGrowing awareness of potential contaminants in tap water and their possible health effects has made reliable water filtration more important than ever. Many people don't realize what unseen pollutants could be in their water, but filters can provide peace of mind by delivering clean, safe drinking water. To test performance, we prepared water samples with elevated levels of chlorine, iron, sulfate, lead, fluoride, and copper - all well above EPA safe limits. We then send filtered and control samples to\nTap Score for independent lab testing\n, ensuring accurate and trustworthy results.\nWe defined Critical Contaminant Removal as the filter's ability to eliminate high-priority pollutants like lead, PFNA, arsenic, and uranium, while Secondary Contaminant Removal covers trace elements and minerals such as copper, zinc, iron, and barium that can affect taste and safety but are generally less immediately hazardous. What contaminants you're concerned about depends on your health and the water quality where you live.\nOpening the filter box to replace the internal filter on the Brita Elite Advanced.  \nCredit: Matt Lighthart\nCritical Contaminant Removal\nWe examined how well each filter handled the critical water contaminants, providing a more comprehensive understanding of which models truly deliver safer water and which ones fall short. The chart below primarily focuses on the most toxic\nheavy metals that can make their way into tap water\n.\n% Critical Contaminant Removal\nProduct\nLead\nArsenic\nUranium\nAPEC Essence ROES-50\n100\n100\n100\niSpring RCC7AK RO\n100\n100\n100\nPur Plus Pitcher\n100\n100\n100\nWaterdrop G3P600 RO\n100\n100\n100\nCulligan Zerowater Pitcher 10-Cup\n100\n100\n98\nTravel Berkey\n100\n25\n95\nBrita Large Pitcher (10 cup)\n94\n9\n97\nAmazon Basics\n97\n0\n97\nBrita Metro\n93\n3\n96\nBrita Faucet Mount Elite\n100\n3\n44\nPur Plus Faucet Mount\n100\n9\n28\nBrita UltraMax Elite\n99\n0\n30\nWaterdrop 10UA Under Sink\n0\n0\n1\nAgain, the RO systems we tested came out on top, removing nearly all the contaminants we tested for in both contaminated samples and standard tap water. For pitchers, the\nPur Plus 11-Cup Pitcher\nand\nCulligan with Zerowater 8-Cup Pitcher\nboth neared RO-quality results.\nThe\nAmazon Basics 10-Cup Pitcher\nfiltered lead (97.2% removed) and uranium (100% removed) well, but it isn't NSF certified for many serious contaminants like fluoride or nitrates.\nThe\nWaterdrop 10UA Under Sink\ncame in toward the bottom of test results, making it the lowest-scored under-sink system. It was able to filter trace amounts of nitrate, but barely enough to mention. It only filtered out 3.8% of lead, 10% of uranium in water quality tests, and it isn't certified to reduce arsenic.\nPFAS Forever Chemical Removal\nPFAS are a group of “\nforever chemicals\n” that don't break down easily, and\nsome reports say they may be more prevalent\nthan we previously thought, and they are toxic even in very small amounts. They fall into our critical contaminant category. In the water quality test results, we specifically looked at two types: PFNA, which sticks around longer, and PFBA, which is smaller and exits the body more quickly. You don't want either in your drinking water. The results of PFAS removal lab tests are charted below.\n% PFAS Removal\nProduct\nTotal Reduction\nPFNA Reduction\nPFBA Reduction\nAPEC Essence ROES-50\n100\n100\n100\nBrita Faucet Mount Elite\n100\n100\n100\nPur Plus Faucet Mount\n100\n100\n100\nTravel Berkey\n100\n100\n100\nWaterdrop G3P600 RO\n100\n100\n100\nPur Plus Pitcher\n97\n96\n100\nWaterdrop 10UA Under Sink\n93\n92\n100\niSpring RCC7AK RO\n91\n90\n100\nBrita UltraMax Elite\n91\n89\n100\nAmazon Basics\n87\n85\n100\nCulligan Zerowater Pitcher 10-Cup\n87\n85\n100\nBrita Large Pitcher (10 cup)\n73\n69\n100\nBrita Metro\n54\n51\n72\nAcross the systems we tested, the reverse osmosis units — particularly the APEC ROES-50 and the other under-sink RO models — delivered the strongest PFAS removal, consistently reducing both PFNA and PFBA to near- or fully undetectable levels in both tap water and super-contaminated samples. The two faucet filters we tested — the\nBrita Elite Advanced Faucet\nand the\nPur Plus Vertical Faucet\nalso hit near-top marks here.\nPitcher filters showed far more mixed results: the high-end, specialty PFAS-targeting pitchers, like the\nPur Plus 11-Cup Pitcher\n, performed respectably, but most standard carbon pitchers struggled, often removing only a portion of PFBA and doing very little against PFNA. The\nBrita Large 10-Cup Pitcher\nand\nBrita Metro\nwere among the most disappointing performers in PFAS testing, with 68.99% and 50.78% PFNA removal rates, respectively. They removed far less PFNA and PFBA than comparable filters and fell well short of what we'd expect from trusted, everyday-use pitchers.\nThe Waterdrop WD-10UA Under Sink essential only removes chlorine and light sediment.  \nCredit: Matt Lighthart\nSecondary Contaminant Removal\nCertain heavy metals and trace elements get their own category because they behave differently from critical contaminants and often enter tap water through plumbing corrosion or natural mineral sources. Some of these are even nutritionally essential in small amounts, and while they're usually less urgent than issues like lead or PFNA, elevated levels of metals such as copper, zinc, or barium\ncan impact long-term health\nand the taste of your water — so we test them separately to show which filters can reliably address these everyday concerns. These materials are typically more of a concern if you draw water from a private well.\nThe results of heavy metal and trace element removal tests are charted below.\nMineral and Trace Element Removal\nProduct\nIron (ppm)\nCopper (ppm)\nBarium (ppm)\nZinc (ppm)\nAPEC Essence ROES-50\n100\n100\n100\n100\nBrita Faucet Mount Elite\n100\n100\n100\n100\nCulligan Zerowater Pitcher 10-Cup\n100\n100\n100\n100\niSpring RCC7AK RO\n100\n100\n100\n100\nPur PlusFaucet Mount\n100\n100\n100\n100\nTravel Berkey\n100\n100\n100\n100\nWaterdrop G3P600 RO\n100\n96\n88\n87\nAmazon Basics\n96\n93\n85\n74\nBrita Large Pitcher (10 cup)\n88\n85\n78\n62\nBrita Metro\n87\n86\n77\n62\nBrita UltraMax Elite\n99\n66\n61\n0\nPur Plus Pitcher\n100\n100\n0\n0\nWaterdrop 10UA Under Sink\n4\n0\n0\n100\nThe top reverse osmosis systems dealt with heavy metals and trace elements well across the board, reducing nearly all secondary contaminants to zero in tests of super-contaminated and tap water samples. The\nCulligan with Zerowater 8-Cup Pitcher\nalso performed well here, reliably knocking out metals like copper, zinc, iron, and barium; while we did see minor copper and zinc leaching in the lab, the amounts were extremely small and stayed well below EPA health guidelines.\nCompared to other reverse osmosis systems, the Waterdrop G3P600 takes up much less cabinet space.  \nCredit: Matt Lighthart\nThe\nTravel Berkey\ndelivered solid mid-tier results, effectively removing metals like barium, copper, strontium, nickel, zinc, and iron, with decent performance on vanadium, lithium, and boron; while it showed small amounts of aluminum, cobalt, and silver leaching, levels stayed safe, and only selenium and molybdenum proved unreliable. The\nAmazon Basics 10-Cup Pitcher\nwas right behind, but there were some issues with the leaching of aluminum and very small amounts of silver.\nAgain, the\nWaterdrop WD-10UA Under Sink\ncame in last place. It reliably removed 100% of zinc from the contaminated samples (its primary certified target), but most other metals, like cobalt and chromium, passed through largely unchanged. It didn't introduce any noticeable leaching, so at least it isn't adding anything unwanted to your water. That's a low bar, though. The\nBrita Ultramax Dispenser with Elite Filter\nwas also disappointing in this category, showing inconsistent removal of several metals and introducing some aluminum during testing.\nBrita's Elite filters used in the Brita Ultramax Dispenser last about three times as long as standard filters from Brita.  \nCredit: Matt Lighthart\nTaste\nFiltered water can make a noticeable difference in how your tap water tastes, especially if it carries metallic or chemical notes. Enjoying crisp, clean-tasting water straight from your faucet or pitcher not only improves the everyday experience but can also encourage you to stay hydrated and cut down on bottled water use. Taste is subjective, though; some people like a hint of minerals, while others prefer a completely neutral flavor. We aimed to capture overall impressions across a range of preferences. For taste tests, we ran each filter with water from a garden hose to standardize the source, then conducted a blind taste test with five evaluators. Each tester sampled filtered water from every unit alongside unfiltered tap and garden hose water, ranking the results from best to worst to give us a clear sense of relative taste performance. When we weren't able to run water samples through taste tests, we crowdsourced opinions by researching online reviews to glean accurate notes about each model through user feedback.\nYour browser does not support charts\n×\nOverall, users consistently reported that filtered water tasted fresher across all models we tested, though a few naysayers occasionally noted plastic or flat flavors. Among our top performers, the\nAPEC ROES-50 Essence Series\n,\nWaterdrop G3P600 Reverse Osmosis System\n, and\nPur Plus 11-Cup Pitcher\nreceived the highest marks for crisp, clean taste. Models with slightly lower scores, namely the\nCulligan with Zerowater 8-Cup Pitcher\n,\nTravel Berkey\n, and\nWaterdrop WD-10UA Under Sink\n, still delivered noticeably improved water compared to unfiltered tap, even if minor off-flavors were reported by some users.\nWe enlisted other members of our team to do blind taste tests.  \nCredit: Matt Lighthart\nMaintenance and Setup\nWe often take running water for granted, and a great water filter fits seamlessly into that everyday routine. However, setup, daily use, and ongoing upkeep can vary a lot from model to model. Our testing team dives in, handling installation and daily operation to see how each unit performs in real-world use.\nSome filters, like under-sink RO systems, require a bit of DIY know-how to install, while pitchers are ready to go after a quick rinse. Which model fits best really comes down to how much time and effort you're willing to put into setup and upkeep.\nYour browser does not support charts\n×\nThe easiest water filters to use are, obviously, the pitcher-style filters. After a quick initial clean, all you need to do is drop in a filter and fill it up with water to have cleaner, tastier water at your disposal. These models are designed to be easy to clean regularly and during filter replacements. Some are even dishwasher safe. You won't need to check any instructions here — these are as “\nplug and play\n” as they come.\nThe top performers in ease of use all follow the 'fill-and-go' philosophy. The\nBrita Ultramax Dispenser with Elite Filter\nis especially convenient, with a large capacity that means fewer refills. The\nAmazon Basics 10-Cup Pitcher\nand\nBrita Metro\nare compact, simple, and virtually maintenance-free, making them perfect for quick daily use. The\nCulligan with Zerowater 8-Cup Pitcher\nalso shines here, with a straightforward drop-in filter and intuitive design that keeps clean water flowing with minimal effort. Some pitchers do filter at different speeds, though, so take individual reviews into account if you don't want to sacrifice speed.\nThe Brita Ultramax Dispenser is pretty easy to fill, but it can get pretty heavy when it's full.  \nCredit: Matt Lighthart\nThe Amazon Basics 10-Cup Pitcher easily fits in the fridge, although it might be too wide to sit in a door shelf.  \nCredit: Matt Lighthart\nThe small size of the Brita Metro makes it easy to use on a daily basis, but it's best suited to smaller households of one or two people.  \nCredit: Matt Lighthart\nUnfortunately, replacement filters for this pitcher are quite pricey, and they need to be changed more often than any other system we tested.  \nCredit: Matt Lighthart\nBoth of the faucet models were surprisingly easy to set up as well. The Pur Plus Vertical Faucet snaps onto most standard taps and delivers filtered water instantly. They require a filter change every few months, which we found easy to do, and daily use is effortless, making them a hassle-free alternative to pitchers.\nThe Pur Plus is easily snapped onto many kitchen faucets.  \nCredit: Matt Lighthart\nAll of the RO systems received much lower scores in the category, not because they're a complete hassle, but because it takes a little more know-how to install them. Most require you to renovate (and abandon) under-sink spaces and some basic plumbing access. Once set up, they run quietly and efficiently, but the initial setup is more involved than pitchers or faucet models.\nThe\nWaterdrop G3P600 Reverse Osmosis System\nis specifically designed to navigate those issues, though, with a more compact design and streamlined installation that reduces the hassle and space concerns typical of traditional RO setups. It's no water pitcher, but it's a bit simpler.\nThe Waterdrop G3P600 Reverse Osmosis System has a pretty fast flow rate, which is impressive for an on-demand filter system.  \nCredit: Matt Lighthart\nOperating Cost\nOperating costs are an important part of the equation. While filtered water tastes better and is safer, some systems require frequent, pricey replacement filters or produce extra wastewater, which can add up over time. It's worth factoring in both filter longevity and the amount of water wasted during the process when deciding which model offers the best long-term value.\nWe divide annual operating costs into two key categories: costs for filtering 40 gallons a month vs. 160 gallons per month. Why? We want to capture the difference in value between households with low-volume needs (40 gallons) and higher-volume needs (160 gallons).\nAt around 40 gallons per month, pitcher-style filters sit solidly in the middle of the value spectrum, thanks to zero installation costs and no wasted water.\nYour browser does not support charts\n×\nOnce usage ramps up to 160 gallons per month, the picture changes. Frequent filter replacements make most pitchers less cost-effective at higher volumes, and for larger households or heavy water use, under-sink systems become the more economical choice.\nYour browser does not support charts\n×\nThose Filter Replacement Costs Add Up!\nThe\nCulligan with Zerowater 8-Cup Pitcher\noffers good water quality performance; however, the frequent need for filter replacements significantly increases annual operating costs. You'll want to consider annual costs in your purchase decision to hit the right balance of water quality, convenience, and cost for your family.\nReverse osmosis systems cost a lot more upfront than pitchers or faucet filters, and take more effort to install. But, for households that frequently need filtered water, their reasonable annual operating costs and higher-volume output may justify the higher initial cost. The\nAPEC ROES-50 Essence Series\nemerged as the most affordable reverse osmosis system, with estimated annual filter costs of about $75,\nregardless of water usage\n. The\niSpring RCC7AK\nfollowed at roughly $95 per year, slightly higher because it includes an extra filter in the rotation. The\nWaterdrop G3P600 Reverse Osmosis System\nwas the priciest by far, with annual costs hitting around $145, significantly more than its RO counterparts.\nPre-filters can last 6-12 months, depending on your water quality, so you don't have to worry about swapping them out too often.  \nCredit: Matt Lighthart\nEvery filter change adds up over time, and the difference between models can be striking. Among pitchers, the\nAmazon Basics 10-Cup Pitcher\ncame out as the most affordable, with estimated annual costs of just $44 at 40 gallons per month. On the other end, the\nCulligan with Zerowater 8-Cup Pitcher\nwas a major outlier, costing a whopping $240 for the same monthly usage.\nThe drop-in filters are super easy to change and don't cost too much to replace, especially when you have the option to shop around.  \nCredit: Matt Lighthart\nFor faucet filters, the\nPur Plus Vertical Faucet\nand\nBrita Elite Advanced Faucet\nshow a notable annual cost difference: at 40 gallons per month, annual expenses are $41 versus $78, respectively. That gap widens even further with heavier use—at 160 gallons per month, the difference jumps to $90 versus $288.\nBottom line\n: Reverse Osmosis systems generally make more sense for high-volume use since they're more economical if your needs go beyond just drinking water and can efficiently provide filtered water for cooking, coffee, and other household needs. Pitchers and faucet filters remain convenient and easy for light use and drinking water, but their costs can escalate quickly if you rely on them too heavily.\nWastewater with Reverse Osmosis\nAnother factor to keep in mind with reverse osmosis systems is wastewater. RO filters produce a surprising amount of wastewater as part of the filtration process as they need to flush contaminants off the membrane. This wastewater is plumbed into your kitchen sink drain pipe (although some people come up with creative solutions to plumb it into a rain barrel for watering plants). While not a deal-breaker for most people interested in cleaner water, this additional water used is a factor to be aware of and consider.\nFor example, as shown in the chart below, the\nAPEC ROES-50 Essence Series\ngenerates about 3 gallons of wastewater for every 1 gallon of filtered water and the\niSpring RCC7AK\nruns at a 2:1 ratio. The\nWaterdrop G3P600\nproduces the\nleast amount of wastewater\n, roughly 1\/2 gallon of wastewater per each 1 gallon filtered.\nYour browser does not support charts\n×\nThe iSpring RCC7AK showed good results in contaminant removal testing, but it doesn't stand out compared to the other reverse osmosis systems in our lineup.  \nCredit: Matt Lighthart\nHow to Pick A Water Filter\nWe've put together four key considerations, including the type of filtration system, available space, and budget, to help you find the best water filtration for your home.\nAll the standards, certifications, and labels attached to water filters can be confusing. NSF\/ANSI standards are outlined by the National Sanitation Foundation and the American National Standards Institute. A full list can be\nfound here\n, but in short, the one you want to look for most of the time is NSF\/ANSI 53, which covers filters that are meant to handle contaminants with known health effects, like lead and PFAS.\nThe\nNSF guide to Contaminant Reduction Claims\nby filter can be found here. Other acronyms to know are WQA (Water Quality Association) and IAPMO (International Association of Plumbing & Mechanical Officials), which are both organizations that can grant certifications to filters that pass NSF standards.\nWhile most people are accustomed to pitcher-style water filters, other options also exist, such as under-the-sink, faucet-mounted, and reverse osmosis systems. Deciding on the appropriate filtration system comes down to the level of contaminants in your water, your budget, and the level of setup needed. If you know your water has higher levels of contaminants and you need to cover a wide range of filtration, the upfront cost of a reverse osmosis system can be worth it. On the other hand, if you're more or less hoping to get cleaner, odor-free water, then a pitcher is your best bet.\nDepending on your household size, you may opt for larger capacity systems. While the simplicity and ease of use of a pitcher is great, larger households may find themselves refilling too often, especially if you use your filtered water for everything from drinking to boiling pasta and watering your houseplants. For those who consume more water, an under-the-sink option may work best for your needs. Also, consider how much free space you have. Under-the-sink options help keep counter space free, but you will have to clear a place to potentially store a tank along with the filters.\nPeriodic maintenance of your water filter system is key to maintaining proper filtration. Some systems require changing filters after only two months, while others can run the same filter for a year (or longer, depending on usage). A simple pitcher-style system typically only needs one filter type to be replaced, while more complex filtration systems, such as reverse osmosis filters, require different replacements depending on the filter stage. For those undecided on a filtration system, consider whether the extra maintenance costs and time are worth it for the extra filtration capabilities.\nInstallation of under-the-sink systems involves a variety of different parts and often requires cutting pipe and drilling for installation of the faucet. If you feel comfortable with DIY projects, installing a filtration system can be fairly straightforward. However, if you're renting, have limited space under your sink, or are not keen on self-installation, it's worth considering options that can be placed on the counter.\nSpigot dispensers like the one found on the Brita Ultramax can be convenient than pitcher pours.  \nCredit: Matt Lighthart\nConclusion\nHere at GearLab, we aim to provide you with firsthand knowledge from our testing experience, so you can purchase the best products that suit your needs and budget. For water filters, we looked closely at the subtle nuances that set pitchers, faucet models, and under-the-sink versions apart from one another. Whether you are looking to improve the taste of city water or want the perfect-tasting refreshment for a wedding or backyard BBQ, we hope you now have the knowledge to buy the perfect water filter for you.\nAt GearLab, we cover in-depth reviews on a variety of products, spanning goods from\nair purifiers\nto\nblood pressure monitors\n. If you're looking for some new home or kitchen appliances, we've got testing-backed opinions on the\ntop-rated air fryers\nand\nvacuum cleaners\n.\nAppendix\nFor those who are interested, the detailed results of the\nIndependent Water Quality Lab\ntesting we conducted are listed in the tables below:\nCritical Contaminant Results\n \nTest\nLead Reduction\nLead (ppm)\nArsenic Reduction\nArsenic (ppm)\nUranium Reduction\nUranium (ppm)\nNitrate Reduction\nNitrate as N (ppm)\nSupply (baseline)\n-\n-\n0.26\n-\n0.00265\n-\n0.00376\n-\n2.46\nHealth Guideline Limit (HGL)\n-\n-\n0\n-\n0\n-\n0\n-\n10\nEPA Limit\n-\n-\n0\n-\n0.01\n-\n0.03\n-\n10\nAPEC Essence ROES-50\nTap Score Essential City Water Test\n100%\n0\n100%\n0\n100%\n0\n-\n-\niSpring RCC7AK RO\nTap Score Essential City Water Test\n100%\n0\n100%\n0\n100%\n0\n-\n-\nWaterdrop G3P600 RO\nTap Score Essential City Water Test\n100%\n0\n100%\n0\n100%\n0\n-\n-\nPur Plus\nTap Score Essential City Water Test\n100%\n0\n100%\n0\n100%\n0\n92%\n0.2\nCulligan Zerowater Pitcher 10-Cup\nTap Score Essential City Water Test\n100%\n0\n100%\n0\n98%\n0.00008\n100%\n0\nTravel Berkey\nTap Score Essential City Water Test\n100%\n0\n25%\n0.00198\n95%\n0.00017\n20%\n1.98\nPUR PLUS Faucet Mount\nTap Score Essential City Water Test\n100%\n0\n9%\n0.0024\n28%\n0.0027\n37%\n1.54\nBrita Faucet Mount Elite\nTap Score Essential City Water Test\n100%\n0\n3%\n0.00256\n44%\n0.00212\n33%\n1.66\nBrita UltraMax Elite\nTap Score Essential City Water Test\n99%\n0.0019\n0%\n0.00266\n30%\n0.00262\n0%\n2.47\nAmazon Basics\nTap Score Essential City Water Test\n97%\n0.0072\nAdded 13%\n0.00299\n97%\n0.00011\n64%\n0.88\nBrita Large Pitcher (10 cup)\nTap Score Essential City Water Test\n94%\n0.016\n9%\n0.0024\n97%\n0.00013\n70%\n0.74\nBrita Metro\nTap Score Essential City Water Test\n93%\n0.017\n3%\n0.00258\n96%\n0.00015\n61%\n0.95\nWaterdrop 10UA Under Sink\nTap Score Essential City Water Test\n0%\n0.27\n0%\n0.00264\n1%\n0.00374\n-\n-\nMetals and Trace Elements and % Removal\n \nTest\nBarium Removed\nBarium (ppm)\nCopper (Extreme) Removed\nCopper Extreme (ppm)\nCopper (Normal) Removed\nCopper Normal (ppm)\nVanadium Removed\nVanadium - Tap Water (ppm)\nIron Removed\nIron (ppm)\nStrontium Removed\nStrontium (ppm)\nZinc Removed\nZinc (ppm)\nSupply (baseline)\n-\n-\n0.012\n-\n8\n-\n0.014\n-\n0.00794\n-\n4.5\n-\n0.31\n-\n0.039\nHealth Guideline Limit (HGL)\n-\n-\n2\n-\n0.3\n-\n0.3\n-\n0.005\n-\n4\n-\n3\n-\n2\nEPA Limit\n-\n-\n2\n-\n1.3\n-\n1.3\n-\n0.23\n-\n0.3 (SMCL)\n-\n4 (SMCL)\n-\n5\nAmazon Basics\nTap Score Essential City Water Test\n85%\n0.0018\n93%\n0.56\n95%\n0.00065\n70%\n0.00242\n96%\n0.19\n97%\n0.01\n74%\n0.01\nAPEC Essence ROES-50\nTap Score Essential City Water Test\n100%\n0\n100%\n0\n-\n-\n-\n-\n100%\n0\n-\n-\n100%\n0\nBrita Faucet Mount Elite\nTap Score Essential City Water Test\n100%\n0\n100%\n0\n100%\n0\n42%\n0.00461\n100%\n0\n97%\n0.01\n100%\n0\nBrita Large Pitcher (10 cup)\nTap Score Essential City Water Test\n78%\n0.0026\n85%\n1.2\n95%\n0.00065\n74%\n0.00205\n88%\n0.53\n90%\n0.03\n62%\n0.015\nBrita Metro\nTap Score Essential City Water Test\n77%\n0.0028\n86%\n1.1\n100%\n0\n64%\n0.00282\n87%\n0.6\n90%\n0.03\n62%\n0.015\nBrita UltraMax Elite\nTap Score Essential City Water Test\n61%\n0.0047\n66%\n2.7\n95%\n0.00065\n49%\n0.00405\n99%\n0.066\n35%\n0.2\nAdded 5%\n0.041\nCulligan Zerowater Pitcher 10-Cup\nTap Score Essential City Water Test\n100%\n0\n100%\n0\nAdded 114%\n0.03\n100%\n0\n100%\n0\n100%\n0\n100%\n0\niSpring RCC7AK RO\nTap Score Essential City Water Test\n100%\n0\n100%\n0\n-\n-\n-\n-\n100%\n0\n-\n-\n100%\n0\nPur Plus\nTap Score Essential City Water Test\nAdded 1150 - 1983%\n0.25\n100%\n0\n100%\n0\n100%\n0\n100%\n0\n97%\n0.01\nAdded 151%\n0.098\nPUR PLUS Faucet Mount\nTap Score Essential City Water Test\n100%\n0\n100%\n0\n100%\n0\n53%\n0.00376\n100%\n0\n77%\n0.07\n100%\n0\nTravel Berkey\nTap Score Essential City Water Test\n100%\n0\n100%\n0\n93%\n0.00096\n84%\n0.00128\n100%\n0\n100%\n0\n100%\n0\nWaterdrop 10UA Under Sink\nTap Score Essential City Water Test\nAdded 8%\n0.013\nAdded 2%\n8.2\n0%\n0.014\n-\n-\n4%\n4.3\n-\n-\n100%\n0\nWaterdrop G3P600 RO\nTap Score Essential City Water Test\n88%\n0.0014\n96%\n0.29\n-\n-\n-\n-\n100%\n0.013\n-\n-\n87%\n0.0049","attrs_markdown":"[![GearLab logo](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/images\/gl-logo-web-v1o.png)](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/)\n\n[![GearLab logo](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/images\/gl-logo-web-v1o.png)](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/)\n\nReviews You Can Rely On\n\n- [Home](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/)\n- [Electronics](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/electronics)\n  - [All Electronics](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/electronics)\n  - [Batteries & Chargers](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/t\/batteries-and-chargers)\n  - [Cars & Auto](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/t\/cars-and-auto)\n  - [Cool Gadgets](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/cool-gadgets)\n  - [Drones](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/t\/drones)\n  - [Gaming](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/t\/gaming)\n  - [Home Electronics](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/t\/home-electronics)\n  - [Home Security](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/t\/home-security)\n  - [Laptops](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/t\/laptops)\n  - [Networking](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/t\/networking)\n  - [Photography](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/t\/photography)\n  - [Smartphone](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/t\/smartphones)\n  - [Storage](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/t\/storage)\n  - [Tablet](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/t\/tablets)\n  - [Tinkering & STEM](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/t\/tinkering-and-stem)\n- [Kitchen](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/kitchen)\n  - [All Kitchen & Dining](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/kitchen)\n  - [Kitchen Appliances](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/t\/kitchen-appliances)\n  - [Baking](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/t\/baking)\n  - [Cleaning](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/t\/cleaning)\n  - [Coffee & Espresso](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/t\/coffee)\n  - [Cooking Tools & Utensils](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/t\/cooking-tools)\n  - [Cookware](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/t\/cookware)\n  - [Dining](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/t\/dining)\n  - [Kitchen Storage](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/t\/kitchen-storage)\n  - [Wine & Bar](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/t\/wine-and-bar)\n- [Audio](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/audio)\n  - [All Audio](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/audio)\n  - [Earbuds](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/topics\/audio\/best-wireless-earbuds)\n  - [Headphones](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/catalog\/headphones)\n  - [Speakers](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/t\/speakers)\n- [Home & Garden](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/home)\n  - [All Home & Garden](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/home)\n  - [Home Appliances](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/t\/home-appliances)\n  - [Bathroom](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/t\/bathroom)\n  - [Bedroom](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/t\/bedroom)\n  - [Cleaning](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/t\/cleaning)\n  - [Furniture & Decor](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/t\/furniture-and-decor)\n  - [Gardening](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/t\/gardening)\n  - [Hobby & Crafts](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/t\/hobby-and-crafts)\n  - [Laundry & Storage](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/t\/laundry-and-storage)\n  - [Patio & Yard](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/t\/patio-and-yard)\n  - [Pets](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/t\/pets)\n  - [Skateboards & Scooters](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/t\/skateboards-and-scooters)\n  - [Smart Home](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/smart-home)\n  - [Tools & DIY](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/tools)\n  - [Toys & Games](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/t\/toys-and-games)\n  - [Vacuum Cleaners](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/catalog\/vacuum-cleaner)\n- [Health](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/health-fitness)\n  - [All Health & Fitness](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/health-fitness)\n  - [Fitness](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/t\/fitness)\n  - [Home Appliances](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/t\/home-appliances)\n  - [Personal Care](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/t\/personal-care)\n  - [Wellness](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/t\/wellness)\n- [Floor Cleaning](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/floor-cleaning)\n  - [All Floor Cleaning](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/floor-cleaning)\n  - [Steam Cleaners](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/topics\/floor-cleaning\/best-steam-mop)\n  - [Vacuums](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/catalog\/vacuum-cleaner)\n- [Office](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/small-and-home-office)\n  - [All Office](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/small-and-home-office)\n  - [Keyboard & Mouse](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/t\/keyboard-and-mouse)\n  - [Networking](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/t\/networking)\n  - [Office Accessories](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/t\/office-accessories)\n  - [Office Furniture](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/t\/office-furniture)\n  - [Printers & Scanners](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/t\/printers-and-scanners)\n  - [Smart Home](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/smart-home)\n- [More](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/topics\/kitchen\/best-water-filter)\n  - [Tools & DIY](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/tools)\n  - [Cool Gadgets](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/cool-gadgets)\n  - [Smart Home](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/smart-home)\n  - [About GearLab](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/about)\n\nWe 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.](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/about)\n\n1. [Wellness](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/t\/wellness)\n2. [Water Filter Reviews](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/catalog\/water-filter)\n\n- [Review](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/topics\/kitchen\/best-water-filter)\n- [Compare](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/topics\/kitchen\/best-water-filter\/ratings)\n- [Buying Advice](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/topics\/kitchen\/best-water-filter\/buying-advice)\n- [How We Tested](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/topics\/kitchen\/best-water-filter\/how-we-test)\n\n# The Best Water Filters of 2026 \\| Lab Tested & Ranked\nWe put 13 top water filters from Brita, PUR, Waterdrop, iSpring, and more head-to-head to find the best\n\n![gearlab tested logo](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/images\/gearlab_tested_v4_80w.png)\n\n[![Best Water Filter Review (A few of the different filters included in this review.)](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/40\/37\/525265_15068_XXL.jpg)](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/40\/37\/525265_15068_XXXL.jpg)\n\nA few of the different filters included in this review.\n\nCredit: Matt Lighthart\n\n![Graham Faulknor](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/37\/60\/497514_8305_XSS.jpg)\n\nBy [Graham Faulknor](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/author\/graham-faulknor) ⋅ Senior Review Analyst ⋅ Updated December 5, 2025\n\nContributions From: [Austin Palmer](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/author\/austin-palmer) & [Sam Hill](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/author\/sam-hill)\n\nClean water is a no brainer when trying to take care of your health and hydration. We bought the 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](https:\/\/mytapscore.com\/) to measure precisely the effectiveness of each filter. We also evaluated annual operating costs, ease of installation, and daily ease of use.\n\nThe water quality lab tests examined filter performance for critically important contaminants such as: [PFAS](https:\/\/sustainability.yale.edu\/explainers\/yale-experts-explain-pfas-forever-chemicals) (forever chemicals), Heavy Metals (like [lead](https:\/\/www.epa.gov\/ground-water-and-drinking-water\/basic-information-about-lead-drinking-water)), and other critical contaminants.\n\nThe [Pur Plus 11-Cup Pitcher](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/topics\/kitchen\/best-water-filter#best-pitcher-filter) is the best filter for most people — it's compact, convenient, and its filtration rivals that of premium reverse osmosis (RO) models.\n\nOur favorite under-sink filtration system is the [APEC ROES-50 Essence Series](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/topics\/kitchen\/best-water-filter#best-reverse-osmosis-system). It received nearly perfect scores in contaminant removal and also offers compelling long-term annual costs.\n\nYou might also be interested in our [water bottle review](https:\/\/www.outdoorgearlab.com\/topics\/camping-and-hiking\/best-water-bottle) and if you want to purify water from a non-potable source, take a look at a [backpacking water purification systems](https:\/\/www.outdoorgearlab.com\/topics\/camping-and-hiking\/best-backpacking-water-filter).\n## Quick Look\n![Thumbnail photo of Pur Plus 11-Cup Pitcher](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/40\/37\/525195_10566_S.jpg)\n\nBest Pitcher Filter\n\nPur Plus 11-Cup Pitcher\n\n[READ MORE ↓](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/topics\/kitchen\/best-water-filter#best-pitcher-filter)\n\n![Thumbnail photo of APEC ROES-50 Essence Series](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/40\/36\/525128_4018_S.jpg)\n\nBest Reverse Osmosis System\n\nAPEC ROES-50 Essence Series\n\n[READ MORE ↓](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/topics\/kitchen\/best-water-filter#best-reverse-osmosis-system)\n\n![Thumbnail photo of Amazon Basics 10-Cup Pitcher](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/40\/37\/525186_13185_S.jpg)\n\nBest Value Pitcher\n\nAmazon Basics 10-Cup Pitcher\n\n[READ MORE ↓](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/topics\/kitchen\/best-water-filter#best-value-pitcher)\n\n![Thumbnail photo of Travel Berkey](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/40\/36\/525092_8898_S.jpg)\n\nBest Long Term Value\n\nTravel Berkey\n\n[READ MORE ↓](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/topics\/kitchen\/best-water-filter#best-long-term-value)\n\n![Thumbnail photo of Waterdrop G3P600 Reverse Osmosis System](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/40\/36\/525119_4042_S.jpg)\n\nFavorite Modern Reverse Osmosis System\n\nWaterdrop G3P600 Reverse Osmosis System\n\n[READ MORE ↓](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/topics\/kitchen\/best-water-filter#favorite-modern-reverse-osmosis-system)\n\n![Thumbnail photo of Pur Plus Vertical Faucet](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/40\/36\/525158_5687_S.jpg)\n\nBest Faucet\n\nPur Plus Vertical Faucet\n\n[READ MORE ↓](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/topics\/kitchen\/best-water-filter#best-faucet)\n\n![Thumbnail photo of Culligan with Zerowater 8-Cup Pitcher](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/40\/37\/525212_18030_S.jpg)\n\nBest Pitcher for Secondary Contaminant Removal\n\nCulligan with Zerowater 8-Cup Pitcher\n\n[READ MORE ↓](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/topics\/kitchen\/best-water-filter#best-pitcher-for-secondary-contaminant-removal)\n\n[Show 3 More ▼]()\n\n[Show 3 Less ▲]()\n\n## The Best Water Filters\nFull results from testing 13 top products are in our [Product Comparison Table](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/topics\/kitchen\/best-water-filter#product-comparison-table) and [Analysis & Test Results](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/topics\/kitchen\/best-water-filter#analysis-and-test-results) sections.\n\nYour browser does not support charts×\n\n## Best Pitcher Filter\n### Pur Plus 11-Cup Pitcher\n\n![Editors' Choice Award](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/images\/editors-choice_47x107.png)\n\n![pur plus 11-cup pitcher](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/40\/37\/525195_10566_M.jpg)\n\n![Editors' Choice Award](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/images\/editors-choice_47x107.png)\n\n[Read the Review](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/reviews\/kitchen\/water-filter\/pur-plus-11-cup-pitcher)\n\n81\n\n**OVERALL  SCORE**\n\n- Critical Contaminant Removal **9\\.6**\n- Secondary Contaminant Removal **6\\.5**\n- Taste **8\\.6**\n- Maintenance and Setup **8\\.3**\n- Operating Cost **5\\.8**\n\n**PROS**\n\nGreat contaminant removal\n\nGood taste\n\nFilter change light\n\nRemoves microplastics\n\n**CONS**\n\nSmall fill opening\n\nMore costly than others over time for filters\n\nSlower to filter than some other pitchers\n\nThe [Pur Plus 11-Cup Pitcher](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/reviews\/kitchen\/water-filter\/pur-plus-11-cup-pitcher) stands out because it delivers filtration performance nearly on par with what we expect from under-sink reverse osmosis (RO) systems without requiring a complicated install. This would be a great choice for renters or others who want cleaner water without embarking on a DIY project. The 3-in-1 PUR PLUS filter is NSF-certified for lead, microplastics, chlorine, and more than 20 chemical and physical impurities, providing an impressive level of purification. In testing, it lived up to its certifications, removing nearly all major contaminants, including 100% of lead, arsenic, and uranium, plus over 96% of PFNA, making it one of the most capable pitcher filters we have used. It has a slim, fridge-friendly shape and a built-in filter change indicator that removes the guesswork from maintenance.\n\n**SPECIFICATIONS**\n\n|   |   |\n|---|---|\n| Type | Pitcher |\n| Estimated cost per year (40 gal\/month) i | \\$108 |\n| Certifications | WQA certified to reduce lead  NSF certified to reduce microplastics |\n| Estimated cost per year (160 gal\/month) | \\$432 |\n| Wastewater Generated i | No |\n\nIts downsides are relatively minor but worth considering: filtration is slower than some competing pitchers, and replacement filters cost more than the average pitcher, which can add up quickly if your household goes through a lot of water. For anyone who wants serious contaminant reduction without stepping up to an RO system, the **Pur Plus 11-Cup Pitcher** is the most well-rounded, high-performance choice. If you're shopping around for a pitcher-style filter, you should also take a look at the [Culligan with Zerowater 8-Cup Pitcher](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/reviews\/kitchen\/water-filter\/culligan-with-zerowater-8-cup-pitcher), which did a great job with trace elements and minerals, and the [Amazon Basics 10-Cup Pitcher](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/reviews\/kitchen\/water-filter\/amazon-basics-10-cup-pitcher), which provides a good value in the pitcher category.\n\n**Read more:** [Pur Plus 11-Cup Pitcher review](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/reviews\/kitchen\/water-filter\/pur-plus-11-cup-pitcher)\n\nThe Pur Plus provides some impressively clean water for a pitcher style filter. Credit: Matt Lighthart\n\n## Best Reverse Osmosis System\n### APEC ROES-50 Essence Series\n\n![Editors' Choice Award](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/images\/editors-choice_47x107.png)\n\n![apec roes-50 essence series](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/40\/36\/525128_4018_M.jpg)\n\n![Editors' Choice Award](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/images\/editors-choice_47x107.png)\n\n[Check price at Amazon CA](https:\/\/www.amazon.com\/dp\/B0D4PJYHJK?tag=tglcom20-20)\n\n89\n\n**OVERALL  SCORE**\n\n- Critical Contaminant Removal **10\\.0**\n- Secondary Contaminant Removal **9\\.8**\n- Taste **8\\.8**\n- Maintenance and Setup **3\\.6**\n- Operating Cost **8\\.0**\n\n**PROS**\n\nExcellent contaminant removal\n\nNSF certified in multiple categories\n\n**CONS**\n\nTakes up significant under-sink space\n\nWastes water\n\nFilter changes are less convenient than other RO systems\n\nThe [APEC ROES-50 Essence Series](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/reviews\/kitchen\/water-filter\/apec-roes-50-essence-series) is a straightforward, highly capable reverse-osmosis (RO) system that delivers some of the most impressive filtration results in water quality tests. Reverse osmosis works by pushing water through an ultrafine membrane that blocks contaminants at the molecular level, producing exceptionally clean, low-TDS water — and in water quality lab tests, the ROES-50 excelled at exactly that. It brought every critical contaminant we measured, including lead, PFNA, arsenic, and uranium, down to undetectable levels and posted nearly perfect scores for secondary contaminants like zinc and copper as well. It has a no-frills design, but this system produces excellent-tasting water thanks to its carbon polishing stage, earning high marks in blind taste tests and frequent praise from long-term users.\n\n**SPECIFICATIONS**\n\n|   |   |\n|---|---|\n| Type | Under Sink Reverse Osmosis |\n| Estimated cost per year (40 gal\/month) i | \\$75 |\n| Certifications | WQA |\n| Estimated cost per year (160 gal\/month) | \\$75 |\n| Wastewater Generated i | 3:1 ratio wastewater-to-filtered |\n\nThe main hesitation many have with the **APEC ROES** is that installing an under-sink system requires some DIY skills and some modifications to your kitchen. It also requires a more significant upfront investment; therefore, this model is best suited for those who own their home and plan to use the filter system for many years. If this is the case it is a great value. The classic five-stage layout is a bit old-school, but it's also one of the reasons this model is such a strong value: replacement filters are inexpensive, long-lasting, and easy to buy individually. That said, maintenance is more hands-on than modern RO units, and the system takes up a lot of under-sink space. It also produces a lot of wastewater, an inevitable trade-off with RO designs. Still, for shoppers prioritizing maximum contaminant removal without spending premium RO money, the **ROES-50** stands out as a top performer. If you like the idea of RO-quality water but want a sleeker, easier-to-maintain setup, consider the [Waterdrop G3P600 tankless system](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/reviews\/kitchen\/water-filter\/waterdrop-g3p600-reverse-osmosis-system) — it performs nearly as well with far less bulk under your sink.\n\n**Read more:** [APEC ROES-50 Essence Series review](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/reviews\/kitchen\/water-filter\/apec-roes-50-essence-series)\n\nThough the APEC produces excellent quality water, filter changes are pretty inconvenient. Credit: Matt Lighthart\n\n## Best Value Pitcher\n### Amazon Basics 10-Cup Pitcher\n\n![Best Buy Award](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/images\/best-buy_47x107.png)\n\n![amazon basics 10-cup pitcher](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/40\/37\/525186_13185_M.jpg)\n\n![Best Buy Award](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/images\/best-buy_47x107.png)\n\n[Read the Review](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/reviews\/kitchen\/water-filter\/amazon-basics-10-cup-pitcher)\n\n73\n\n**OVERALL  SCORE**\n\n- Critical Contaminant Removal **6\\.6**\n- Secondary Contaminant Removal **7\\.5**\n- Taste **7\\.0**\n- Maintenance and Setup **8\\.5**\n- Operating Cost **8\\.2**\n\n**PROS**\n\nAccepts multiple filter brands\n\nBudget friendly\n\nSpout cover\n\n**CONS**\n\nNo flip top\n\nNo PFAS or heavy metal certification\n\nNot NSF certified for many serious contaminants\n\nLeached some aluminum into our water\n\nThe [Amazon Basics 10-Cup Pitcher](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/reviews\/kitchen\/water-filter\/amazon-basics-10-cup-pitcher) delivers far better filtration performance than its price tag suggests, making it one of the best-value options for everyday use. It didn't come back with the strongest filtration results, but for a budget pitcher, it isn't too shabby. It removed 97.2% of lead, and 100% of uranium. It produced an impressive 84.88% cut in PFAS, even though it is not certified to remove this. For households with typical tap water concerns, those numbers put it well ahead of many inexpensive competitors. Upfront cost is slightly lower than other models, but where this pitcher really stands out is its long-term affordability. Most pitcher systems lock you into proprietary filters with fixed pricing and limited buying options. The Amazon Basics model accepts multiple filter brands, meaning you can comparison shop, switch filter types as needed, and take advantage of bulk deals. Replacement filters are inexpensive to begin with, and that flexibility can help drive yearly costs even lower if you're a savvy shopper.\n\n**SPECIFICATIONS**\n\n|   |   |\n|---|---|\n| Type | Pitcher |\n| Estimated cost per year (40 gal\/month) i | \\$44 |\n| Certifications | WQA certified against NSF Standards 42, 53, and 372 |\n| Estimated cost per year (160 gal\/month) | \\$176 |\n| Wastewater Generated i | No |\n\nThe **Amazon Basics** is not certified to remove many trace elements and minerals, and its PFAS removal was lower than we would prefer. If those are a concern for you, this might not be the best option. While it's not certified for all contaminants, its performance with common pollutants like lead makes it reliable for general day-to-day use. It's not going to match the performance of a RO system, but for casual filtration on a budget, it does a decent job. For anyone who wants clean, better-tasting water without the long-term expense, this pitcher offers unmatched cost control. If you need stronger filtration and can stretch the budget, the [Pur Plus 11-Cup](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/reviews\/kitchen\/water-filter\/pur-plus-11-cup-pitcher) is the top-performing pitcher overall. And if you want the convenience of purified water straight from the tap (but no install), the [Pur Plus Vertical Faucet Filter](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/reviews\/kitchen\/water-filter\/pur-plus-vertical-faucet) offers better contaminant removal.\n\n**Read more:** [Amazon Basics 10-Cup Pitcher review](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/reviews\/kitchen\/water-filter\/amazon-basics-10-cup-pitcher)\n\nThe Amazon Basics pitcher has a simple design that is compatible with filters from multiple brands, allowing you to shop around for the ones that fit your filtration needs and budget. Credit: Matt Lighthart\n\n## Best Long Term Value\n### Travel Berkey\n\n![Best Buy Award](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/images\/best-buy_47x107.png)\n\n![travel berkey](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/40\/36\/525092_8898_M.jpg)\n\n![Best Buy Award](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/images\/best-buy_47x107.png)\n\n[Check price at Amazon CA](https:\/\/www.amazon.com\/dp\/B00FQP2CUU?tag=tglcom20-20)\n\n76\n\n**OVERALL  SCORE**\n\n- Critical Contaminant Removal **8\\.2**\n- Secondary Contaminant Removal **7\\.9**\n- Taste **6\\.3**\n- Maintenance and Setup **6\\.3**\n- Operating Cost **8\\.8**\n\n**PROS**\n\nGood performance with lead and PFAS\n\nFilters last a long time\n\nLess plastic in the construction\n\n**CONS**\n\nBig initial investment\n\nLarge size won't fit in fridge\n\nFilters require upkeep\n\nThe [Travel Berkey](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/reviews\/kitchen\/water-filter\/travel-berkey) is a stainless steel gravity filter that has a high 1.5-gallon capacity, and shows excellent results when it comes to critical contaminants, removing 100% of PFAS and lead, as well as effectively removing many trace elements and minerals. It comes at a high up-front cost, almost on par with reverse osmosis systems. However, with filters that last up to 4 years, you'll make up the difference in replacement costs; our team estimated annual costs to be about \\$41, even at high-volume usage. This is significantly less than all other pitchers in our lineup, which makes it a great choice for large households that want a filter that can take care of most critical contaminants with minimal maintenance and low long-term costs.\n\n**SPECIFICATIONS**\n\n|   |   |\n|---|---|\n| Type | Dispenser |\n| Estimated cost per year (40 gal\/month) i | \\$41 |\n| Certifications | Exceeds EPA and ANSI\/NSF Standard 53 protocols |\n| Estimated cost per year (160 gal\/month) | \\$41 |\n| Wastewater Generated i | No |\n\nThe filters last a long time, provided they are properly maintained. You have to remove and scrub them every 6 months or so to keep them in working condition, and our testing team noted that this is more of a pain than simply dropping in a fresh filter every month or two. We like the spigot spout, but note that the unit must be placed on a stand or ledge in order to dispense water. It is also too tall to fit in the fridge, so you have to be ok with room-temperature water. If you're looking for a large capacity and low cost filter that doesn't depend on plumbing or electric hookups, the Travel Berkey is the way to go, but if you want filtered water straight from the tap, consider an under-sink system like the [APEC ROES-50 Essence Series](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/reviews\/kitchen\/water-filter\/apec-roes-50-essence-series), which is the most affordable RO system in the lineup.\n\n**Read more:** [Travel Berkey review](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/reviews\/kitchen\/water-filter\/travel-berkey)\n\n![the travel berkey is a big investment at first, but it is a great...](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/40\/37\/525201_19864_L2.jpg)\n\nThe Travel Berkey is a big investment at first, but it is a great value in the long term. Credit: Matt Lighthart\n\n![the travel berkey has a larger storage capacity than most...](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/40\/37\/525204_21264_L2.jpg)\n\nThe Travel Berkey has a larger storage capacity than most gravity-fed filters. Credit: Matt Lighthart\n\n![wingnuts screw on the upper tank of the travel berkey to hold the...](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/40\/37\/525205_11799_L2.jpg)\n\nWingnuts 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\n\n![it's a tough sell to fit the travel berkey in your fridge. you'd...](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/40\/36\/525093_1312_L2.jpg)\n\nIt's a tough sell to fit the Travel Berkey in your fridge. You'd lose alot of shelf space. Credit: Matt Lighthart\n\n![this model did a fantastic job of removing chlorine from drinking...](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/36\/25\/483995_28144_L2.jpg)\n\nThis model did a fantastic job of removing chlorine from drinking water. Credit: Abriah Wofford\n\nPrevious\n\nNext\n\n![Button for slide 1](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/40\/37\/525201_19864_XS.jpg)\n\n![Button for slide 2](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/40\/37\/525204_21264_XS.jpg)\n\n![Button for slide 3](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/40\/37\/525205_11799_XS.jpg)\n\n![Button for slide 4](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/40\/36\/525093_1312_XS.jpg)\n\n![Button for slide 5](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/36\/25\/483995_28144_XS.jpg)\n\n## Favorite Modern Reverse Osmosis System\n### Waterdrop G3P600 Reverse Osmosis System\n\n![Top Pick Award](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/images\/top-pick_47x107.png)\n\n![waterdrop g3p600 reverse osmosis system](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/40\/36\/525119_4042_M.jpg)\n\n![Top Pick Award](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/images\/top-pick_47x107.png)\n\n[Read the Review](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/reviews\/kitchen\/water-filter\/waterdrop-g3p600-reverse-osmosis-system)\n\n89\n\n**OVERALL  SCORE**\n\n- Critical Contaminant Removal **10\\.0**\n- Secondary Contaminant Removal **9\\.4**\n- Taste **8\\.8**\n- Maintenance and Setup **6\\.4**\n- Operating Cost **6\\.4**\n\n**PROS**\n\nEasier to maintain than most RO systems\n\nGreat PFAS and lead removal\n\nProduces less waste water\n\n**CONS**\n\nMore expensive than most filters\n\nInstallation is a DIY home project\n\nThe [Waterdrop G3P600 Reverse Osmosis System](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/reviews\/kitchen\/water-filter\/waterdrop-g3p600-reverse-osmosis-system) performs just as well as our Editors' Choice RO filter in critical contaminant removal, and has an additional alkaline remineralization stage that improves flavor and adds back some essential trace minerals to your water (which accounts for its lower score in removing secondary contaminants). In addition to near-flawless filtration, this system is one of the easiest RO systems to use after initial installation. It has modern features that make it easy to use and maintain on a daily basis. The tankless design takes up much less space under your sink, and filter changes require a simple twist and pull to remove them from dedicated slots. Overall, the unit is a bit bulky, but its completely enclosed design means you don't have a bunch of tubes and wires hanging around, and it's still smaller than a storage tank. Wastewater is an inevitable byproduct of reverse osmosis systems, but the Waterdrop produces about a quarter of the amount produced by competing models.\n\n**SPECIFICATIONS**\n\n|   |   |\n|---|---|\n| Type | Under Sink Reverse Osmosis |\n| Estimated cost per year (40 gal\/month) i | \\$145 |\n| Certifications | NSF\/ANSI certified against Standards 42, 58, and 372 |\n| Estimated cost per year (160 gal\/month) | \\$145 |\n| Wastewater Generated i | 1:2 ratio wastewater-to-filtered |\n\nThe downside is primarily the cost and the more involved installation. It is the most expensive unit in our lineup, and like all RO systems, it requires you to do some plumbing work and drill a hole into your countertop to install the separate faucet. If you choose to hire a professional to do this work, it pushes the cost up even higher, and is likely only something that you'll want to commit to if you own your home and plan to use the filter for many years. However, after this initial push, the ongoing costs are less than a pitcher, and maintenance is relatively easy compared to other under-sink filters. If you like the idea of on-demand filtration, but are renting or can't justify the high cost of the Waterdrop, then a faucet filter like the [Pur Plus Vertical Faucet](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/reviews\/kitchen\/water-filter\/pur-plus-vertical-faucet) is a good alternative.\n\n**Read more:** [Waterdrop G3P600 RO review](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/reviews\/kitchen\/water-filter\/waterdrop-g3p600-reverse-osmosis-system)\n\nSwapping filters on the Waterdrop G3P600 is as easy as a slide and twist motion. Credit: Matt Lighthart\n\n## Best Faucet\n### Pur Plus Vertical Faucet\n\n![Top Pick Award](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/images\/top-pick_47x107.png)\n\n![pur plus vertical faucet](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/40\/36\/525158_5687_M.jpg)\n\n![Top Pick Award](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/images\/top-pick_47x107.png)\n\n[Check price at Amazon CA](https:\/\/www.amazon.com\/dp\/B07MLSVLZH?tag=tglcom20-20)\n\n**Deal Alert:** on sale for 39% off at Amazon\n\n[See Deal](https:\/\/www.amazon.com\/dp\/B07MLSVLZH?tag=tglcom20-20&linkCode=ogi&th=1&psc=1)\n\n73\n\n**OVERALL  SCORE**\n\n- Critical Contaminant Removal **7\\.1**\n- Secondary Contaminant Removal **7\\.3**\n- Taste **6\\.5**\n- Maintenance and Setup **8\\.4**\n- Operating Cost **8\\.2**\n\n**PROS**\n\nFiltered water is available immediately\n\nReduces lead and PFNA to undetectable levels\n\n**CONS**\n\nSlower flow compared to unfiltered tap\n\nDoesn't fit all faucet types\n\nBulky\n\nThe [Pur Plus Vertical Faucet](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/reviews\/kitchen\/water-filter\/pur-plus-vertical-faucet) is an ideal solution for anyone looking to improve their tap water without committing to an under-sink system or dealing with constantly refilling pitchers. Faucet filters like this one deliver water immediately, avoid counter clutter, and don't require permanent plumbing changes, making them perfect for renters or small kitchens. This vertical design, while slightly bulky, fits most faucets and includes a simple one-click installation that makes setup and filter changes easy. In testing, the Pur Plus Vertical Faucet excelled at reducing lead and PFAS to near-undetectable levels while removing chlorine to improve taste. It also performed well on common heavy metals like barium, copper, zinc, and iron, ensuring a safe, clean pour for daily drinking and cooking.\n\n**SPECIFICATIONS**\n\n|   |   |\n|---|---|\n| Type | Faucet |\n| Estimated cost per year (40 gal\/month) i | \\$59 |\n| Certifications | WQA and NSF certified to reduce 70 contaminants including lead, microplastics, mercury, chlorine taste and odor, DEET, and TTHM |\n| Estimated cost per year (160 gal\/month) | \\$90 |\n| Wastewater Generated i | No |\n\nIt is not designed to filter fluoride, arsenic, or high uranium levels, so households with extreme contamination concerns may need a more robust system. It also requires you to remove the aerator on your faucet and replace it with an adapter, and our tester worried about thread damage on the faucet head. You can avoid this with a pitcher-style option, and the **Pur Plus 11-Cup Pitcher** remains our top pick for critical contaminant removal while being simple to use and maintain.\n\n**Read more:** [Pur Plus Vertical Faucet review](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/reviews\/kitchen\/water-filter\/pur-plus-vertical-faucet)\n\n[![water filter - the pur plus is a renter-friendly option for on-demand filtered water.](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/40\/36\/525161_17870_L2.jpg)](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/40\/36\/525161_17870_XXXL.jpg)\n\nThe PUR Plus is a renter-friendly option for on-demand filtered water. Credit: Matt Lighthart\n\n## Best Pitcher for Secondary Contaminant Removal\n### Culligan with Zerowater 8-Cup Pitcher\n\n![culligan with zerowater 8-cup pitcher](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/40\/37\/525212_18030_M.jpg)\n\n[Read the Review](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/reviews\/kitchen\/water-filter\/culligan-with-zerowater-8-cup-pitcher)\n\n**PROS**\n\nFilters a wide range of contaminants for a pitcher\n\nLow-effort setup\n\nFits in the fridge\n\n**CONS**\n\nFilters have a short lifespan\n\nCostly to maintain long-term\n\nTakes a long time to filter water\n\nThe [Culligan with Zerowater 8-Cup Pitcher](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/reviews\/kitchen\/water-filter\/culligan-with-zerowater-8-cup-pitcher) provides a great balance of critical *and* secondary contaminant removal, coming in just behind competitors like the **Pur Plus 11-Cup Pitcher** thanks to its superior performance with trace elements and minerals. While both pitchers excel at removing critical contaminants like lead and arsenic, this Culligan model consistently scored higher in reducing metals such as nickel, iron, and barium, making it an excellent choice for households with older plumbing or questionable municipal water. The star of the system is its 5-stage Zerowater filtration, which strips contaminants down to near-zero levels and even includes a built-in TDS meter so you can verify performance in real time. In testing, it removed 100% of lead, uranium, and mercury. Taste results were solid—clean, crisp water with chlorine and chemical notes fully removed.\n\n**SPECIFICATIONS**\n\n|   |   |\n|---|---|\n| Type | Pitcher |\n| Estimated cost per year (40 gal\/month) i | \\$240 |\n| Certifications | NSF\/ANSI 42, 53, and 401 |\n| Estimated cost per year (160 gal\/month) | \\$960 |\n| Wastewater Generated i | No |\n\nWhere this pitcher falters is the long-term cost. Its impressive performance comes at the price of very short filter life — often only two to four weeks — and the replacements are expensive. For heavy water drinkers or families, long-term operating costs can reach several hundred dollars per year, far higher than the average pitcher. It also didn't remove as much PFAS as we would like, only reaching 87% removal. If your priority is more on trace element and mineral removal (like iron, copper or zinc), this is the one to get. If you'd prefer lower maintenance and lower cost, consider the [Amazon Basics 10-Cup](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/reviews\/kitchen\/water-filter\/amazon-basics-10-cup-pitcher) or [Pur Plus 11-Cup Pitcher](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/reviews\/kitchen\/water-filter\/pur-plus-11-cup-pitcher), or step up to a budget-friendly RO system like the [APEC ROES-50](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/reviews\/kitchen\/water-filter\/apec-roes-50-essence-series).\n\n**Read more:** [Culligan with Zerowater 8-Cup Pitcher review](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/reviews\/kitchen\/water-filter\/culligan-with-zerowater-8-cup-pitcher)\n\nThe Culligan with Zerowater did a great job with many contaminants across the board. Credit: Matt Lighthart\n\n## Product Comparison Table\n## How We Tested\nWe 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.\n\n#### Water Quality Lab Testing\nThe majority of a filter's score hinges on its effectiveness in removing various contaminants and impurities. To ensure the accuracy of our ratings, we commissioned professional water-quality testing at an an [independent water-quality lab](https:\/\/mytapscore.com\/). We focused on three major categories of contaminants: PFAS (forever chemicals), Critical Contaminants, and Heavy Metals. We ran two types of water samples through each filter: a highly contaminated “*super*” sample with elevated levels of each contaminant, and a standard tap water sample to mimic typical household conditions. We measured the concentration of each contaminant before and after filtration to determine how effectively each system reduced or eliminated these substances. This dual-sample approach allowed us to see both worst-case performance and everyday effectiveness.\n\n[![water filter - we tested filtered water for common contaminants using an...](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/40\/36\/525095_12863_L2.jpg)](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/40\/36\/525095_12863_XXXL.jpg)\n\nWe tested filtered water for common contaminants using an independent lab, conducted taste tests, and measured for total dissolved solids. Credit: Matt Lighthart\n\nIn addition to lab analysis, we used a Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) meter and chemical indicator strips to further assess the efficiency of each filter. For the taste metric, we assembled a panel of judges to do a blind taste test and rank each water sample. They evaluated whether the filter introduced any unpleasant taste to clean water and assessed its ability to remove undesirable flavors and odors.\n\nFinally, we evaluated each filter's user experience, taking into account factors such as installation, maintenance, operating costs, and efficiency. This comprehensive approach ensures our reviews are thorough, reliable, and beneficial to users seeking the best water filtration system for their home. To learn more about our procedures, check out our [How We Test article](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/topics\/kitchen\/best-water-filter\/how-we-test).\n\nOur water filter rating scores are divided into **six different metrics**:\n\n- Critical Contaminant Removal *(35% of overall score weighting)*\n\n- Heavy Metal and Trace Element Removal *(25% of overall score weighting)*\n\n- Taste *(20% weighting)*\n\n- Setup and Use *(10% weighting)*\n\n- Maintenance and Setup *(10% weighting)*\n\n- Operating Cost *(10% weighting)*\n## Why Trust GearLab\nOur testing team includes professionals in environmental research, engineering, and journalism. [Graham Faulknor](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/author\/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 brings substantial experience to the team when designing, analyzing, and communicating our findings. [Austin Palmer](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/author\/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. [Sam Hill](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/author\/sam-hill) is a journalist based in the Pacific Northwest who focuses his writing on a mix of environmental and tech topics. He leverages his extensive experience in the industry to break down complex topics into clear, understandable results.\n\n![pair this article with our buying advice article to make the best...](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/37\/26\/494151_23271_L2.jpg)\n\nPair this article with our buying advice article to make the best decision for your needs. Credit: Abriah Wofford\n\n![a small subset of our blind taste test.](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/37\/29\/494400_16255_L2.jpg)\n\nA small subset of our blind taste test. Credit: Graham Faulknor\n\n![we built a custom test counter to conduct true side-by-side tests.](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/37\/29\/494396_2423_L2.jpg)\n\nWe built a custom test counter to conduct true side-by-side tests. Credit: Graham Faulknor\n\nPrevious\n\nNext\n\n![Button for slide 1](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/37\/26\/494151_23271_XS.jpg)\n\n![Button for slide 2](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/37\/29\/494400_16255_XS.jpg)\n\n![Button for slide 3](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/37\/29\/494396_2423_XS.jpg)\n## Analysis and Test Results\nIn 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](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/topics\/kitchen\/best-water-filter\/buying-advice).\n\nYour browser does not support charts×\n\nWorse Value\n\nBetter Value\n### What's the Best Value?\nWhen it comes to getting the best value in a water filter, the list price of the product doesn't tell the whole story. A higher sticker often means more filtration stages, but that doesn't always translate to better results. What really matters is how well the filter actually removes contaminants. Additionally, there can be a big difference between upfront costs and ongoing costs when you factor in the cost of filter replacements.\n\nSome simple pitchers or faucet filters can outperform pricier under-sink systems while keeping your annual filter costs low. But for high-volume users, undersink models are going to offer the best value. The **APEC ROES-50 Essence Series** or the **iSpring RCC7AK** are fantastic options. The APEC ROES-50 is the overall winner here with a slightly higher score in secondary contaminant testing and cheaper long-term operating costs — it is especially cost-effective when you look at annual operating costs for those households with a need for higher volumes of filtered water.\n\nFor pitchers, the **Pur Plus 11-Cup Pitcher** is an excellent value and top performer for 1-2 person households. It's a pretty average price in the pitcher-style filter lineup, but it competes with some RO systems when it comes to filter quality. If you don't have major health concerns when it comes to water quality, the **Amazon Basics 10-Cup Pitcher** is also a great little budget pitcher. It provides serviceable filtering for most households and is one of the lower-cost pitchers out there due to its ability to use filter replacements from multiple brands.\n\nSee more details below in the [Operating Costs section](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/topics\/kitchen\/best-water-filter#operating-cost).\n\n**Heading Into the Great Outdoors?**  \n Then it's best to leave all of these products behind. Under-the-sink or faucet-mount filters aren't suited to the backcountry, and filter pitchers are designed to improve the taste and quality of already-potable water, not to render lake or stream water safe to drink. That task is better left to a [water filter specifically designed for the backcountry](https:\/\/www.outdoorgearlab.com\/topics\/camping-and-hiking\/best-backpacking-water-filter). To ensure the filter you are considering is up to the task you have in mind, we recommend that you always consult the manufacturer's specifications.\n\nUsing filtered water can help improve the taste of your morning coffee or tea, and softer water is easier on your appliances. Credit: Matt Lighthart\n\n### Contaminant Removal\nGrowing awareness of potential contaminants in tap water and their possible health effects has made reliable water filtration more important than ever. Many people don't realize what unseen pollutants could be in their water, but filters can provide peace of mind by delivering clean, safe drinking water. To test performance, we prepared water samples with elevated levels of chlorine, iron, sulfate, lead, fluoride, and copper - all well above EPA safe limits. We then send filtered and control samples to [Tap Score for independent lab testing](https:\/\/mytapscore.com\/), ensuring accurate and trustworthy results.\n\nWe defined Critical Contaminant Removal as the filter's ability to eliminate high-priority pollutants like lead, PFNA, arsenic, and uranium, while Secondary Contaminant Removal covers trace elements and minerals such as copper, zinc, iron, and barium that can affect taste and safety but are generally less immediately hazardous. What contaminants you're concerned about depends on your health and the water quality where you live.\n\n[![water filter - opening the filter box to replace the internal filter on the brita...](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/40\/36\/525155_14728_L2.jpg)](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/40\/36\/525155_14728_XXXL.jpg)\n\nOpening the filter box to replace the internal filter on the Brita Elite Advanced. Credit: Matt Lighthart\n### Critical Contaminant Removal\nWe examined how well each filter handled the critical water contaminants, providing a more comprehensive understanding of which models truly deliver safer water and which ones fall short. The chart below primarily focuses on the most toxic [heavy metals that can make their way into tap water](https:\/\/www.ewg.org\/news-insights\/news\/2025\/05\/harmful-heavy-metals-why-theyre-tap-water-and-how-reduce-your-exposure).\n\n100%\n\n100%\n\n100%\n\n100%\n\n100%\n\n100%\n\n94%\n\n97%\n\n93%\n\n100%\n\n100%\n\n99%\n\n100%\n\n100%\n\n100%\n\n100%\n\n100%\n\n25%\n\n9%\n\n3%\n\n3%\n\n9%\n\n100%\n\n100%\n\n100%\n\n100%\n\n98%\n\n95%\n\n97%\n\n97%\n\n96%\n\n44%\n\n28%\n\n30%\n\n1%\n\nAPEC Essence ROES-50\n\niSpring RCC7AK RO\n\nPur Plus Pitcher\n\nWaterdrop G3P600 RO\n\nCulligan Zerowater P...\n\nTravel Berkey\n\nBrita Large Pitcher...\n\nAmazon Basics\n\nBrita Metro\n\nBrita Faucet Mount E...\n\nPur Plus Faucet Mount\n\nBrita UltraMax Elite\n\nWaterdrop 10UA Under...\n\nPercent removed by filter (100% = Fully Removed)\n\n0\n\n100\n\n200\n\n300\n\n% Critical Contaminant Removal\n\nLead\n\nArsenic\n\nUranium\n\n**% Critical Contaminant Removal**\n\n| Product | Lead | Arsenic | Uranium |\n|---|---|---|---|\n| APEC Essence ROES-50 | 100 | 100 | 100 |\n| iSpring RCC7AK RO | 100 | 100 | 100 |\n| Pur Plus Pitcher | 100 | 100 | 100 |\n| Waterdrop G3P600 RO | 100 | 100 | 100 |\n| Culligan Zerowater Pitcher 10-Cup | 100 | 100 | 98 |\n| Travel Berkey | 100 | 25 | 95 |\n| Brita Large Pitcher (10 cup) | 94 | 9 | 97 |\n| Amazon Basics | 97 | 0 | 97 |\n| Brita Metro | 93 | 3 | 96 |\n| Brita Faucet Mount Elite | 100 | 3 | 44 |\n| Pur Plus Faucet Mount | 100 | 9 | 28 |\n| Brita UltraMax Elite | 99 | 0 | 30 |\n| Waterdrop 10UA Under Sink | 0 | 0 | 1 |\n\nAgain, the RO systems we tested came out on top, removing nearly all the contaminants we tested for in both contaminated samples and standard tap water. For pitchers, the **Pur Plus 11-Cup Pitcher** and **Culligan with Zerowater 8-Cup Pitcher** both neared RO-quality results.\n\nThe **Amazon Basics 10-Cup Pitcher** filtered lead (97.2% removed) and uranium (100% removed) well, but it isn't NSF certified for many serious contaminants like fluoride or nitrates.\n\nThe [Waterdrop 10UA Under Sink](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/reviews\/kitchen\/water-filter\/waterdrop-wd-10ua-under-sink) came in toward the bottom of test results, making it the lowest-scored under-sink system. It was able to filter trace amounts of nitrate, but barely enough to mention. It only filtered out 3.8% of lead, 10% of uranium in water quality tests, and it isn't certified to reduce arsenic.\n\n### PFAS Forever Chemical Removal\nPFAS are a group of “*forever chemicals*” that don't break down easily, and [some reports say they may be more prevalent](https:\/\/www.ewg.org\/research\/national-pfas-testing) than we previously thought, and they are toxic even in very small amounts. They fall into our critical contaminant category. In the water quality test results, we specifically looked at two types: PFNA, which sticks around longer, and PFBA, which is smaller and exits the body more quickly. You don't want either in your drinking water. The results of PFAS removal lab tests are charted below.\n\n100%\n\n100%\n\n100%\n\n100%\n\n100%\n\n97%\n\n93%\n\n91%\n\n91%\n\n87%\n\n87%\n\n73%\n\n54%\n\n100%\n\n100%\n\n100%\n\n100%\n\n100%\n\n96%\n\n92%\n\n90%\n\n89%\n\n85%\n\n85%\n\n69%\n\n51%\n\n100%\n\n100%\n\n100%\n\n100%\n\n100%\n\n100%\n\n100%\n\n100%\n\n100%\n\n100%\n\n100%\n\n100%\n\n72%\n\nAPEC Essence ROES-50\n\nBrita Faucet Mount E...\n\nPur Plus Faucet Mount\n\nTravel Berkey\n\nWaterdrop G3P600 RO\n\nPur Plus Pitcher\n\nWaterdrop 10UA Under...\n\niSpring RCC7AK RO\n\nBrita UltraMax Elite\n\nAmazon Basics\n\nCulligan Zerowater P...\n\nBrita Large Pitcher...\n\nBrita Metro\n\nPercent removed by filter (100% = Fully Removed)\n\n0\n\n100\n\n200\n\n300\n\n% PFAS Removal\n\nTotal Reduction\n\nPFNA Reduction\n\nPFBA Reduction\n\n**% PFAS Removal**\n\n| Product | Total Reduction | PFNA Reduction | PFBA Reduction |\n|---|---|---|---|\n| APEC Essence ROES-50 | 100 | 100 | 100 |\n| Brita Faucet Mount Elite | 100 | 100 | 100 |\n| Pur Plus Faucet Mount | 100 | 100 | 100 |\n| Travel Berkey | 100 | 100 | 100 |\n| Waterdrop G3P600 RO | 100 | 100 | 100 |\n| Pur Plus Pitcher | 97 | 96 | 100 |\n| Waterdrop 10UA Under Sink | 93 | 92 | 100 |\n| iSpring RCC7AK RO | 91 | 90 | 100 |\n| Brita UltraMax Elite | 91 | 89 | 100 |\n| Amazon Basics | 87 | 85 | 100 |\n| Culligan Zerowater Pitcher 10-Cup | 87 | 85 | 100 |\n| Brita Large Pitcher (10 cup) | 73 | 69 | 100 |\n| Brita Metro | 54 | 51 | 72 |\n\nAcross the systems we tested, the reverse osmosis units — particularly the APEC ROES-50 and the other under-sink RO models — delivered the strongest PFAS removal, consistently reducing both PFNA and PFBA to near- or fully undetectable levels in both tap water and super-contaminated samples. The two faucet filters we tested — the **Brita Elite Advanced Faucet** and the **Pur Plus Vertical Faucet** also hit near-top marks here.\n\nPitcher filters showed far more mixed results: the high-end, specialty PFAS-targeting pitchers, like the **Pur Plus 11-Cup Pitcher**, performed respectably, but most standard carbon pitchers struggled, often removing only a portion of PFBA and doing very little against PFNA. The [Brita Large 10-Cup Pitcher](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/reviews\/kitchen\/water-filter\/brita-large-10-cup-pitcher) and [Brita Metro](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/reviews\/kitchen\/water-filter\/brita-metro) were among the most disappointing performers in PFAS testing, with 68.99% and 50.78% PFNA removal rates, respectively. They removed far less PFNA and PFBA than comparable filters and fell well short of what we'd expect from trusted, everyday-use pitchers.\n\n[![water filter - the waterdrop wd-10ua under sink essential only removes chlorine and...](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/40\/37\/525253_15841_L2.jpg)](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/40\/37\/525253_15841_XXXL.jpg)\n\nThe Waterdrop WD-10UA Under Sink essential only removes chlorine and light sediment. Credit: Matt Lighthart\n### Secondary Contaminant Removal\nCertain heavy metals and trace elements get their own category because they behave differently from critical contaminants and often enter tap water through plumbing corrosion or natural mineral sources. Some of these are even nutritionally essential in small amounts, and while they're usually less urgent than issues like lead or PFNA, elevated levels of metals such as copper, zinc, or barium [can impact long-term health](https:\/\/www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov\/books\/NBK218751\/) and the taste of your water — so we test them separately to show which filters can reliably address these everyday concerns. These materials are typically more of a concern if you draw water from a private well.\n\nThe results of heavy metal and trace element removal tests are charted below.\n\n100%\n\n100%\n\n100%\n\n100%\n\n100%\n\n100%\n\n100%\n\n96%\n\n88%\n\n87%\n\n99%\n\n100%\n\n4%\n\n100%\n\n100%\n\n100%\n\n100%\n\n100%\n\n100%\n\n96%\n\n93%\n\n85%\n\n86%\n\n66%\n\n100%\n\n100%\n\n100%\n\n100%\n\n100%\n\n100%\n\n100%\n\n88%\n\n85%\n\n78%\n\n77%\n\n61%\n\n100%\n\n100%\n\n100%\n\n100%\n\n100%\n\n100%\n\n87%\n\n74%\n\n62%\n\n62%\n\n100%\n\nAPEC Essence ROES-50\n\nBrita Faucet Mount E...\n\nCulligan Zerowater P...\n\niSpring RCC7AK RO\n\nPur PlusFaucet Mount\n\nTravel Berkey\n\nWaterdrop G3P600 RO\n\nAmazon Basics\n\nBrita Large Pitcher...\n\nBrita Metro\n\nBrita UltraMax Elite\n\nPur Plus Pitcher\n\nWaterdrop 10UA Under...\n\nPercent removed by filter (100% = Fully Removed)\n\n0\n\n100\n\n200\n\n300\n\n400\n\nMineral and Trace Element Removal\n\nIron (ppm)\n\nCopper (ppm)\n\nBarium (ppm)\n\nZinc (ppm)\n\n**Mineral and Trace Element Removal**\n\n| Product | Iron (ppm) | Copper (ppm) | Barium (ppm) | Zinc (ppm) |\n|---|---|---|---|---|\n| APEC Essence ROES-50 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 |\n| Brita Faucet Mount Elite | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 |\n| Culligan Zerowater Pitcher 10-Cup | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 |\n| iSpring RCC7AK RO | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 |\n| Pur PlusFaucet Mount | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 |\n| Travel Berkey | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 |\n| Waterdrop G3P600 RO | 100 | 96 | 88 | 87 |\n| Amazon Basics | 96 | 93 | 85 | 74 |\n| Brita Large Pitcher (10 cup) | 88 | 85 | 78 | 62 |\n| Brita Metro | 87 | 86 | 77 | 62 |\n| Brita UltraMax Elite | 99 | 66 | 61 | 0 |\n| Pur Plus Pitcher | 100 | 100 | 0 | 0 |\n| Waterdrop 10UA Under Sink | 4 | 0 | 0 | 100 |\n\nThe top reverse osmosis systems dealt with heavy metals and trace elements well across the board, reducing nearly all secondary contaminants to zero in tests of super-contaminated and tap water samples. The **Culligan with Zerowater 8-Cup Pitcher** also performed well here, reliably knocking out metals like copper, zinc, iron, and barium; while we did see minor copper and zinc leaching in the lab, the amounts were extremely small and stayed well below EPA health guidelines.\n\n[![water filter - compared to other reverse osmosis systems, the waterdrop g3p600...](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/40\/37\/525235_5358_L2.jpg)](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/40\/37\/525235_5358_XXXL.jpg)\n\nCompared to other reverse osmosis systems, the Waterdrop G3P600 takes up much less cabinet space. Credit: Matt Lighthart\n\nThe [Travel Berkey](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/reviews\/kitchen\/water-filter\/travel-berkey) delivered solid mid-tier results, effectively removing metals like barium, copper, strontium, nickel, zinc, and iron, with decent performance on vanadium, lithium, and boron; while it showed small amounts of aluminum, cobalt, and silver leaching, levels stayed safe, and only selenium and molybdenum proved unreliable. The **Amazon Basics 10-Cup Pitcher** was right behind, but there were some issues with the leaching of aluminum and very small amounts of silver.\n\nAgain, the **Waterdrop WD-10UA Under Sink** came in last place. It reliably removed 100% of zinc from the contaminated samples (its primary certified target), but most other metals, like cobalt and chromium, passed through largely unchanged. It didn't introduce any noticeable leaching, so at least it isn't adding anything unwanted to your water. That's a low bar, though. The [Brita Ultramax Dispenser with Elite Filter](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/reviews\/kitchen\/water-filter\/brita-ultramax-dispenser-with-elite-filter) was also disappointing in this category, showing inconsistent removal of several metals and introducing some aluminum during testing.\n\n[![water filter - brita\\&\\#039;s elite filters used in the brita ultramax dispenser last...](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/40\/36\/525090_4489_L2.jpg)](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/40\/36\/525090_4489_XXXL.jpg)\n\nBrita's Elite filters used in the Brita Ultramax Dispenser last about three times as long as standard filters from Brita. Credit: Matt Lighthart\n### Taste\nFiltered water can make a noticeable difference in how your tap water tastes, especially if it carries metallic or chemical notes. Enjoying crisp, clean-tasting water straight from your faucet or pitcher not only improves the everyday experience but can also encourage you to stay hydrated and cut down on bottled water use. Taste is subjective, though; some people like a hint of minerals, while others prefer a completely neutral flavor. We aimed to capture overall impressions across a range of preferences. For taste tests, we ran each filter with water from a garden hose to standardize the source, then conducted a blind taste test with five evaluators. Each tester sampled filtered water from every unit alongside unfiltered tap and garden hose water, ranking the results from best to worst to give us a clear sense of relative taste performance. When we weren't able to run water samples through taste tests, we crowdsourced opinions by researching online reviews to glean accurate notes about each model through user feedback.\n\nYour browser does not support charts×\n\nOverall, users consistently reported that filtered water tasted fresher across all models we tested, though a few naysayers occasionally noted plastic or flat flavors. Among our top performers, the **APEC ROES-50 Essence Series**, **Waterdrop G3P600 Reverse Osmosis System**, and **Pur Plus 11-Cup Pitcher** received the highest marks for crisp, clean taste. Models with slightly lower scores, namely the **Culligan with Zerowater 8-Cup Pitcher**, **Travel Berkey**, and **Waterdrop WD-10UA Under Sink**, still delivered noticeably improved water compared to unfiltered tap, even if minor off-flavors were reported by some users.\n\n[![water filter - we enlisted other members of our team to do blind taste tests.](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/40\/37\/525243_30827_L2.jpg)](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/40\/37\/525243_30827_XXXL.jpg)\n\nWe enlisted other members of our team to do blind taste tests. Credit: Matt Lighthart\n### Maintenance and Setup\nWe often take running water for granted, and a great water filter fits seamlessly into that everyday routine. However, setup, daily use, and ongoing upkeep can vary a lot from model to model. Our testing team dives in, handling installation and daily operation to see how each unit performs in real-world use.\n\nSome filters, like under-sink RO systems, require a bit of DIY know-how to install, while pitchers are ready to go after a quick rinse. Which model fits best really comes down to how much time and effort you're willing to put into setup and upkeep.\n\nYour browser does not support charts×\n\nThe easiest water filters to use are, obviously, the pitcher-style filters. After a quick initial clean, all you need to do is drop in a filter and fill it up with water to have cleaner, tastier water at your disposal. These models are designed to be easy to clean regularly and during filter replacements. Some are even dishwasher safe. You won't need to check any instructions here — these are as “*plug and play*” as they come.\n\nThe top performers in ease of use all follow the 'fill-and-go' philosophy. The **Brita Ultramax Dispenser with Elite Filter** is especially convenient, with a large capacity that means fewer refills. The **Amazon Basics 10-Cup Pitcher** and **Brita Metro** are compact, simple, and virtually maintenance-free, making them perfect for quick daily use. The **Culligan with Zerowater 8-Cup Pitcher** also shines here, with a straightforward drop-in filter and intuitive design that keeps clean water flowing with minimal effort. Some pitchers do filter at different speeds, though, so take individual reviews into account if you don't want to sacrifice speed.\n\n![the brita ultramax dispenser is pretty easy to fill, but it can get...](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/40\/36\/525076_12553_L2.jpg)\n\nThe Brita Ultramax Dispenser is pretty easy to fill, but it can get pretty heavy when it's full. Credit: Matt Lighthart\n\n![the amazon basics 10-cup pitcher easily fits in the fridge, although...](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/40\/36\/525096_24581_L2.jpg)\n\nThe Amazon Basics 10-Cup Pitcher easily fits in the fridge, although it might be too wide to sit in a door shelf. Credit: Matt Lighthart\n\n![the small size of the brita metro makes it easy to use on a daily...](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/40\/36\/525084_8381_L2.jpg)\n\nThe small size of the Brita Metro makes it easy to use on a daily basis, but it's best suited to smaller households of one or two people. Credit: Matt Lighthart\n\n![unfortunately, replacement filters for this pitcher are quite...](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/40\/36\/525101_8556_L2.jpg)\n\nUnfortunately, replacement filters for this pitcher are quite pricey, and they need to be changed more often than any other system we tested. Credit: Matt Lighthart\n\nPrevious\n\nNext\n\n![Button for slide 1](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/40\/36\/525076_12553_XS.jpg)\n\n![Button for slide 2](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/40\/36\/525096_24581_XS.jpg)\n\n![Button for slide 3](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/40\/36\/525084_8381_XS.jpg)\n\n![Button for slide 4](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/40\/36\/525101_8556_XS.jpg)\n\nBoth of the faucet models were surprisingly easy to set up as well. The Pur Plus Vertical Faucet snaps onto most standard taps and delivers filtered water instantly. They require a filter change every few months, which we found easy to do, and daily use is effortless, making them a hassle-free alternative to pitchers.\n\nThe Pur Plus is easily snapped onto many kitchen faucets. Credit: Matt Lighthart\n\nAll of the RO systems received much lower scores in the category, not because they're a complete hassle, but because it takes a little more know-how to install them. Most require you to renovate (and abandon) under-sink spaces and some basic plumbing access. Once set up, they run quietly and efficiently, but the initial setup is more involved than pitchers or faucet models.\n\nThe **Waterdrop G3P600 Reverse Osmosis System** is specifically designed to navigate those issues, though, with a more compact design and streamlined installation that reduces the hassle and space concerns typical of traditional RO setups. It's no water pitcher, but it's a bit simpler.\n\nThe Waterdrop G3P600 Reverse Osmosis System has a pretty fast flow rate, which is impressive for an on-demand filter system. Credit: Matt Lighthart\n\n### Operating Cost\nOperating costs are an important part of the equation. While filtered water tastes better and is safer, some systems require frequent, pricey replacement filters or produce extra wastewater, which can add up over time. It's worth factoring in both filter longevity and the amount of water wasted during the process when deciding which model offers the best long-term value.\n\nWe divide annual operating costs into two key categories: costs for filtering 40 gallons a month vs. 160 gallons per month. Why? We want to capture the difference in value between households with low-volume needs (40 gallons) and higher-volume needs (160 gallons).\n\nAt around 40 gallons per month, pitcher-style filters sit solidly in the middle of the value spectrum, thanks to zero installation costs and no wasted water.\n\nYour browser does not support charts×\n\nOnce usage ramps up to 160 gallons per month, the picture changes. Frequent filter replacements make most pitchers less cost-effective at higher volumes, and for larger households or heavy water use, under-sink systems become the more economical choice.\n\nYour browser does not support charts×\n\n**Those Filter Replacement Costs Add Up\\!**  \n The **Culligan with Zerowater 8-Cup Pitcher** offers good water quality performance; however, the frequent need for filter replacements significantly increases annual operating costs. You'll want to consider annual costs in your purchase decision to hit the right balance of water quality, convenience, and cost for your family.\n\nReverse osmosis systems cost a lot more upfront than pitchers or faucet filters, and take more effort to install. But, for households that frequently need filtered water, their reasonable annual operating costs and higher-volume output may justify the higher initial cost. The **APEC ROES-50 Essence Series** emerged as the most affordable reverse osmosis system, with estimated annual filter costs of about \\$75, *regardless of water usage*. The **iSpring RCC7AK** followed at roughly \\$95 per year, slightly higher because it includes an extra filter in the rotation. The **Waterdrop G3P600 Reverse Osmosis System** was the priciest by far, with annual costs hitting around \\$145, significantly more than its RO counterparts.\n\nPre-filters can last 6-12 months, depending on your water quality, so you don't have to worry about swapping them out too often. Credit: Matt Lighthart\n\nEvery filter change adds up over time, and the difference between models can be striking. Among pitchers, the **Amazon Basics 10-Cup Pitcher** came out as the most affordable, with estimated annual costs of just \\$44 at 40 gallons per month. On the other end, the **Culligan with Zerowater 8-Cup Pitcher** was a major outlier, costing a whopping \\$240 for the same monthly usage.\n\nThe drop-in filters are super easy to change and don't cost too much to replace, especially when you have the option to shop around. Credit: Matt Lighthart\n\nFor faucet filters, the **Pur Plus Vertical Faucet** and **Brita Elite Advanced Faucet** show a notable annual cost difference: at 40 gallons per month, annual expenses are \\$41 versus \\$78, respectively. That gap widens even further with heavier use—at 160 gallons per month, the difference jumps to \\$90 versus \\$288.\n\n**Bottom line**: Reverse Osmosis systems generally make more sense for high-volume use since they're more economical if your needs go beyond just drinking water and can efficiently provide filtered water for cooking, coffee, and other household needs. Pitchers and faucet filters remain convenient and easy for light use and drinking water, but their costs can escalate quickly if you rely on them too heavily.\n\n#### Wastewater with Reverse Osmosis\nAnother factor to keep in mind with reverse osmosis systems is wastewater. RO filters produce a surprising amount of wastewater as part of the filtration process as they need to flush contaminants off the membrane. This wastewater is plumbed into your kitchen sink drain pipe (although some people come up with creative solutions to plumb it into a rain barrel for watering plants). While not a deal-breaker for most people interested in cleaner water, this additional water used is a factor to be aware of and consider.\n\nFor example, as shown in the chart below, the **APEC ROES-50 Essence Series** generates about 3 gallons of wastewater for every 1 gallon of filtered water and the **iSpring RCC7AK** runs at a 2:1 ratio. The **Waterdrop G3P600** produces the *least amount of wastewater*, roughly 1\/2 gallon of wastewater per each 1 gallon filtered.\n\nYour browser does not support charts×\n\n[![water filter - the ispring rcc7ak showed good results in contaminant removal...](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/40\/36\/525140_26754_L2.jpg)](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/40\/36\/525140_26754_XXXL.jpg)\n\nThe iSpring RCC7AK showed good results in contaminant removal testing, but it doesn't stand out compared to the other reverse osmosis systems in our lineup. Credit: Matt Lighthart\n## How to Pick A Water Filter\nWe've put together four key considerations, including the type of filtration system, available space, and budget, to help you find the best water filtration for your home.\n\n### **What Do All These Certifications Mean?**\nAll the standards, certifications, and labels attached to water filters can be confusing. NSF\/ANSI standards are outlined by the National Sanitation Foundation and the American National Standards Institute. A full list can be [found here](https:\/\/www.nsf.org\/consumer-resources\/articles\/standards-water-treatment-systems), but in short, the one you want to look for most of the time is NSF\/ANSI 53, which covers filters that are meant to handle contaminants with known health effects, like lead and PFAS.  \n   \n The [NSF guide to Contaminant Reduction Claims](https:\/\/www.nsf.org\/consumer-resources\/articles\/contaminant-reduction-claims-guide) by filter can be found here. Other acronyms to know are WQA (Water Quality Association) and IAPMO (International Association of Plumbing & Mechanical Officials), which are both organizations that can grant certifications to filters that pass NSF standards.\n\n### **What Type of Water Filter Do You Need?**\nWhile most people are accustomed to pitcher-style water filters, other options also exist, such as under-the-sink, faucet-mounted, and reverse osmosis systems. Deciding on the appropriate filtration system comes down to the level of contaminants in your water, your budget, and the level of setup needed. If you know your water has higher levels of contaminants and you need to cover a wide range of filtration, the upfront cost of a reverse osmosis system can be worth it. On the other hand, if you're more or less hoping to get cleaner, odor-free water, then a pitcher is your best bet.\n\n### **How Big is Your Household?**\nDepending on your household size, you may opt for larger capacity systems. While the simplicity and ease of use of a pitcher is great, larger households may find themselves refilling too often, especially if you use your filtered water for everything from drinking to boiling pasta and watering your houseplants. For those who consume more water, an under-the-sink option may work best for your needs. Also, consider how much free space you have. Under-the-sink options help keep counter space free, but you will have to clear a place to potentially store a tank along with the filters.\n\n### **Which System Requires the Least Maintenance?**\nPeriodic maintenance of your water filter system is key to maintaining proper filtration. Some systems require changing filters after only two months, while others can run the same filter for a year (or longer, depending on usage). A simple pitcher-style system typically only needs one filter type to be replaced, while more complex filtration systems, such as reverse osmosis filters, require different replacements depending on the filter stage. For those undecided on a filtration system, consider whether the extra maintenance costs and time are worth it for the extra filtration capabilities.\n\n### **Is Setup Going to Be a Hassle?**\nInstallation of under-the-sink systems involves a variety of different parts and often requires cutting pipe and drilling for installation of the faucet. If you feel comfortable with DIY projects, installing a filtration system can be fairly straightforward. However, if you're renting, have limited space under your sink, or are not keen on self-installation, it's worth considering options that can be placed on the counter.\n\n[![water filter - spigot dispensers like the one found on the brita ultramax can be...](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/40\/37\/525191_19943_L2.jpg)](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/40\/37\/525191_19943_XXXL.jpg)\n\nSpigot dispensers like the one found on the Brita Ultramax can be convenient than pitcher pours. Credit: Matt Lighthart\n## Conclusion\nHere at GearLab, we aim to provide you with firsthand knowledge from our testing experience, so you can purchase the best products that suit your needs and budget. For water filters, we looked closely at the subtle nuances that set pitchers, faucet models, and under-the-sink versions apart from one another. Whether you are looking to improve the taste of city water or want the perfect-tasting refreshment for a wedding or backyard BBQ, we hope you now have the knowledge to buy the perfect water filter for you.\n\nAt GearLab, we cover in-depth reviews on a variety of products, spanning goods from [air purifiers](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/topics\/health-fitness\/best-air-purifier) to [blood pressure monitors](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/topics\/health-fitness\/best-blood-pressure-monitor). If you're looking for some new home or kitchen appliances, we've got testing-backed opinions on the [top-rated air fryers](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/topics\/kitchen\/best-air-fryer) and [vacuum cleaners](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/topics\/floor-cleaning\/best-vacuum-cleaner).\n\n## Appendix\nFor those who are interested, the detailed results of the [Independent Water Quality Lab](https:\/\/mytapscore.com\/) testing we conducted are listed in the tables below:\n\nCritical Contaminant Results\n\n|   | Test | Lead Reduction | Lead (ppm) | Arsenic Reduction | Arsenic (ppm) | Uranium Reduction | Uranium (ppm) | Nitrate Reduction | Nitrate as N (ppm) |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| **Supply (baseline)** | \\- | \\- | 0\\.26 | \\- | 0\\.00265 | \\- | 0\\.00376 | \\- | 2\\.46 |\n| **Health Guideline Limit (HGL)** | \\- | \\- | 0 | \\- | 0 | \\- | 0 | \\- | 10 |\n| **EPA Limit** | \\- | \\- | 0 | \\- | 0\\.01 | \\- | 0\\.03 | \\- | 10 |\n| **APEC Essence ROES-50** | Tap Score Essential City Water Test | 100% | 0 | 100% | 0 | 100% | 0 | \\- | \\- |\n| **iSpring RCC7AK RO** | Tap Score Essential City Water Test | 100% | 0 | 100% | 0 | 100% | 0 | \\- | \\- |\n| **Waterdrop G3P600 RO** | Tap Score Essential City Water Test | 100% | 0 | 100% | 0 | 100% | 0 | \\- | \\- |\n| **Pur Plus** | Tap Score Essential City Water Test | 100% | 0 | 100% | 0 | 100% | 0 | 92% | 0\\.2 |\n| **Culligan Zerowater Pitcher 10-Cup** | Tap Score Essential City Water Test | 100% | 0 | 100% | 0 | 98% | 0\\.00008 | 100% | 0 |\n| **Travel Berkey** | Tap Score Essential City Water Test | 100% | 0 | 25% | 0\\.00198 | 95% | 0\\.00017 | 20% | 1\\.98 |\n| **PUR PLUS Faucet Mount** | Tap Score Essential City Water Test | 100% | 0 | 9% | 0\\.0024 | 28% | 0\\.0027 | 37% | 1\\.54 |\n| **Brita Faucet Mount Elite** | Tap Score Essential City Water Test | 100% | 0 | 3% | 0\\.00256 | 44% | 0\\.00212 | 33% | 1\\.66 |\n| **Brita UltraMax Elite** | Tap Score Essential City Water Test | 99% | 0\\.0019 | 0% | 0\\.00266 | 30% | 0\\.00262 | 0% | 2\\.47 |\n| **Amazon Basics** | Tap Score Essential City Water Test | 97% | 0\\.0072 | Added 13% | 0\\.00299 | 97% | 0\\.00011 | 64% | 0\\.88 |\n| **Brita Large Pitcher (10 cup)** | Tap Score Essential City Water Test | 94% | 0\\.016 | 9% | 0\\.0024 | 97% | 0\\.00013 | 70% | 0\\.74 |\n| **Brita Metro** | Tap Score Essential City Water Test | 93% | 0\\.017 | 3% | 0\\.00258 | 96% | 0\\.00015 | 61% | 0\\.95 |\n| **Waterdrop 10UA Under Sink** | Tap Score Essential City Water Test | 0% | 0\\.27 | 0% | 0\\.00264 | 1% | 0\\.00374 | \\- | \\- |\n\nMetals and Trace Elements and % Removal\n\n|   | Test | Barium Removed | Barium (ppm) | Copper (Extreme) Removed | Copper Extreme (ppm) | Copper (Normal) Removed | Copper Normal (ppm) | Vanadium Removed | Vanadium - Tap Water (ppm) | Iron Removed | Iron (ppm) | Strontium Removed | Strontium (ppm) | Zinc Removed | Zinc (ppm) |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| **Supply (baseline)** | \\- | \\- | 0\\.012 | \\- | 8 | \\- | 0\\.014 | \\- | 0\\.00794 | \\- | 4\\.5 | \\- | 0\\.31 | \\- | 0\\.039 |\n| **Health Guideline Limit (HGL)** | \\- | \\- | 2 | \\- | 0\\.3 | \\- | 0\\.3 | \\- | 0\\.005 | \\- | 4 | \\- | 3 | \\- | 2 |\n| **EPA Limit** | \\- | \\- | 2 | \\- | 1\\.3 | \\- | 1\\.3 | \\- | 0\\.23 | \\- | 0\\.3 (SMCL) | \\- | 4 (SMCL) | \\- | 5 |\n| **Amazon Basics** | Tap Score Essential City Water Test | 85% | 0\\.0018 | 93% | 0\\.56 | 95% | 0\\.00065 | 70% | 0\\.00242 | 96% | 0\\.19 | 97% | 0\\.01 | 74% | 0\\.01 |\n| **APEC Essence ROES-50** | Tap Score Essential City Water Test | 100% | 0 | 100% | 0 | \\- | \\- | \\- | \\- | 100% | 0 | \\- | \\- | 100% | 0 |\n| **Brita Faucet Mount Elite** | Tap Score Essential City Water Test | 100% | 0 | 100% | 0 | 100% | 0 | 42% | 0\\.00461 | 100% | 0 | 97% | 0\\.01 | 100% | 0 |\n| **Brita Large Pitcher (10 cup)** | Tap Score Essential City Water Test | 78% | 0\\.0026 | 85% | 1\\.2 | 95% | 0\\.00065 | 74% | 0\\.00205 | 88% | 0\\.53 | 90% | 0\\.03 | 62% | 0\\.015 |\n| **Brita Metro** | Tap Score Essential City Water Test | 77% | 0\\.0028 | 86% | 1\\.1 | 100% | 0 | 64% | 0\\.00282 | 87% | 0\\.6 | 90% | 0\\.03 | 62% | 0\\.015 |\n| **Brita UltraMax Elite** | Tap Score Essential City Water Test | 61% | 0\\.0047 | 66% | 2\\.7 | 95% | 0\\.00065 | 49% | 0\\.00405 | 99% | 0\\.066 | 35% | 0\\.2 | Added 5% | 0\\.041 |\n| **Culligan Zerowater Pitcher 10-Cup** | Tap Score Essential City Water Test | 100% | 0 | 100% | 0 | Added 114% | 0\\.03 | 100% | 0 | 100% | 0 | 100% | 0 | 100% | 0 |\n| **iSpring RCC7AK RO** | Tap Score Essential City Water Test | 100% | 0 | 100% | 0 | \\- | \\- | \\- | \\- | 100% | 0 | \\- | \\- | 100% | 0 |\n| **Pur Plus** | Tap Score Essential City Water Test | Added 1150 - 1983% | 0\\.25 | 100% | 0 | 100% | 0 | 100% | 0 | 100% | 0 | 97% | 0\\.01 | Added 151% | 0\\.098 |\n| **PUR PLUS Faucet Mount** | Tap Score Essential City Water Test | 100% | 0 | 100% | 0 | 100% | 0 | 53% | 0\\.00376 | 100% | 0 | 77% | 0\\.07 | 100% | 0 |\n| **Travel Berkey** | Tap Score Essential City Water Test | 100% | 0 | 100% | 0 | 93% | 0\\.00096 | 84% | 0\\.00128 | 100% | 0 | 100% | 0 | 100% | 0 |\n| **Waterdrop 10UA Under Sink** | Tap Score Essential City Water Test | Added 8% | 0\\.013 | Added 2% | 8\\.2 | 0% | 0\\.014 | \\- | \\- | 4% | 4\\.3 | \\- | \\- | 100% | 0 |\n| **Waterdrop G3P600 RO** | Tap Score Essential City Water Test | 88% | 0\\.0014 | 96% | 0\\.29 | \\- | \\- | \\- | \\- | 100% | 0\\.013 | \\- | \\- | 87% | 0\\.0049 |\n\n—*Graham Faulknor, Austin Palmer, and Sam Hill*\n\nTable of Contents\n\n- [The Best Water Filters](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/topics\/kitchen\/best-water-filter#the-best-water-filters)\n- - [Best Pitcher Filter](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/topics\/kitchen\/best-water-filter#best-pitcher-filter)\n- - [Best Reverse Osmosis System](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/topics\/kitchen\/best-water-filter#best-reverse-osmosis-system)\n- - [Best Value Pitcher](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/topics\/kitchen\/best-water-filter#best-value-pitcher)\n- - [Best Long Term Value](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/topics\/kitchen\/best-water-filter#best-long-term-value)\n- - [Favorite Modern Reverse Osmosis System](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/topics\/kitchen\/best-water-filter#favorite-modern-reverse-osmosis-system)\n- - [Best Faucet](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/topics\/kitchen\/best-water-filter#best-faucet)\n- - [Best Pitcher for Secondary Contaminant Removal](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/topics\/kitchen\/best-water-filter#best-pitcher-for-secondary-contaminant-removal)\n- [Product Comparison Table](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/topics\/kitchen\/best-water-filter#product-comparison-table)\n- [How We Tested](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/topics\/kitchen\/best-water-filter#how-we-tested)\n- [Why Trust GearLab](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/topics\/kitchen\/best-water-filter#why-trust-gearlab)\n- [Analysis and Test Results](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/topics\/kitchen\/best-water-filter#analysis-and-test-results)\n- - [What's the Best Value?](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/topics\/kitchen\/best-water-filter#whats-the-best-value)\n- - [Contaminant Removal](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/topics\/kitchen\/best-water-filter#contaminant-removal)\n- - [Critical Contaminant Removal](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/topics\/kitchen\/best-water-filter#critical-contaminant-removal)\n- - [PFAS Forever Chemical Removal](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/topics\/kitchen\/best-water-filter#pfas-forever-chemical-removal)\n- - [Secondary Contaminant Removal](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/topics\/kitchen\/best-water-filter#secondary-contaminant-removal)\n- - [Taste](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/topics\/kitchen\/best-water-filter#taste)\n- - [Maintenance and Setup](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/topics\/kitchen\/best-water-filter#maintenance-and-setup)\n- - [Operating Cost](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/topics\/kitchen\/best-water-filter#operating-cost)\n- [How to Pick A Water Filter](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/topics\/kitchen\/best-water-filter#how-to-pick-a-water-filter)\n- [Conclusion](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/topics\/kitchen\/best-water-filter#conclusion)\n- [Appendix](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/topics\/kitchen\/best-water-filter#appendix)\n\n## Recommended Water Filters\nWater Filters\n\n[![Lead photo for APEC ROES-50 Essence Series](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/40\/36\/525128_4018_M2.jpg)](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/reviews\/kitchen\/water-filter\/apec-roes-50-essence-series)\n\n[APEC ROES-50 Essence Series](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/reviews\/kitchen\/water-filter\/apec-roes-50-essence-series)\n\n![Editors' Choice Award](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/images\/editors-choice_30x69.png)\n\n\\$231 List  \n[Check Price at Amazon](https:\/\/www.amazon.com\/dp\/B0D4PJYHJK?tag=tglcom20-20&linkCode=ogi&th=1&psc=1)\n\n[![Lead photo for iSpring RCC7](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/37\/26\/494081_17070_M2.jpg)](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/reviews\/kitchen\/water-filter\/ispring-rcc7)\n\n[iSpring RCC7](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/reviews\/kitchen\/water-filter\/ispring-rcc7)\n\n![Editors' Choice Award](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/images\/editors-choice_30x69.png)\n\n\\$220 List  \n[Check Price at Amazon](https:\/\/www.amazon.com\/dp\/B003XELTTG?tag=tglcom20-20&linkCode=ogi&th=1&psc=1)\n\n[![Lead photo for ZeroWater 10-Cup 5-Stage Pitcher](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/37\/26\/494108_3542_M2.jpg)](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/reviews\/kitchen\/water-filter\/zerowater-10-cup-5-stage-pitcher)\n\n[ZeroWater 10-Cup 5-Stage Pitcher](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/reviews\/kitchen\/water-filter\/zerowater-10-cup-5-stage-pitcher)\n\n![Editors' Choice Award](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/images\/editors-choice_30x69.png)\n\n\\$35 List  \n[Check Price at Amazon](https:\/\/www.amazon.com\/dp\/B0073PZ6O0?tag=tglcom20-20&linkCode=ogi&th=1&psc=1)\n\n[![Lead photo for Pur Plus 11-Cup Pitcher](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/40\/37\/525195_10566_M2.jpg)](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/reviews\/kitchen\/water-filter\/pur-plus-11-cup-pitcher)\n\n[Pur Plus 11-Cup Pitcher](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/reviews\/kitchen\/water-filter\/pur-plus-11-cup-pitcher)\n\n![Editors' Choice Award](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/images\/editors-choice_30x69.png)\n\n\\$25 List\n\n[![Lead photo for Travel Berkey](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/40\/36\/525092_8898_M2.jpg)](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/reviews\/kitchen\/water-filter\/travel-berkey)\n\n[Travel Berkey](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/reviews\/kitchen\/water-filter\/travel-berkey)\n\n![Best Buy Award](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/images\/best-buy_30x69.png)\n\n\\$362 List  \n[Check Amazon *(on sale!)*](https:\/\/www.amazon.com\/dp\/B00FQP2CUU?tag=tglcom20-20&linkCode=ogi&th=1&psc=1)\n\n[![Lead photo for PUR Classic 11 Cup Pitcher](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/37\/26\/494116_23959_M2.jpg)](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/reviews\/kitchen\/water-filter\/pur-classic-11-cup-pitcher)\n\n[PUR Classic 11 Cup Pitcher](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/reviews\/kitchen\/water-filter\/pur-classic-11-cup-pitcher)\n\n![Best Buy Award](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/images\/best-buy_30x69.png)\n\n\\$30 List  \n[Check Price at Amazon](https:\/\/www.amazon.com\/dp\/B00G15A8E6?tag=tglcom20-20&linkCode=ogi&th=1&psc=1)\n\n[![Lead photo for APEC WFS-1000](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/37\/26\/494099_12386_M2.jpg)](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/reviews\/kitchen\/water-filter\/apec-wfs-1000)\n\n[APEC WFS-1000](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/reviews\/kitchen\/water-filter\/apec-wfs-1000)\n\n![Best Buy Award](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/images\/best-buy_30x69.png)\n\n\\$145 List  \n[Check Price at Amazon](https:\/\/www.amazon.com\/dp\/B00TT9I2PS?tag=tglcom20-20&linkCode=ogi&th=1&psc=1)\n\n[![Lead photo for Amazon Basics 10-Cup Pitcher](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/40\/37\/525186_13185_M2.jpg)](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/reviews\/kitchen\/water-filter\/amazon-basics-10-cup-pitcher)\n\n[Amazon Basics 10-Cup Pitcher](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/reviews\/kitchen\/water-filter\/amazon-basics-10-cup-pitcher)\n\n![Best Buy Award](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/images\/best-buy_30x69.png)\n\n\\$26 List\n\n[![Lead photo for Pur Plus Vertical Faucet](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/40\/36\/525158_5687_M2.jpg)](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/reviews\/kitchen\/water-filter\/pur-plus-vertical-faucet)\n\n[Pur Plus Vertical Faucet](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/reviews\/kitchen\/water-filter\/pur-plus-vertical-faucet)\n\n![Top Pick Award](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/images\/top-pick_30x69.png)\n\n\\$22 List  \n[Check Amazon *(on sale!)*](https:\/\/www.amazon.com\/dp\/B07MLSVLZH?tag=tglcom20-20&linkCode=ogi&th=1&psc=1)\n\n[![Lead photo for Bluevua RO100ROPOT](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/37\/26\/494133_29262_M2.jpg)](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/reviews\/kitchen\/water-filter\/bluevua-ro100ropot)\n\n[Bluevua RO100ROPOT](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/reviews\/kitchen\/water-filter\/bluevua-ro100ropot)\n\n![Top Pick Award](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/images\/top-pick_30x69.png)\n\n\\$434 List  \n[Check Amazon *(on sale!)*](https:\/\/www.amazon.com\/dp\/B09KRDK677?tag=tglcom20-20&linkCode=ogi&th=1&psc=1)\n\n[![Lead photo for Waterdrop G3P600 Reverse Osmosis System](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/40\/36\/525119_4042_M2.jpg)](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/reviews\/kitchen\/water-filter\/waterdrop-g3p600-reverse-osmosis-system)\n\n[Waterdrop G3P600 Reverse Osmosis System](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/reviews\/kitchen\/water-filter\/waterdrop-g3p600-reverse-osmosis-system)\n\n![Top Pick Award](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/images\/top-pick_30x69.png)\n\n\\$539 List\n\nSee the review: [Best Water Filters](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/topics\/kitchen\/best-water-filter)\n\nYou Might Also Like\n\n[![best blenders](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/39\/88\/520320_20324_M2.jpg)](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/topics\/kitchen\/best-blender)\n\n### [Blenders](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/topics\/kitchen\/best-blender)\n\n[![best kitchen appliances](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/34\/18\/463358_16306_M2.jpg)](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/topics\/kitchen\/best-kitchen-appliances)\n\n### [Best Kitchen Appliances](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/topics\/kitchen\/best-kitchen-appliances)\n\n[![10 top coffee makers](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/39\/75\/519064_11306_M2.jpg)](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/topics\/kitchen\/best-coffee-maker)\n\n### [10 Top Coffee Makers](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/topics\/kitchen\/best-coffee-maker)\n\n[![best stand mixers](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/39\/43\/515836_81_M2.jpg)](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/topics\/kitchen\/best-stand-mixer)\n\n### [Stand Mixers](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/topics\/kitchen\/best-stand-mixer)\n\n[![best juicers](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/36\/83\/489824_24160_M2.jpg)](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/topics\/kitchen\/best-juicer)\n\n### [Juicers](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/topics\/kitchen\/best-juicer)\n\n[![best food processors](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/38\/67\/508224_22054_M2.jpg)](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/topics\/kitchen\/best-food-processor)\n\n### [Food Processors](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/topics\/kitchen\/best-food-processor)\n\nHow can we improve GearLab? Got feedback?  \n  [Let us know\\!](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/feedback)\n\nGearLab is reader-supported. We buy all the products we test — *no freebies* from manufacturers. If you click on our links, we may earn a commission, which helps support [our testing work](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/about).\n\n- [Home](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/)\n- [Best-in-Class Reviews](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/reviews)\n- [How To Articles](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/articles)\n- [FAQ](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/faq)\n- [Jobs](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/jobs)\n- [Feedback](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/feedback)\n- [Contact](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/contact)\n- [About Us](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/about)\n\nMaterial on GearLab is copyrighted. Reproduction without permission is prohibited.  \n All trademarks property of their respective owners.  \n [Privacy](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/privacy) \\| [Cookies](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/cookies) \\| [Terms](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/terms)\n\nZinc (ppm)\n\nLead\n\nArsenic\n\nUranium\n\nTotal Reduction\n\nPFNA Reduction\n\nPFBA Reduction\n\nIron (ppm)\n\nCopper (ppm)\n\nBarium (ppm)\n\nZinc (ppm)","attrs_readable_markdown":"## The Best Water Filters\nFull results from testing 13 top products are in our [Product Comparison Table](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/topics\/kitchen\/best-water-filter#product-comparison-table) and [Analysis & Test Results](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/topics\/kitchen\/best-water-filter#analysis-and-test-results) sections.\n\nYour browser does not support charts×\n\nBest Pitcher FilterPur Plus 11-Cup Pitcher\n\n![Editors' Choice Award](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/images\/editors-choice_47x107.png)\n\n![pur plus 11-cup pitcher](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/40\/37\/525195_10566_M.jpg)\n\n![Editors' Choice Award](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/images\/editors-choice_47x107.png)\n\n81\n\n**OVERALL  SCORE**\n\n- Critical Contaminant Removal **9\\.6**\n- Secondary Contaminant Removal **6\\.5**\n- Taste **8\\.6**\n- Maintenance and Setup **8\\.3**\n- Operating Cost **5\\.8**\n\n**PROS**\n\nGreat contaminant removal\n\nGood taste\n\nFilter change light\n\nRemoves microplastics\n\n**CONS**\n\nSmall fill opening\n\nMore costly than others over time for filters\n\nSlower to filter than some other pitchers\n\nThe [Pur Plus 11-Cup Pitcher](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/reviews\/kitchen\/water-filter\/pur-plus-11-cup-pitcher) stands out because it delivers filtration performance nearly on par with what we expect from under-sink reverse osmosis (RO) systems without requiring a complicated install. This would be a great choice for renters or others who want cleaner water without embarking on a DIY project. The 3-in-1 PUR PLUS filter is NSF-certified for lead, microplastics, chlorine, and more than 20 chemical and physical impurities, providing an impressive level of purification. In testing, it lived up to its certifications, removing nearly all major contaminants, including 100% of lead, arsenic, and uranium, plus over 96% of PFNA, making it one of the most capable pitcher filters we have used. It has a slim, fridge-friendly shape and a built-in filter change indicator that removes the guesswork from maintenance.\n\n**SPECIFICATIONS**\n\n|   |   |\n|---|---|\n| Type | Pitcher |\n| Estimated cost per year (40 gal\/month) | \\$108 |\n| Certifications | WQA certified to reduce lead  NSF certified to reduce microplastics |\n| Estimated cost per year (160 gal\/month) | \\$432 |\n| Wastewater Generated | No |\n\nIts downsides are relatively minor but worth considering: filtration is slower than some competing pitchers, and replacement filters cost more than the average pitcher, which can add up quickly if your household goes through a lot of water. For anyone who wants serious contaminant reduction without stepping up to an RO system, the **Pur Plus 11-Cup Pitcher** is the most well-rounded, high-performance choice. If you're shopping around for a pitcher-style filter, you should also take a look at the [Culligan with Zerowater 8-Cup Pitcher](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/reviews\/kitchen\/water-filter\/culligan-with-zerowater-8-cup-pitcher), which did a great job with trace elements and minerals, and the [Amazon Basics 10-Cup Pitcher](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/reviews\/kitchen\/water-filter\/amazon-basics-10-cup-pitcher), which provides a good value in the pitcher category.\n\n**Read more:** [Pur Plus 11-Cup Pitcher review](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/reviews\/kitchen\/water-filter\/pur-plus-11-cup-pitcher)\n\nThe Pur Plus provides some impressively clean water for a pitcher style filter. Credit: Matt Lighthart\n\nBest Reverse Osmosis SystemAPEC ROES-50 Essence Series\n\n![Editors' Choice Award](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/images\/editors-choice_47x107.png)\n\n![apec roes-50 essence series](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/40\/36\/525128_4018_M.jpg)\n\n![Editors' Choice Award](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/images\/editors-choice_47x107.png)\n\n89\n\n**OVERALL  SCORE**\n\n- Critical Contaminant Removal **10\\.0**\n- Secondary Contaminant Removal **9\\.8**\n- Taste **8\\.8**\n- Maintenance and Setup **3\\.6**\n- Operating Cost **8\\.0**\n\n**PROS**\n\nExcellent contaminant removal\n\nNSF certified in multiple categories\n\n**CONS**\n\nTakes up significant under-sink space\n\nWastes water\n\nFilter changes are less convenient than other RO systems\n\nThe [APEC ROES-50 Essence Series](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/reviews\/kitchen\/water-filter\/apec-roes-50-essence-series) is a straightforward, highly capable reverse-osmosis (RO) system that delivers some of the most impressive filtration results in water quality tests. Reverse osmosis works by pushing water through an ultrafine membrane that blocks contaminants at the molecular level, producing exceptionally clean, low-TDS water — and in water quality lab tests, the ROES-50 excelled at exactly that. It brought every critical contaminant we measured, including lead, PFNA, arsenic, and uranium, down to undetectable levels and posted nearly perfect scores for secondary contaminants like zinc and copper as well. It has a no-frills design, but this system produces excellent-tasting water thanks to its carbon polishing stage, earning high marks in blind taste tests and frequent praise from long-term users.\n\n**SPECIFICATIONS**\n\n|   |   |\n|---|---|\n| Type | Under Sink Reverse Osmosis |\n| Estimated cost per year (40 gal\/month) | \\$75 |\n| Certifications | WQA |\n| Estimated cost per year (160 gal\/month) | \\$75 |\n| Wastewater Generated | 3:1 ratio wastewater-to-filtered |\n\nThe main hesitation many have with the **APEC ROES** is that installing an under-sink system requires some DIY skills and some modifications to your kitchen. It also requires a more significant upfront investment; therefore, this model is best suited for those who own their home and plan to use the filter system for many years. If this is the case it is a great value. The classic five-stage layout is a bit old-school, but it's also one of the reasons this model is such a strong value: replacement filters are inexpensive, long-lasting, and easy to buy individually. That said, maintenance is more hands-on than modern RO units, and the system takes up a lot of under-sink space. It also produces a lot of wastewater, an inevitable trade-off with RO designs. Still, for shoppers prioritizing maximum contaminant removal without spending premium RO money, the **ROES-50** stands out as a top performer. If you like the idea of RO-quality water but want a sleeker, easier-to-maintain setup, consider the [Waterdrop G3P600 tankless system](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/reviews\/kitchen\/water-filter\/waterdrop-g3p600-reverse-osmosis-system) — it performs nearly as well with far less bulk under your sink.\n\n**Read more:** [APEC ROES-50 Essence Series review](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/reviews\/kitchen\/water-filter\/apec-roes-50-essence-series)\n\nThough the APEC produces excellent quality water, filter changes are pretty inconvenient. Credit: Matt Lighthart\n\nBest Value PitcherAmazon Basics 10-Cup Pitcher\n\n![Best Buy Award](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/images\/best-buy_47x107.png)\n\n![amazon basics 10-cup pitcher](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/40\/37\/525186_13185_M.jpg)\n\n![Best Buy Award](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/images\/best-buy_47x107.png)\n\n73\n\n**OVERALL  SCORE**\n\n- Critical Contaminant Removal **6\\.6**\n- Secondary Contaminant Removal **7\\.5**\n- Taste **7\\.0**\n- Maintenance and Setup **8\\.5**\n- Operating Cost **8\\.2**\n\n**PROS**\n\nAccepts multiple filter brands\n\nBudget friendly\n\nSpout cover\n\n**CONS**\n\nNo flip top\n\nNo PFAS or heavy metal certification\n\nNot NSF certified for many serious contaminants\n\nLeached some aluminum into our water\n\nThe [Amazon Basics 10-Cup Pitcher](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/reviews\/kitchen\/water-filter\/amazon-basics-10-cup-pitcher) delivers far better filtration performance than its price tag suggests, making it one of the best-value options for everyday use. It didn't come back with the strongest filtration results, but for a budget pitcher, it isn't too shabby. It removed 97.2% of lead, and 100% of uranium. It produced an impressive 84.88% cut in PFAS, even though it is not certified to remove this. For households with typical tap water concerns, those numbers put it well ahead of many inexpensive competitors. Upfront cost is slightly lower than other models, but where this pitcher really stands out is its long-term affordability. Most pitcher systems lock you into proprietary filters with fixed pricing and limited buying options. The Amazon Basics model accepts multiple filter brands, meaning you can comparison shop, switch filter types as needed, and take advantage of bulk deals. Replacement filters are inexpensive to begin with, and that flexibility can help drive yearly costs even lower if you're a savvy shopper.\n\n**SPECIFICATIONS**\n\n|   |   |\n|---|---|\n| Type | Pitcher |\n| Estimated cost per year (40 gal\/month) | \\$44 |\n| Certifications | WQA certified against NSF Standards 42, 53, and 372 |\n| Estimated cost per year (160 gal\/month) | \\$176 |\n| Wastewater Generated | No |\n\nThe **Amazon Basics** is not certified to remove many trace elements and minerals, and its PFAS removal was lower than we would prefer. If those are a concern for you, this might not be the best option. While it's not certified for all contaminants, its performance with common pollutants like lead makes it reliable for general day-to-day use. It's not going to match the performance of a RO system, but for casual filtration on a budget, it does a decent job. For anyone who wants clean, better-tasting water without the long-term expense, this pitcher offers unmatched cost control. If you need stronger filtration and can stretch the budget, the [Pur Plus 11-Cup](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/reviews\/kitchen\/water-filter\/pur-plus-11-cup-pitcher) is the top-performing pitcher overall. And if you want the convenience of purified water straight from the tap (but no install), the [Pur Plus Vertical Faucet Filter](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/reviews\/kitchen\/water-filter\/pur-plus-vertical-faucet) offers better contaminant removal.\n\n**Read more:** [Amazon Basics 10-Cup Pitcher review](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/reviews\/kitchen\/water-filter\/amazon-basics-10-cup-pitcher)\n\nThe Amazon Basics pitcher has a simple design that is compatible with filters from multiple brands, allowing you to shop around for the ones that fit your filtration needs and budget. Credit: Matt Lighthart\n\nBest Long Term ValueTravel Berkey\n\n![Best Buy Award](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/images\/best-buy_47x107.png)\n\n![travel berkey](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/40\/36\/525092_8898_M.jpg)\n\n![Best Buy Award](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/images\/best-buy_47x107.png)\n\n76\n\n**OVERALL  SCORE**\n\n- Critical Contaminant Removal **8\\.2**\n- Secondary Contaminant Removal **7\\.9**\n- Taste **6\\.3**\n- Maintenance and Setup **6\\.3**\n- Operating Cost **8\\.8**\n\n**PROS**\n\nGood performance with lead and PFAS\n\nFilters last a long time\n\nLess plastic in the construction\n\n**CONS**\n\nBig initial investment\n\nLarge size won't fit in fridge\n\nFilters require upkeep\n\nThe [Travel Berkey](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/reviews\/kitchen\/water-filter\/travel-berkey) is a stainless steel gravity filter that has a high 1.5-gallon capacity, and shows excellent results when it comes to critical contaminants, removing 100% of PFAS and lead, as well as effectively removing many trace elements and minerals. It comes at a high up-front cost, almost on par with reverse osmosis systems. However, with filters that last up to 4 years, you'll make up the difference in replacement costs; our team estimated annual costs to be about \\$41, even at high-volume usage. This is significantly less than all other pitchers in our lineup, which makes it a great choice for large households that want a filter that can take care of most critical contaminants with minimal maintenance and low long-term costs.\n\n**SPECIFICATIONS**\n\n|   |   |\n|---|---|\n| Type | Dispenser |\n| Estimated cost per year (40 gal\/month) | \\$41 |\n| Certifications | Exceeds EPA and ANSI\/NSF Standard 53 protocols |\n| Estimated cost per year (160 gal\/month) | \\$41 |\n| Wastewater Generated | No |\n\nThe filters last a long time, provided they are properly maintained. You have to remove and scrub them every 6 months or so to keep them in working condition, and our testing team noted that this is more of a pain than simply dropping in a fresh filter every month or two. We like the spigot spout, but note that the unit must be placed on a stand or ledge in order to dispense water. It is also too tall to fit in the fridge, so you have to be ok with room-temperature water. If you're looking for a large capacity and low cost filter that doesn't depend on plumbing or electric hookups, the Travel Berkey is the way to go, but if you want filtered water straight from the tap, consider an under-sink system like the [APEC ROES-50 Essence Series](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/reviews\/kitchen\/water-filter\/apec-roes-50-essence-series), which is the most affordable RO system in the lineup.\n\n**Read more:** [Travel Berkey review](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/reviews\/kitchen\/water-filter\/travel-berkey)\n\n![the travel berkey is a big investment at first, but it is a great...](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/40\/37\/525201_19864_L2.jpg)\n\nThe Travel Berkey is a big investment at first, but it is a great value in the long term. Credit: Matt Lighthart\n\n![the travel berkey has a larger storage capacity than most...](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/40\/37\/525204_21264_L2.jpg)\n\nThe Travel Berkey has a larger storage capacity than most gravity-fed filters. Credit: Matt Lighthart\n\n![wingnuts screw on the upper tank of the travel berkey to hold the...](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/40\/37\/525205_11799_L2.jpg)\n\nWingnuts 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\n\n![it's a tough sell to fit the travel berkey in your fridge. you'd...](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/40\/36\/525093_1312_L2.jpg)\n\nIt's a tough sell to fit the Travel Berkey in your fridge. You'd lose alot of shelf space. Credit: Matt Lighthart\n\n![this model did a fantastic job of removing chlorine from drinking...](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/36\/25\/483995_28144_L2.jpg)\n\nThis model did a fantastic job of removing chlorine from drinking water. Credit: Abriah Wofford\n\nFavorite Modern Reverse Osmosis SystemWaterdrop G3P600 Reverse Osmosis System\n\n![Top Pick Award](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/images\/top-pick_47x107.png)\n\n![waterdrop g3p600 reverse osmosis system](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/40\/36\/525119_4042_M.jpg)\n\n![Top Pick Award](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/images\/top-pick_47x107.png)\n\n89\n\n**OVERALL  SCORE**\n\n- Critical Contaminant Removal **10\\.0**\n- Secondary Contaminant Removal **9\\.4**\n- Taste **8\\.8**\n- Maintenance and Setup **6\\.4**\n- Operating Cost **6\\.4**\n\n**PROS**\n\nEasier to maintain than most RO systems\n\nGreat PFAS and lead removal\n\nProduces less waste water\n\n**CONS**\n\nMore expensive than most filters\n\nInstallation is a DIY home project\n\nThe [Waterdrop G3P600 Reverse Osmosis System](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/reviews\/kitchen\/water-filter\/waterdrop-g3p600-reverse-osmosis-system) performs just as well as our Editors' Choice RO filter in critical contaminant removal, and has an additional alkaline remineralization stage that improves flavor and adds back some essential trace minerals to your water (which accounts for its lower score in removing secondary contaminants). In addition to near-flawless filtration, this system is one of the easiest RO systems to use after initial installation. It has modern features that make it easy to use and maintain on a daily basis. The tankless design takes up much less space under your sink, and filter changes require a simple twist and pull to remove them from dedicated slots. Overall, the unit is a bit bulky, but its completely enclosed design means you don't have a bunch of tubes and wires hanging around, and it's still smaller than a storage tank. Wastewater is an inevitable byproduct of reverse osmosis systems, but the Waterdrop produces about a quarter of the amount produced by competing models.\n\n**SPECIFICATIONS**\n\n|   |   |\n|---|---|\n| Type | Under Sink Reverse Osmosis |\n| Estimated cost per year (40 gal\/month) | \\$145 |\n| Certifications | NSF\/ANSI certified against Standards 42, 58, and 372 |\n| Estimated cost per year (160 gal\/month) | \\$145 |\n| Wastewater Generated | 1:2 ratio wastewater-to-filtered |\n\nThe downside is primarily the cost and the more involved installation. It is the most expensive unit in our lineup, and like all RO systems, it requires you to do some plumbing work and drill a hole into your countertop to install the separate faucet. If you choose to hire a professional to do this work, it pushes the cost up even higher, and is likely only something that you'll want to commit to if you own your home and plan to use the filter for many years. However, after this initial push, the ongoing costs are less than a pitcher, and maintenance is relatively easy compared to other under-sink filters. If you like the idea of on-demand filtration, but are renting or can't justify the high cost of the Waterdrop, then a faucet filter like the [Pur Plus Vertical Faucet](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/reviews\/kitchen\/water-filter\/pur-plus-vertical-faucet) is a good alternative.\n\n**Read more:** [Waterdrop G3P600 RO review](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/reviews\/kitchen\/water-filter\/waterdrop-g3p600-reverse-osmosis-system)\n\nSwapping filters on the Waterdrop G3P600 is as easy as a slide and twist motion. Credit: Matt Lighthart\n\nBest FaucetPur Plus Vertical Faucet\n\n![Top Pick Award](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/images\/top-pick_47x107.png)\n\n![pur plus vertical faucet](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/40\/36\/525158_5687_M.jpg)\n\n![Top Pick Award](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/images\/top-pick_47x107.png)\n\n**Deal Alert:** on sale for 39% off at Amazon\n\n[See Deal](https:\/\/www.amazon.com\/dp\/B07MLSVLZH?tag=tglcom20-20&linkCode=ogi&th=1&psc=1)\n\n73\n\n**OVERALL  SCORE**\n\n- Critical Contaminant Removal **7\\.1**\n- Secondary Contaminant Removal **7\\.3**\n- Taste **6\\.5**\n- Maintenance and Setup **8\\.4**\n- Operating Cost **8\\.2**\n\n**PROS**\n\nFiltered water is available immediately\n\nReduces lead and PFNA to undetectable levels\n\n**CONS**\n\nSlower flow compared to unfiltered tap\n\nDoesn't fit all faucet types\n\nBulky\n\nThe [Pur Plus Vertical Faucet](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/reviews\/kitchen\/water-filter\/pur-plus-vertical-faucet) is an ideal solution for anyone looking to improve their tap water without committing to an under-sink system or dealing with constantly refilling pitchers. Faucet filters like this one deliver water immediately, avoid counter clutter, and don't require permanent plumbing changes, making them perfect for renters or small kitchens. This vertical design, while slightly bulky, fits most faucets and includes a simple one-click installation that makes setup and filter changes easy. In testing, the Pur Plus Vertical Faucet excelled at reducing lead and PFAS to near-undetectable levels while removing chlorine to improve taste. It also performed well on common heavy metals like barium, copper, zinc, and iron, ensuring a safe, clean pour for daily drinking and cooking.\n\n**SPECIFICATIONS**\n\n|   |   |\n|---|---|\n| Type | Faucet |\n| Estimated cost per year (40 gal\/month) | \\$59 |\n| Certifications | WQA and NSF certified to reduce 70 contaminants including lead, microplastics, mercury, chlorine taste and odor, DEET, and TTHM |\n| Estimated cost per year (160 gal\/month) | \\$90 |\n| Wastewater Generated | No |\n\nIt is not designed to filter fluoride, arsenic, or high uranium levels, so households with extreme contamination concerns may need a more robust system. It also requires you to remove the aerator on your faucet and replace it with an adapter, and our tester worried about thread damage on the faucet head. You can avoid this with a pitcher-style option, and the **Pur Plus 11-Cup Pitcher** remains our top pick for critical contaminant removal while being simple to use and maintain.\n\n**Read more:** [Pur Plus Vertical Faucet review](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/reviews\/kitchen\/water-filter\/pur-plus-vertical-faucet)\n\n[![water filter - the pur plus is a renter-friendly option for on-demand filtered water.](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/40\/36\/525161_17870_L2.jpg)](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/40\/36\/525161_17870_XXXL.jpg)\n\nThe PUR Plus is a renter-friendly option for on-demand filtered water. Credit: Matt Lighthart\n\nBest Pitcher for Secondary Contaminant RemovalCulligan with Zerowater 8-Cup Pitcher\n\n![culligan with zerowater 8-cup pitcher](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/40\/37\/525212_18030_M.jpg)\n\n**PROS**\n\nFilters a wide range of contaminants for a pitcher\n\nLow-effort setup\n\nFits in the fridge\n\n**CONS**\n\nFilters have a short lifespan\n\nCostly to maintain long-term\n\nTakes a long time to filter water\n\nThe [Culligan with Zerowater 8-Cup Pitcher](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/reviews\/kitchen\/water-filter\/culligan-with-zerowater-8-cup-pitcher) provides a great balance of critical *and* secondary contaminant removal, coming in just behind competitors like the **Pur Plus 11-Cup Pitcher** thanks to its superior performance with trace elements and minerals. While both pitchers excel at removing critical contaminants like lead and arsenic, this Culligan model consistently scored higher in reducing metals such as nickel, iron, and barium, making it an excellent choice for households with older plumbing or questionable municipal water. The star of the system is its 5-stage Zerowater filtration, which strips contaminants down to near-zero levels and even includes a built-in TDS meter so you can verify performance in real time. In testing, it removed 100% of lead, uranium, and mercury. Taste results were solid—clean, crisp water with chlorine and chemical notes fully removed.\n\n**SPECIFICATIONS**\n\n|   |   |\n|---|---|\n| Type | Pitcher |\n| Estimated cost per year (40 gal\/month) | \\$240 |\n| Certifications | NSF\/ANSI 42, 53, and 401 |\n| Estimated cost per year (160 gal\/month) | \\$960 |\n| Wastewater Generated | No |\n\nWhere this pitcher falters is the long-term cost. Its impressive performance comes at the price of very short filter life — often only two to four weeks — and the replacements are expensive. For heavy water drinkers or families, long-term operating costs can reach several hundred dollars per year, far higher than the average pitcher. It also didn't remove as much PFAS as we would like, only reaching 87% removal. If your priority is more on trace element and mineral removal (like iron, copper or zinc), this is the one to get. If you'd prefer lower maintenance and lower cost, consider the [Amazon Basics 10-Cup](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/reviews\/kitchen\/water-filter\/amazon-basics-10-cup-pitcher) or [Pur Plus 11-Cup Pitcher](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/reviews\/kitchen\/water-filter\/pur-plus-11-cup-pitcher), or step up to a budget-friendly RO system like the [APEC ROES-50](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/reviews\/kitchen\/water-filter\/apec-roes-50-essence-series).\n\n**Read more:** [Culligan with Zerowater 8-Cup Pitcher review](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/reviews\/kitchen\/water-filter\/culligan-with-zerowater-8-cup-pitcher)\n\nThe Culligan with Zerowater did a great job with many contaminants across the board. Credit: Matt Lighthart\n\n## Product Comparison Table\n## How We Tested\nWe 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.\n\n#### Water Quality Lab Testing\nThe majority of a filter's score hinges on its effectiveness in removing various contaminants and impurities. To ensure the accuracy of our ratings, we commissioned professional water-quality testing at an an [independent water-quality lab](https:\/\/mytapscore.com\/). We focused on three major categories of contaminants: PFAS (forever chemicals), Critical Contaminants, and Heavy Metals. We ran two types of water samples through each filter: a highly contaminated “*super*” sample with elevated levels of each contaminant, and a standard tap water sample to mimic typical household conditions. We measured the concentration of each contaminant before and after filtration to determine how effectively each system reduced or eliminated these substances. This dual-sample approach allowed us to see both worst-case performance and everyday effectiveness.\n\n[![water filter - we tested filtered water for common contaminants using an...](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/40\/36\/525095_12863_L2.jpg)](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/40\/36\/525095_12863_XXXL.jpg)\n\nWe tested filtered water for common contaminants using an independent lab, conducted taste tests, and measured for total dissolved solids. Credit: Matt Lighthart\n\nIn addition to lab analysis, we used a Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) meter and chemical indicator strips to further assess the efficiency of each filter. For the taste metric, we assembled a panel of judges to do a blind taste test and rank each water sample. They evaluated whether the filter introduced any unpleasant taste to clean water and assessed its ability to remove undesirable flavors and odors.\n\nFinally, we evaluated each filter's user experience, taking into account factors such as installation, maintenance, operating costs, and efficiency. This comprehensive approach ensures our reviews are thorough, reliable, and beneficial to users seeking the best water filtration system for their home. To learn more about our procedures, check out our [How We Test article](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/topics\/kitchen\/best-water-filter\/how-we-test).\n\nOur water filter rating scores are divided into **six different metrics**:\n\n- Critical Contaminant Removal *(35% of overall score weighting)*\n\n- Heavy Metal and Trace Element Removal *(25% of overall score weighting)*\n\n- Taste *(20% weighting)*\n\n- Setup and Use *(10% weighting)*\n\n- Maintenance and Setup *(10% weighting)*\n\n- Operating Cost *(10% weighting)*\n## Why Trust GearLab\nOur testing team includes professionals in environmental research, engineering, and journalism. [Graham Faulknor](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/author\/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 brings substantial experience to the team when designing, analyzing, and communicating our findings. [Austin Palmer](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/author\/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. [Sam Hill](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/author\/sam-hill) is a journalist based in the Pacific Northwest who focuses his writing on a mix of environmental and tech topics. He leverages his extensive experience in the industry to break down complex topics into clear, understandable results.\n\n![pair this article with our buying advice article to make the best...](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/37\/26\/494151_23271_L2.jpg)\n\nPair this article with our buying advice article to make the best decision for your needs. Credit: Abriah Wofford\n\n![a small subset of our blind taste test.](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/37\/29\/494400_16255_L2.jpg)\n\nA small subset of our blind taste test. Credit: Graham Faulknor\n\n![we built a custom test counter to conduct true side-by-side tests.](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/37\/29\/494396_2423_L2.jpg)\n\nWe built a custom test counter to conduct true side-by-side tests. Credit: Graham Faulknor\n## Analysis and Test Results\nIn 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](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/topics\/kitchen\/best-water-filter\/buying-advice).\n\nYour browser does not support charts×\n\nWorse Value\n\nBetter Value\n### What's the Best Value?\nWhen it comes to getting the best value in a water filter, the list price of the product doesn't tell the whole story. A higher sticker often means more filtration stages, but that doesn't always translate to better results. What really matters is how well the filter actually removes contaminants. Additionally, there can be a big difference between upfront costs and ongoing costs when you factor in the cost of filter replacements.\n\nSome simple pitchers or faucet filters can outperform pricier under-sink systems while keeping your annual filter costs low. But for high-volume users, undersink models are going to offer the best value. The **APEC ROES-50 Essence Series** or the **iSpring RCC7AK** are fantastic options. The APEC ROES-50 is the overall winner here with a slightly higher score in secondary contaminant testing and cheaper long-term operating costs — it is especially cost-effective when you look at annual operating costs for those households with a need for higher volumes of filtered water.\n\nFor pitchers, the **Pur Plus 11-Cup Pitcher** is an excellent value and top performer for 1-2 person households. It's a pretty average price in the pitcher-style filter lineup, but it competes with some RO systems when it comes to filter quality. If you don't have major health concerns when it comes to water quality, the **Amazon Basics 10-Cup Pitcher** is also a great little budget pitcher. It provides serviceable filtering for most households and is one of the lower-cost pitchers out there due to its ability to use filter replacements from multiple brands.\n\nSee more details below in the [Operating Costs section](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/topics\/kitchen\/best-water-filter#operating-cost).\n\n**Heading Into the Great Outdoors?**  \n Then it's best to leave all of these products behind. Under-the-sink or faucet-mount filters aren't suited to the backcountry, and filter pitchers are designed to improve the taste and quality of already-potable water, not to render lake or stream water safe to drink. That task is better left to a [water filter specifically designed for the backcountry](https:\/\/www.outdoorgearlab.com\/topics\/camping-and-hiking\/best-backpacking-water-filter). To ensure the filter you are considering is up to the task you have in mind, we recommend that you always consult the manufacturer's specifications.\n\nUsing filtered water can help improve the taste of your morning coffee or tea, and softer water is easier on your appliances. Credit: Matt Lighthart\n\n### Contaminant Removal\nGrowing awareness of potential contaminants in tap water and their possible health effects has made reliable water filtration more important than ever. Many people don't realize what unseen pollutants could be in their water, but filters can provide peace of mind by delivering clean, safe drinking water. To test performance, we prepared water samples with elevated levels of chlorine, iron, sulfate, lead, fluoride, and copper - all well above EPA safe limits. We then send filtered and control samples to [Tap Score for independent lab testing](https:\/\/mytapscore.com\/), ensuring accurate and trustworthy results.\n\nWe defined Critical Contaminant Removal as the filter's ability to eliminate high-priority pollutants like lead, PFNA, arsenic, and uranium, while Secondary Contaminant Removal covers trace elements and minerals such as copper, zinc, iron, and barium that can affect taste and safety but are generally less immediately hazardous. What contaminants you're concerned about depends on your health and the water quality where you live.\n\n[![water filter - opening the filter box to replace the internal filter on the brita...](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/40\/36\/525155_14728_L2.jpg)](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/40\/36\/525155_14728_XXXL.jpg)\n\nOpening the filter box to replace the internal filter on the Brita Elite Advanced. Credit: Matt Lighthart\n### Critical Contaminant Removal\nWe examined how well each filter handled the critical water contaminants, providing a more comprehensive understanding of which models truly deliver safer water and which ones fall short. The chart below primarily focuses on the most toxic [heavy metals that can make their way into tap water](https:\/\/www.ewg.org\/news-insights\/news\/2025\/05\/harmful-heavy-metals-why-theyre-tap-water-and-how-reduce-your-exposure).\n\n**% Critical Contaminant Removal**\n\n| Product | Lead | Arsenic | Uranium |\n|---|---|---|---|\n| APEC Essence ROES-50 | 100 | 100 | 100 |\n| iSpring RCC7AK RO | 100 | 100 | 100 |\n| Pur Plus Pitcher | 100 | 100 | 100 |\n| Waterdrop G3P600 RO | 100 | 100 | 100 |\n| Culligan Zerowater Pitcher 10-Cup | 100 | 100 | 98 |\n| Travel Berkey | 100 | 25 | 95 |\n| Brita Large Pitcher (10 cup) | 94 | 9 | 97 |\n| Amazon Basics | 97 | 0 | 97 |\n| Brita Metro | 93 | 3 | 96 |\n| Brita Faucet Mount Elite | 100 | 3 | 44 |\n| Pur Plus Faucet Mount | 100 | 9 | 28 |\n| Brita UltraMax Elite | 99 | 0 | 30 |\n| Waterdrop 10UA Under Sink | 0 | 0 | 1 |\n\nAgain, the RO systems we tested came out on top, removing nearly all the contaminants we tested for in both contaminated samples and standard tap water. For pitchers, the **Pur Plus 11-Cup Pitcher** and **Culligan with Zerowater 8-Cup Pitcher** both neared RO-quality results.\n\nThe **Amazon Basics 10-Cup Pitcher** filtered lead (97.2% removed) and uranium (100% removed) well, but it isn't NSF certified for many serious contaminants like fluoride or nitrates.\n\nThe [Waterdrop 10UA Under Sink](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/reviews\/kitchen\/water-filter\/waterdrop-wd-10ua-under-sink) came in toward the bottom of test results, making it the lowest-scored under-sink system. It was able to filter trace amounts of nitrate, but barely enough to mention. It only filtered out 3.8% of lead, 10% of uranium in water quality tests, and it isn't certified to reduce arsenic.\n\n### PFAS Forever Chemical Removal\nPFAS are a group of “*forever chemicals*” that don't break down easily, and [some reports say they may be more prevalent](https:\/\/www.ewg.org\/research\/national-pfas-testing) than we previously thought, and they are toxic even in very small amounts. They fall into our critical contaminant category. In the water quality test results, we specifically looked at two types: PFNA, which sticks around longer, and PFBA, which is smaller and exits the body more quickly. You don't want either in your drinking water. The results of PFAS removal lab tests are charted below.\n\n**% PFAS Removal**\n\n| Product | Total Reduction | PFNA Reduction | PFBA Reduction |\n|---|---|---|---|\n| APEC Essence ROES-50 | 100 | 100 | 100 |\n| Brita Faucet Mount Elite | 100 | 100 | 100 |\n| Pur Plus Faucet Mount | 100 | 100 | 100 |\n| Travel Berkey | 100 | 100 | 100 |\n| Waterdrop G3P600 RO | 100 | 100 | 100 |\n| Pur Plus Pitcher | 97 | 96 | 100 |\n| Waterdrop 10UA Under Sink | 93 | 92 | 100 |\n| iSpring RCC7AK RO | 91 | 90 | 100 |\n| Brita UltraMax Elite | 91 | 89 | 100 |\n| Amazon Basics | 87 | 85 | 100 |\n| Culligan Zerowater Pitcher 10-Cup | 87 | 85 | 100 |\n| Brita Large Pitcher (10 cup) | 73 | 69 | 100 |\n| Brita Metro | 54 | 51 | 72 |\n\nAcross the systems we tested, the reverse osmosis units — particularly the APEC ROES-50 and the other under-sink RO models — delivered the strongest PFAS removal, consistently reducing both PFNA and PFBA to near- or fully undetectable levels in both tap water and super-contaminated samples. The two faucet filters we tested — the **Brita Elite Advanced Faucet** and the **Pur Plus Vertical Faucet** also hit near-top marks here.\n\nPitcher filters showed far more mixed results: the high-end, specialty PFAS-targeting pitchers, like the **Pur Plus 11-Cup Pitcher**, performed respectably, but most standard carbon pitchers struggled, often removing only a portion of PFBA and doing very little against PFNA. The [Brita Large 10-Cup Pitcher](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/reviews\/kitchen\/water-filter\/brita-large-10-cup-pitcher) and [Brita Metro](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/reviews\/kitchen\/water-filter\/brita-metro) were among the most disappointing performers in PFAS testing, with 68.99% and 50.78% PFNA removal rates, respectively. They removed far less PFNA and PFBA than comparable filters and fell well short of what we'd expect from trusted, everyday-use pitchers.\n\n[![water filter - the waterdrop wd-10ua under sink essential only removes chlorine and...](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/40\/37\/525253_15841_L2.jpg)](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/40\/37\/525253_15841_XXXL.jpg)\n\nThe Waterdrop WD-10UA Under Sink essential only removes chlorine and light sediment. Credit: Matt Lighthart\n### Secondary Contaminant Removal\nCertain heavy metals and trace elements get their own category because they behave differently from critical contaminants and often enter tap water through plumbing corrosion or natural mineral sources. Some of these are even nutritionally essential in small amounts, and while they're usually less urgent than issues like lead or PFNA, elevated levels of metals such as copper, zinc, or barium [can impact long-term health](https:\/\/www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov\/books\/NBK218751\/) and the taste of your water — so we test them separately to show which filters can reliably address these everyday concerns. These materials are typically more of a concern if you draw water from a private well.\n\nThe results of heavy metal and trace element removal tests are charted below.\n\n**Mineral and Trace Element Removal**\n\n| Product | Iron (ppm) | Copper (ppm) | Barium (ppm) | Zinc (ppm) |\n|---|---|---|---|---|\n| APEC Essence ROES-50 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 |\n| Brita Faucet Mount Elite | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 |\n| Culligan Zerowater Pitcher 10-Cup | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 |\n| iSpring RCC7AK RO | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 |\n| Pur PlusFaucet Mount | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 |\n| Travel Berkey | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 |\n| Waterdrop G3P600 RO | 100 | 96 | 88 | 87 |\n| Amazon Basics | 96 | 93 | 85 | 74 |\n| Brita Large Pitcher (10 cup) | 88 | 85 | 78 | 62 |\n| Brita Metro | 87 | 86 | 77 | 62 |\n| Brita UltraMax Elite | 99 | 66 | 61 | 0 |\n| Pur Plus Pitcher | 100 | 100 | 0 | 0 |\n| Waterdrop 10UA Under Sink | 4 | 0 | 0 | 100 |\n\nThe top reverse osmosis systems dealt with heavy metals and trace elements well across the board, reducing nearly all secondary contaminants to zero in tests of super-contaminated and tap water samples. The **Culligan with Zerowater 8-Cup Pitcher** also performed well here, reliably knocking out metals like copper, zinc, iron, and barium; while we did see minor copper and zinc leaching in the lab, the amounts were extremely small and stayed well below EPA health guidelines.\n\n[![water filter - compared to other reverse osmosis systems, the waterdrop g3p600...](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/40\/37\/525235_5358_L2.jpg)](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/40\/37\/525235_5358_XXXL.jpg)\n\nCompared to other reverse osmosis systems, the Waterdrop G3P600 takes up much less cabinet space. Credit: Matt Lighthart\n\nThe [Travel Berkey](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/reviews\/kitchen\/water-filter\/travel-berkey) delivered solid mid-tier results, effectively removing metals like barium, copper, strontium, nickel, zinc, and iron, with decent performance on vanadium, lithium, and boron; while it showed small amounts of aluminum, cobalt, and silver leaching, levels stayed safe, and only selenium and molybdenum proved unreliable. The **Amazon Basics 10-Cup Pitcher** was right behind, but there were some issues with the leaching of aluminum and very small amounts of silver.\n\nAgain, the **Waterdrop WD-10UA Under Sink** came in last place. It reliably removed 100% of zinc from the contaminated samples (its primary certified target), but most other metals, like cobalt and chromium, passed through largely unchanged. It didn't introduce any noticeable leaching, so at least it isn't adding anything unwanted to your water. That's a low bar, though. The [Brita Ultramax Dispenser with Elite Filter](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/reviews\/kitchen\/water-filter\/brita-ultramax-dispenser-with-elite-filter) was also disappointing in this category, showing inconsistent removal of several metals and introducing some aluminum during testing.\n\n[![water filter - brita\\&\\#039;s elite filters used in the brita ultramax dispenser last...](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/40\/36\/525090_4489_L2.jpg)](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/40\/36\/525090_4489_XXXL.jpg)\n\nBrita's Elite filters used in the Brita Ultramax Dispenser last about three times as long as standard filters from Brita. Credit: Matt Lighthart\n### Taste\nFiltered water can make a noticeable difference in how your tap water tastes, especially if it carries metallic or chemical notes. Enjoying crisp, clean-tasting water straight from your faucet or pitcher not only improves the everyday experience but can also encourage you to stay hydrated and cut down on bottled water use. Taste is subjective, though; some people like a hint of minerals, while others prefer a completely neutral flavor. We aimed to capture overall impressions across a range of preferences. For taste tests, we ran each filter with water from a garden hose to standardize the source, then conducted a blind taste test with five evaluators. Each tester sampled filtered water from every unit alongside unfiltered tap and garden hose water, ranking the results from best to worst to give us a clear sense of relative taste performance. When we weren't able to run water samples through taste tests, we crowdsourced opinions by researching online reviews to glean accurate notes about each model through user feedback.\n\nYour browser does not support charts×\n\nOverall, users consistently reported that filtered water tasted fresher across all models we tested, though a few naysayers occasionally noted plastic or flat flavors. Among our top performers, the **APEC ROES-50 Essence Series**, **Waterdrop G3P600 Reverse Osmosis System**, and **Pur Plus 11-Cup Pitcher** received the highest marks for crisp, clean taste. Models with slightly lower scores, namely the **Culligan with Zerowater 8-Cup Pitcher**, **Travel Berkey**, and **Waterdrop WD-10UA Under Sink**, still delivered noticeably improved water compared to unfiltered tap, even if minor off-flavors were reported by some users.\n\n[![water filter - we enlisted other members of our team to do blind taste tests.](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/40\/37\/525243_30827_L2.jpg)](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/40\/37\/525243_30827_XXXL.jpg)\n\nWe enlisted other members of our team to do blind taste tests. Credit: Matt Lighthart\n### Maintenance and Setup\nWe often take running water for granted, and a great water filter fits seamlessly into that everyday routine. However, setup, daily use, and ongoing upkeep can vary a lot from model to model. Our testing team dives in, handling installation and daily operation to see how each unit performs in real-world use.\n\nSome filters, like under-sink RO systems, require a bit of DIY know-how to install, while pitchers are ready to go after a quick rinse. Which model fits best really comes down to how much time and effort you're willing to put into setup and upkeep.\n\nYour browser does not support charts×\n\nThe easiest water filters to use are, obviously, the pitcher-style filters. After a quick initial clean, all you need to do is drop in a filter and fill it up with water to have cleaner, tastier water at your disposal. These models are designed to be easy to clean regularly and during filter replacements. Some are even dishwasher safe. You won't need to check any instructions here — these are as “*plug and play*” as they come.\n\nThe top performers in ease of use all follow the 'fill-and-go' philosophy. The **Brita Ultramax Dispenser with Elite Filter** is especially convenient, with a large capacity that means fewer refills. The **Amazon Basics 10-Cup Pitcher** and **Brita Metro** are compact, simple, and virtually maintenance-free, making them perfect for quick daily use. The **Culligan with Zerowater 8-Cup Pitcher** also shines here, with a straightforward drop-in filter and intuitive design that keeps clean water flowing with minimal effort. Some pitchers do filter at different speeds, though, so take individual reviews into account if you don't want to sacrifice speed.\n\n![the brita ultramax dispenser is pretty easy to fill, but it can get...](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/40\/36\/525076_12553_L2.jpg)\n\nThe Brita Ultramax Dispenser is pretty easy to fill, but it can get pretty heavy when it's full. Credit: Matt Lighthart\n\n![the amazon basics 10-cup pitcher easily fits in the fridge, although...](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/40\/36\/525096_24581_L2.jpg)\n\nThe Amazon Basics 10-Cup Pitcher easily fits in the fridge, although it might be too wide to sit in a door shelf. Credit: Matt Lighthart\n\n![the small size of the brita metro makes it easy to use on a daily...](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/40\/36\/525084_8381_L2.jpg)\n\nThe small size of the Brita Metro makes it easy to use on a daily basis, but it's best suited to smaller households of one or two people. Credit: Matt Lighthart\n\n![unfortunately, replacement filters for this pitcher are quite...](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/40\/36\/525101_8556_L2.jpg)\n\nUnfortunately, replacement filters for this pitcher are quite pricey, and they need to be changed more often than any other system we tested. Credit: Matt Lighthart\n\nBoth of the faucet models were surprisingly easy to set up as well. The Pur Plus Vertical Faucet snaps onto most standard taps and delivers filtered water instantly. They require a filter change every few months, which we found easy to do, and daily use is effortless, making them a hassle-free alternative to pitchers.\n\nThe Pur Plus is easily snapped onto many kitchen faucets. Credit: Matt Lighthart\n\nAll of the RO systems received much lower scores in the category, not because they're a complete hassle, but because it takes a little more know-how to install them. Most require you to renovate (and abandon) under-sink spaces and some basic plumbing access. Once set up, they run quietly and efficiently, but the initial setup is more involved than pitchers or faucet models.\n\nThe **Waterdrop G3P600 Reverse Osmosis System** is specifically designed to navigate those issues, though, with a more compact design and streamlined installation that reduces the hassle and space concerns typical of traditional RO setups. It's no water pitcher, but it's a bit simpler.\n\nThe Waterdrop G3P600 Reverse Osmosis System has a pretty fast flow rate, which is impressive for an on-demand filter system. Credit: Matt Lighthart\n\n### Operating Cost\nOperating costs are an important part of the equation. While filtered water tastes better and is safer, some systems require frequent, pricey replacement filters or produce extra wastewater, which can add up over time. It's worth factoring in both filter longevity and the amount of water wasted during the process when deciding which model offers the best long-term value.\n\nWe divide annual operating costs into two key categories: costs for filtering 40 gallons a month vs. 160 gallons per month. Why? We want to capture the difference in value between households with low-volume needs (40 gallons) and higher-volume needs (160 gallons).\n\nAt around 40 gallons per month, pitcher-style filters sit solidly in the middle of the value spectrum, thanks to zero installation costs and no wasted water.\n\nYour browser does not support charts×\n\nOnce usage ramps up to 160 gallons per month, the picture changes. Frequent filter replacements make most pitchers less cost-effective at higher volumes, and for larger households or heavy water use, under-sink systems become the more economical choice.\n\nYour browser does not support charts×\n\n**Those Filter Replacement Costs Add Up\\!**  \n The **Culligan with Zerowater 8-Cup Pitcher** offers good water quality performance; however, the frequent need for filter replacements significantly increases annual operating costs. You'll want to consider annual costs in your purchase decision to hit the right balance of water quality, convenience, and cost for your family.\n\nReverse osmosis systems cost a lot more upfront than pitchers or faucet filters, and take more effort to install. But, for households that frequently need filtered water, their reasonable annual operating costs and higher-volume output may justify the higher initial cost. The **APEC ROES-50 Essence Series** emerged as the most affordable reverse osmosis system, with estimated annual filter costs of about \\$75, *regardless of water usage*. The **iSpring RCC7AK** followed at roughly \\$95 per year, slightly higher because it includes an extra filter in the rotation. The **Waterdrop G3P600 Reverse Osmosis System** was the priciest by far, with annual costs hitting around \\$145, significantly more than its RO counterparts.\n\nPre-filters can last 6-12 months, depending on your water quality, so you don't have to worry about swapping them out too often. Credit: Matt Lighthart\n\nEvery filter change adds up over time, and the difference between models can be striking. Among pitchers, the **Amazon Basics 10-Cup Pitcher** came out as the most affordable, with estimated annual costs of just \\$44 at 40 gallons per month. On the other end, the **Culligan with Zerowater 8-Cup Pitcher** was a major outlier, costing a whopping \\$240 for the same monthly usage.\n\nThe drop-in filters are super easy to change and don't cost too much to replace, especially when you have the option to shop around. Credit: Matt Lighthart\n\nFor faucet filters, the **Pur Plus Vertical Faucet** and **Brita Elite Advanced Faucet** show a notable annual cost difference: at 40 gallons per month, annual expenses are \\$41 versus \\$78, respectively. That gap widens even further with heavier use—at 160 gallons per month, the difference jumps to \\$90 versus \\$288.\n\n**Bottom line**: Reverse Osmosis systems generally make more sense for high-volume use since they're more economical if your needs go beyond just drinking water and can efficiently provide filtered water for cooking, coffee, and other household needs. Pitchers and faucet filters remain convenient and easy for light use and drinking water, but their costs can escalate quickly if you rely on them too heavily.\n\n#### Wastewater with Reverse Osmosis\nAnother factor to keep in mind with reverse osmosis systems is wastewater. RO filters produce a surprising amount of wastewater as part of the filtration process as they need to flush contaminants off the membrane. This wastewater is plumbed into your kitchen sink drain pipe (although some people come up with creative solutions to plumb it into a rain barrel for watering plants). While not a deal-breaker for most people interested in cleaner water, this additional water used is a factor to be aware of and consider.\n\nFor example, as shown in the chart below, the **APEC ROES-50 Essence Series** generates about 3 gallons of wastewater for every 1 gallon of filtered water and the **iSpring RCC7AK** runs at a 2:1 ratio. The **Waterdrop G3P600** produces the *least amount of wastewater*, roughly 1\/2 gallon of wastewater per each 1 gallon filtered.\n\nYour browser does not support charts×\n\n[![water filter - the ispring rcc7ak showed good results in contaminant removal...](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/40\/36\/525140_26754_L2.jpg)](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/40\/36\/525140_26754_XXXL.jpg)\n\nThe iSpring RCC7AK showed good results in contaminant removal testing, but it doesn't stand out compared to the other reverse osmosis systems in our lineup. Credit: Matt Lighthart\n## How to Pick A Water Filter\nWe've put together four key considerations, including the type of filtration system, available space, and budget, to help you find the best water filtration for your home.\n\n###\nAll the standards, certifications, and labels attached to water filters can be confusing. NSF\/ANSI standards are outlined by the National Sanitation Foundation and the American National Standards Institute. A full list can be [found here](https:\/\/www.nsf.org\/consumer-resources\/articles\/standards-water-treatment-systems), but in short, the one you want to look for most of the time is NSF\/ANSI 53, which covers filters that are meant to handle contaminants with known health effects, like lead and PFAS.\n\nThe [NSF guide to Contaminant Reduction Claims](https:\/\/www.nsf.org\/consumer-resources\/articles\/contaminant-reduction-claims-guide) by filter can be found here. Other acronyms to know are WQA (Water Quality Association) and IAPMO (International Association of Plumbing & Mechanical Officials), which are both organizations that can grant certifications to filters that pass NSF standards.\n\n###\nWhile most people are accustomed to pitcher-style water filters, other options also exist, such as under-the-sink, faucet-mounted, and reverse osmosis systems. Deciding on the appropriate filtration system comes down to the level of contaminants in your water, your budget, and the level of setup needed. If you know your water has higher levels of contaminants and you need to cover a wide range of filtration, the upfront cost of a reverse osmosis system can be worth it. On the other hand, if you're more or less hoping to get cleaner, odor-free water, then a pitcher is your best bet.\n\n###\nDepending on your household size, you may opt for larger capacity systems. While the simplicity and ease of use of a pitcher is great, larger households may find themselves refilling too often, especially if you use your filtered water for everything from drinking to boiling pasta and watering your houseplants. For those who consume more water, an under-the-sink option may work best for your needs. Also, consider how much free space you have. Under-the-sink options help keep counter space free, but you will have to clear a place to potentially store a tank along with the filters.\n\n###\nPeriodic maintenance of your water filter system is key to maintaining proper filtration. Some systems require changing filters after only two months, while others can run the same filter for a year (or longer, depending on usage). A simple pitcher-style system typically only needs one filter type to be replaced, while more complex filtration systems, such as reverse osmosis filters, require different replacements depending on the filter stage. For those undecided on a filtration system, consider whether the extra maintenance costs and time are worth it for the extra filtration capabilities.\n\n###\nInstallation of under-the-sink systems involves a variety of different parts and often requires cutting pipe and drilling for installation of the faucet. If you feel comfortable with DIY projects, installing a filtration system can be fairly straightforward. However, if you're renting, have limited space under your sink, or are not keen on self-installation, it's worth considering options that can be placed on the counter.\n\n[![water filter - spigot dispensers like the one found on the brita ultramax can be...](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/40\/37\/525191_19943_L2.jpg)](https:\/\/djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net\/photos\/40\/37\/525191_19943_XXXL.jpg)\n\nSpigot dispensers like the one found on the Brita Ultramax can be convenient than pitcher pours. Credit: Matt Lighthart\n## Conclusion\nHere at GearLab, we aim to provide you with firsthand knowledge from our testing experience, so you can purchase the best products that suit your needs and budget. For water filters, we looked closely at the subtle nuances that set pitchers, faucet models, and under-the-sink versions apart from one another. Whether you are looking to improve the taste of city water or want the perfect-tasting refreshment for a wedding or backyard BBQ, we hope you now have the knowledge to buy the perfect water filter for you.\n\nAt GearLab, we cover in-depth reviews on a variety of products, spanning goods from [air purifiers](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/topics\/health-fitness\/best-air-purifier) to [blood pressure monitors](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/topics\/health-fitness\/best-blood-pressure-monitor). If you're looking for some new home or kitchen appliances, we've got testing-backed opinions on the [top-rated air fryers](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/topics\/kitchen\/best-air-fryer) and [vacuum cleaners](https:\/\/www.techgearlab.com\/topics\/floor-cleaning\/best-vacuum-cleaner).\n\n## Appendix\nFor those who are interested, the detailed results of the [Independent Water Quality Lab](https:\/\/mytapscore.com\/) testing we conducted are listed in the tables below:\n\nCritical Contaminant Results\n\n|   | Test | Lead Reduction | Lead (ppm) | Arsenic Reduction | Arsenic (ppm) | Uranium Reduction | Uranium (ppm) | Nitrate Reduction | Nitrate as N (ppm) |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| **Supply (baseline)** | \\- | \\- | 0\\.26 | \\- | 0\\.00265 | \\- | 0\\.00376 | \\- | 2\\.46 |\n| **Health Guideline Limit (HGL)** | \\- | \\- | 0 | \\- | 0 | \\- | 0 | \\- | 10 |\n| **EPA Limit** | \\- | \\- | 0 | \\- | 0\\.01 | \\- | 0\\.03 | \\- | 10 |\n| **APEC Essence ROES-50** | Tap Score Essential City Water Test | 100% | 0 | 100% | 0 | 100% | 0 | \\- | \\- |\n| **iSpring RCC7AK RO** | Tap Score Essential City Water Test | 100% | 0 | 100% | 0 | 100% | 0 | \\- | \\- |\n| **Waterdrop G3P600 RO** | Tap Score Essential City Water Test | 100% | 0 | 100% | 0 | 100% | 0 | \\- | \\- |\n| **Pur Plus** | Tap Score Essential City Water Test | 100% | 0 | 100% | 0 | 100% | 0 | 92% | 0\\.2 |\n| **Culligan Zerowater Pitcher 10-Cup** | Tap Score Essential City Water Test | 100% | 0 | 100% | 0 | 98% | 0\\.00008 | 100% | 0 |\n| **Travel Berkey** | Tap Score Essential City Water Test | 100% | 0 | 25% | 0\\.00198 | 95% | 0\\.00017 | 20% | 1\\.98 |\n| **PUR PLUS Faucet Mount** | Tap Score Essential City Water Test | 100% | 0 | 9% | 0\\.0024 | 28% | 0\\.0027 | 37% | 1\\.54 |\n| **Brita Faucet Mount Elite** | Tap Score Essential City Water Test | 100% | 0 | 3% | 0\\.00256 | 44% | 0\\.00212 | 33% | 1\\.66 |\n| **Brita UltraMax Elite** | Tap Score Essential City Water Test | 99% | 0\\.0019 | 0% | 0\\.00266 | 30% | 0\\.00262 | 0% | 2\\.47 |\n| **Amazon Basics** | Tap Score Essential City Water Test | 97% | 0\\.0072 | Added 13% | 0\\.00299 | 97% | 0\\.00011 | 64% | 0\\.88 |\n| **Brita Large Pitcher (10 cup)** | Tap Score Essential City Water Test | 94% | 0\\.016 | 9% | 0\\.0024 | 97% | 0\\.00013 | 70% | 0\\.74 |\n| **Brita Metro** | Tap Score Essential City Water Test | 93% | 0\\.017 | 3% | 0\\.00258 | 96% | 0\\.00015 | 61% | 0\\.95 |\n| **Waterdrop 10UA Under Sink** | Tap Score Essential City Water Test | 0% | 0\\.27 | 0% | 0\\.00264 | 1% | 0\\.00374 | \\- | \\- |\n\nMetals and Trace Elements and % Removal\n\n|   | Test | Barium Removed | Barium (ppm) | Copper (Extreme) Removed | Copper Extreme (ppm) | Copper (Normal) Removed | Copper Normal (ppm) | Vanadium Removed | Vanadium - Tap Water (ppm) | Iron Removed | Iron (ppm) | Strontium Removed | Strontium (ppm) | Zinc Removed | Zinc (ppm) |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| **Supply (baseline)** | \\- | \\- | 0\\.012 | \\- | 8 | \\- | 0\\.014 | \\- | 0\\.00794 | \\- | 4\\.5 | \\- | 0\\.31 | \\- | 0\\.039 |\n| **Health Guideline Limit (HGL)** | \\- | \\- | 2 | \\- | 0\\.3 | \\- | 0\\.3 | \\- | 0\\.005 | \\- | 4 | \\- | 3 | \\- | 2 |\n| **EPA Limit** | \\- | \\- | 2 | \\- | 1\\.3 | \\- | 1\\.3 | \\- | 0\\.23 | \\- | 0\\.3 (SMCL) | \\- | 4 (SMCL) | \\- | 5 |\n| **Amazon Basics** | Tap Score Essential City Water Test | 85% | 0\\.0018 | 93% | 0\\.56 | 95% | 0\\.00065 | 70% | 0\\.00242 | 96% | 0\\.19 | 97% | 0\\.01 | 74% | 0\\.01 |\n| **APEC Essence ROES-50** | Tap Score Essential City Water Test | 100% | 0 | 100% | 0 | \\- | \\- | \\- | \\- | 100% | 0 | \\- | \\- | 100% | 0 |\n| **Brita Faucet Mount Elite** | Tap Score Essential City Water Test | 100% | 0 | 100% | 0 | 100% | 0 | 42% | 0\\.00461 | 100% | 0 | 97% | 0\\.01 | 100% | 0 |\n| **Brita Large Pitcher (10 cup)** | Tap Score Essential City Water Test | 78% | 0\\.0026 | 85% | 1\\.2 | 95% | 0\\.00065 | 74% | 0\\.00205 | 88% | 0\\.53 | 90% | 0\\.03 | 62% | 0\\.015 |\n| **Brita Metro** | Tap Score Essential City Water Test | 77% | 0\\.0028 | 86% | 1\\.1 | 100% | 0 | 64% | 0\\.00282 | 87% | 0\\.6 | 90% | 0\\.03 | 62% | 0\\.015 |\n| **Brita UltraMax Elite** | Tap Score Essential City Water Test | 61% | 0\\.0047 | 66% | 2\\.7 | 95% | 0\\.00065 | 49% | 0\\.00405 | 99% | 0\\.066 | 35% | 0\\.2 | Added 5% | 0\\.041 |\n| **Culligan Zerowater Pitcher 10-Cup** | Tap Score Essential City Water Test | 100% | 0 | 100% | 0 | Added 114% | 0\\.03 | 100% | 0 | 100% | 0 | 100% | 0 | 100% | 0 |\n| **iSpring RCC7AK RO** | Tap Score Essential City Water Test | 100% | 0 | 100% | 0 | \\- | \\- | \\- | \\- | 100% | 0 | \\- | \\- | 100% | 0 |\n| **Pur Plus** | Tap Score Essential City Water Test | Added 1150 - 1983% | 0\\.25 | 100% | 0 | 100% | 0 | 100% | 0 | 100% | 0 | 97% | 0\\.01 | Added 151% | 0\\.098 |\n| **PUR PLUS Faucet Mount** | Tap Score Essential City Water Test | 100% | 0 | 100% | 0 | 100% | 0 | 53% | 0\\.00376 | 100% | 0 | 77% | 0\\.07 | 100% | 0 |\n| **Travel Berkey** | Tap Score Essential City Water Test | 100% | 0 | 100% | 0 | 93% | 0\\.00096 | 84% | 0\\.00128 | 100% | 0 | 100% | 0 | 100% | 0 |\n| **Waterdrop 10UA Under Sink** | Tap Score Essential City Water Test | Added 8% | 0\\.013 | Added 2% | 8\\.2 | 0% | 0\\.014 | \\- | \\- | 4% | 4\\.3 | \\- | \\- | 100% | 0 |\n| **Waterdrop G3P600 RO** | Tap Score Essential City Water Test | 88% | 0\\.0014 | 96% | 0\\.29 | \\- | \\- | \\- | \\- | 100% | 0\\.013 | \\- | \\- | 87% | 0\\.0049 |","meta_canonical":null}

3. Robots.txt Check

Query:

Response:

4. Spam/Ban Check

Query:

Response:

5. Seen Status Check

ℹ️ Skipped - page is already crawled

📄

INDEXABLE

✅

CRAWLED

17 hours ago

🤖

ROBOTS ALLOWED

Page Info Filters

Filter	Status	Condition	Details
HTTP status	PASS	`download_http_code = 200`	HTTP 200
Age cutoff	PASS	`download_stamp > now() - 6 MONTH`	0 months ago
History drop	PASS	`isNull(history_drop_reason)`	No drop reason
Spam/ban	PASS	`fh_dont_index != 1 AND ml_spam_score = 0`	ml_spam_score=0
Canonical	PASS	`meta_canonical IS NULL OR = '' OR = src_unparsed`	Not set

Page Details

Property	Value
URL	https://www.techgearlab.com/topics/kitchen/best-water-filter
Last Crawled	2026-04-06 03:58:17 (17 hours ago)
First Indexed	2020-04-15 16:24:15 (5 years ago)
HTTP Status Code	200
Meta Title	The Best Water Filters of 2026 \| Lab Tested & Ranked
Meta Description	Clean water is a no brainer when trying to take care of your health and hydration. We bought the 13 top water filters in a range of different styles, from...
Meta Canonical	null
Boilerpipe Text	The Best Water Filters Full results from testing 13 top products are in our Product Comparison Table and Analysis & Test Results sections. Your browser does not support charts × Best Pitcher Filter Pur Plus 11-Cup Pitcher 81 OVERALL SCORE Critical Contaminant Removal 9.6 Secondary Contaminant Removal 6.5 Taste 8.6 Maintenance and Setup 8.3 Operating Cost 5.8 PROS Great contaminant removal Good taste Filter change light Removes microplastics CONS Small fill opening More costly than others over time for filters Slower to filter than some other pitchers The Pur Plus 11-Cup Pitcher stands out because it delivers filtration performance nearly on par with what we expect from under-sink reverse osmosis (RO) systems without requiring a complicated install. This would be a great choice for renters or others who want cleaner water without embarking on a DIY project. The 3-in-1 PUR PLUS filter is NSF-certified for lead, microplastics, chlorine, and more than 20 chemical and physical impurities, providing an impressive level of purification. In testing, it lived up to its certifications, removing nearly all major contaminants, including 100% of lead, arsenic, and uranium, plus over 96% of PFNA, making it one of the most capable pitcher filters we have used. It has a slim, fridge-friendly shape and a built-in filter change indicator that removes the guesswork from maintenance. SPECIFICATIONS Type Pitcher Estimated cost per year (40 gal/month) $108 Certifications WQA certified to reduce lead NSF certified to reduce microplastics Estimated cost per year (160 gal/month) $432 Wastewater Generated No Its downsides are relatively minor but worth considering: filtration is slower than some competing pitchers, and replacement filters cost more than the average pitcher, which can add up quickly if your household goes through a lot of water. For anyone who wants serious contaminant reduction without stepping up to an RO system, the Pur Plus 11-Cup Pitcher is the most well-rounded, high-performance choice. If you're shopping around for a pitcher-style filter, you should also take a look at the Culligan with Zerowater 8-Cup Pitcher , which did a great job with trace elements and minerals, and the Amazon Basics 10-Cup Pitcher , which provides a good value in the pitcher category. Read more: Pur Plus 11-Cup Pitcher review The Pur Plus provides some impressively clean water for a pitcher style filter. Credit: Matt Lighthart Best Reverse Osmosis System APEC ROES-50 Essence Series 89 OVERALL SCORE Critical Contaminant Removal 10.0 Secondary Contaminant Removal 9.8 Taste 8.8 Maintenance and Setup 3.6 Operating Cost 8.0 PROS Excellent contaminant removal NSF certified in multiple categories CONS Takes up significant under-sink space Wastes water Filter changes are less convenient than other RO systems The APEC ROES-50 Essence Series is a straightforward, highly capable reverse-osmosis (RO) system that delivers some of the most impressive filtration results in water quality tests. Reverse osmosis works by pushing water through an ultrafine membrane that blocks contaminants at the molecular level, producing exceptionally clean, low-TDS water — and in water quality lab tests, the ROES-50 excelled at exactly that. It brought every critical contaminant we measured, including lead, PFNA, arsenic, and uranium, down to undetectable levels and posted nearly perfect scores for secondary contaminants like zinc and copper as well. It has a no-frills design, but this system produces excellent-tasting water thanks to its carbon polishing stage, earning high marks in blind taste tests and frequent praise from long-term users. SPECIFICATIONS Type Under Sink Reverse Osmosis Estimated cost per year (40 gal/month) $75 Certifications WQA Estimated cost per year (160 gal/month) $75 Wastewater Generated 3:1 ratio wastewater-to-filtered The main hesitation many have with the APEC ROES is that installing an under-sink system requires some DIY skills and some modifications to your kitchen. It also requires a more significant upfront investment; therefore, this model is best suited for those who own their home and plan to use the filter system for many years. If this is the case it is a great value. The classic five-stage layout is a bit old-school, but it's also one of the reasons this model is such a strong value: replacement filters are inexpensive, long-lasting, and easy to buy individually. That said, maintenance is more hands-on than modern RO units, and the system takes up a lot of under-sink space. It also produces a lot of wastewater, an inevitable trade-off with RO designs. Still, for shoppers prioritizing maximum contaminant removal without spending premium RO money, the ROES-50 stands out as a top performer. If you like the idea of RO-quality water but want a sleeker, easier-to-maintain setup, consider the Waterdrop G3P600 tankless system — it performs nearly as well with far less bulk under your sink. Read more: APEC ROES-50 Essence Series review Though the APEC produces excellent quality water, filter changes are pretty inconvenient. Credit: Matt Lighthart Best Value Pitcher Amazon Basics 10-Cup Pitcher 73 OVERALL SCORE Critical Contaminant Removal 6.6 Secondary Contaminant Removal 7.5 Taste 7.0 Maintenance and Setup 8.5 Operating Cost 8.2 PROS Accepts multiple filter brands Budget friendly Spout cover CONS No flip top No PFAS or heavy metal certification Not NSF certified for many serious contaminants Leached some aluminum into our water The Amazon Basics 10-Cup Pitcher delivers far better filtration performance than its price tag suggests, making it one of the best-value options for everyday use. It didn't come back with the strongest filtration results, but for a budget pitcher, it isn't too shabby. It removed 97.2% of lead, and 100% of uranium. It produced an impressive 84.88% cut in PFAS, even though it is not certified to remove this. For households with typical tap water concerns, those numbers put it well ahead of many inexpensive competitors. Upfront cost is slightly lower than other models, but where this pitcher really stands out is its long-term affordability. Most pitcher systems lock you into proprietary filters with fixed pricing and limited buying options. The Amazon Basics model accepts multiple filter brands, meaning you can comparison shop, switch filter types as needed, and take advantage of bulk deals. Replacement filters are inexpensive to begin with, and that flexibility can help drive yearly costs even lower if you're a savvy shopper. SPECIFICATIONS Type Pitcher Estimated cost per year (40 gal/month) $44 Certifications WQA certified against NSF Standards 42, 53, and 372 Estimated cost per year (160 gal/month) $176 Wastewater Generated No The Amazon Basics is not certified to remove many trace elements and minerals, and its PFAS removal was lower than we would prefer. If those are a concern for you, this might not be the best option. While it's not certified for all contaminants, its performance with common pollutants like lead makes it reliable for general day-to-day use. It's not going to match the performance of a RO system, but for casual filtration on a budget, it does a decent job. For anyone who wants clean, better-tasting water without the long-term expense, this pitcher offers unmatched cost control. If you need stronger filtration and can stretch the budget, the Pur Plus 11-Cup is the top-performing pitcher overall. And if you want the convenience of purified water straight from the tap (but no install), the Pur Plus Vertical Faucet Filter offers better contaminant removal. Read more: Amazon Basics 10-Cup Pitcher review The Amazon Basics pitcher has a simple design that is compatible with filters from multiple brands, allowing you to shop around for the ones that fit your filtration needs and budget. Credit: Matt Lighthart Best Long Term Value Travel Berkey 76 OVERALL SCORE Critical Contaminant Removal 8.2 Secondary Contaminant Removal 7.9 Taste 6.3 Maintenance and Setup 6.3 Operating Cost 8.8 PROS Good performance with lead and PFAS Filters last a long time Less plastic in the construction CONS Big initial investment Large size won't fit in fridge Filters require upkeep The Travel Berkey is a stainless steel gravity filter that has a high 1.5-gallon capacity, and shows excellent results when it comes to critical contaminants, removing 100% of PFAS and lead, as well as effectively removing many trace elements and minerals. It comes at a high up-front cost, almost on par with reverse osmosis systems. However, with filters that last up to 4 years, you'll make up the difference in replacement costs; our team estimated annual costs to be about $41, even at high-volume usage. This is significantly less than all other pitchers in our lineup, which makes it a great choice for large households that want a filter that can take care of most critical contaminants with minimal maintenance and low long-term costs. SPECIFICATIONS Type Dispenser Estimated cost per year (40 gal/month) $41 Certifications Exceeds EPA and ANSI/NSF Standard 53 protocols Estimated cost per year (160 gal/month) $41 Wastewater Generated No The filters last a long time, provided they are properly maintained. You have to remove and scrub them every 6 months or so to keep them in working condition, and our testing team noted that this is more of a pain than simply dropping in a fresh filter every month or two. We like the spigot spout, but note that the unit must be placed on a stand or ledge in order to dispense water. It is also too tall to fit in the fridge, so you have to be ok with room-temperature water. If you're looking for a large capacity and low cost filter that doesn't depend on plumbing or electric hookups, the Travel Berkey is the way to go, but if you want filtered water straight from the tap, consider an under-sink system like the APEC ROES-50 Essence Series , which is the most affordable RO system in the lineup. Read more: Travel Berkey review 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 Favorite Modern Reverse Osmosis System Waterdrop G3P600 Reverse Osmosis System 89 OVERALL SCORE Critical Contaminant Removal 10.0 Secondary Contaminant Removal 9.4 Taste 8.8 Maintenance and Setup 6.4 Operating Cost 6.4 PROS Easier to maintain than most RO systems Great PFAS and lead removal Produces less waste water CONS More expensive than most filters Installation is a DIY home project The Waterdrop G3P600 Reverse Osmosis System performs just as well as our Editors' Choice RO filter in critical contaminant removal, and has an additional alkaline remineralization stage that improves flavor and adds back some essential trace minerals to your water (which accounts for its lower score in removing secondary contaminants). In addition to near-flawless filtration, this system is one of the easiest RO systems to use after initial installation. It has modern features that make it easy to use and maintain on a daily basis. The tankless design takes up much less space under your sink, and filter changes require a simple twist and pull to remove them from dedicated slots. Overall, the unit is a bit bulky, but its completely enclosed design means you don't have a bunch of tubes and wires hanging around, and it's still smaller than a storage tank. Wastewater is an inevitable byproduct of reverse osmosis systems, but the Waterdrop produces about a quarter of the amount produced by competing models. SPECIFICATIONS Type Under Sink Reverse Osmosis Estimated cost per year (40 gal/month) $145 Certifications NSF/ANSI certified against Standards 42, 58, and 372 Estimated cost per year (160 gal/month) $145 Wastewater Generated 1:2 ratio wastewater-to-filtered The downside is primarily the cost and the more involved installation. It is the most expensive unit in our lineup, and like all RO systems, it requires you to do some plumbing work and drill a hole into your countertop to install the separate faucet. If you choose to hire a professional to do this work, it pushes the cost up even higher, and is likely only something that you'll want to commit to if you own your home and plan to use the filter for many years. However, after this initial push, the ongoing costs are less than a pitcher, and maintenance is relatively easy compared to other under-sink filters. If you like the idea of on-demand filtration, but are renting or can't justify the high cost of the Waterdrop, then a faucet filter like the Pur Plus Vertical Faucet is a good alternative. Read more: Waterdrop G3P600 RO review Swapping filters on the Waterdrop G3P600 is as easy as a slide and twist motion. Credit: Matt Lighthart Best Faucet Pur Plus Vertical Faucet Deal Alert: on sale for 39% off at Amazon See Deal 73 OVERALL SCORE Critical Contaminant Removal 7.1 Secondary Contaminant Removal 7.3 Taste 6.5 Maintenance and Setup 8.4 Operating Cost 8.2 PROS Filtered water is available immediately Reduces lead and PFNA to undetectable levels CONS Slower flow compared to unfiltered tap Doesn't fit all faucet types Bulky The Pur Plus Vertical Faucet is an ideal solution for anyone looking to improve their tap water without committing to an under-sink system or dealing with constantly refilling pitchers. Faucet filters like this one deliver water immediately, avoid counter clutter, and don't require permanent plumbing changes, making them perfect for renters or small kitchens. This vertical design, while slightly bulky, fits most faucets and includes a simple one-click installation that makes setup and filter changes easy. In testing, the Pur Plus Vertical Faucet excelled at reducing lead and PFAS to near-undetectable levels while removing chlorine to improve taste. It also performed well on common heavy metals like barium, copper, zinc, and iron, ensuring a safe, clean pour for daily drinking and cooking. SPECIFICATIONS Type Faucet Estimated cost per year (40 gal/month) $59 Certifications WQA and NSF certified to reduce 70 contaminants including lead, microplastics, mercury, chlorine taste and odor, DEET, and TTHM Estimated cost per year (160 gal/month) $90 Wastewater Generated No It is not designed to filter fluoride, arsenic, or high uranium levels, so households with extreme contamination concerns may need a more robust system. It also requires you to remove the aerator on your faucet and replace it with an adapter, and our tester worried about thread damage on the faucet head. You can avoid this with a pitcher-style option, and the Pur Plus 11-Cup Pitcher remains our top pick for critical contaminant removal while being simple to use and maintain. Read more: Pur Plus Vertical Faucet review The PUR Plus is a renter-friendly option for on-demand filtered water. Credit: Matt Lighthart Best Pitcher for Secondary Contaminant Removal Culligan with Zerowater 8-Cup Pitcher PROS Filters a wide range of contaminants for a pitcher Low-effort setup Fits in the fridge CONS Filters have a short lifespan Costly to maintain long-term Takes a long time to filter water The Culligan with Zerowater 8-Cup Pitcher provides a great balance of critical and secondary contaminant removal, coming in just behind competitors like the Pur Plus 11-Cup Pitcher thanks to its superior performance with trace elements and minerals. While both pitchers excel at removing critical contaminants like lead and arsenic, this Culligan model consistently scored higher in reducing metals such as nickel, iron, and barium, making it an excellent choice for households with older plumbing or questionable municipal water. The star of the system is its 5-stage Zerowater filtration, which strips contaminants down to near-zero levels and even includes a built-in TDS meter so you can verify performance in real time. In testing, it removed 100% of lead, uranium, and mercury. Taste results were solid—clean, crisp water with chlorine and chemical notes fully removed. SPECIFICATIONS Type Pitcher Estimated cost per year (40 gal/month) $240 Certifications NSF/ANSI 42, 53, and 401 Estimated cost per year (160 gal/month) $960 Wastewater Generated No Where this pitcher falters is the long-term cost. Its impressive performance comes at the price of very short filter life — often only two to four weeks — and the replacements are expensive. For heavy water drinkers or families, long-term operating costs can reach several hundred dollars per year, far higher than the average pitcher. It also didn't remove as much PFAS as we would like, only reaching 87% removal. If your priority is more on trace element and mineral removal (like iron, copper or zinc), this is the one to get. If you'd prefer lower maintenance and lower cost, consider the Amazon Basics 10-Cup or Pur Plus 11-Cup Pitcher , or step up to a budget-friendly RO system like the APEC ROES-50 . Read more: Culligan with Zerowater 8-Cup Pitcher review The Culligan with Zerowater did a great job with many contaminants across the board. Credit: Matt Lighthart Product Comparison Table Displaying 1 - 13 (scroll right to see all products) < Previous \| \| Next > #1 Compare: APEC ROES-50 Essence Series #2 Compare: Waterdrop G3P600 Reverse Osmosis System #3 Compare: iSpring RCC7AK #4 Compare: Pur Plus 11-Cup Pitcher #5 Compare: Culligan with Zerowater 8-Cup Pitcher #6 Compare: Travel Berkey #7 Compare: Amazon Basics 10-Cup Pitcher #8 Compare: Pur Plus Vertical Faucet #9 Compare: Brita Elite Advanced Faucet #10 Compare: Brita Metro #11 Compare: Brita Large 10-Cup Pitcher #12 Compare: Brita Ultramax Dispenser with Elite Filter #13 Compare: Waterdrop WD-10UA Under Sink Awards Best Reverse Osmosis System Favorite Modern Reverse Osmosis System Best Pitcher Filter Best Long Term Value Best Value Pitcher Best Faucet Price $231 USD List Check price at Amazon CA $539 USD List $242 USD List Check price at Amazon CA $25 USD List $28 USD List $362 USD List Check price at Amazon CA $26 USD List $22 USD List Check price at Amazon CA $33 USD List Check price at Amazon CA $26 USD List Check price at Amazon CA $37 USD List Check price at Amazon CA $50 USD List Check price at Amazon CA $56 USD List Check price at Amazon CA Overall Score 89 89 84 81 78 76 73 73 72 66 66 66 53 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 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 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 Bottom Line The APEC ROES-50 is a dependable, no-frills RO system that delivers outstanding contaminant removal and great-tasting water, but it takes up a lot of space The Waterdrop G3P600 is a high-performance, tankless reverse‑osmosis system that brings virtually all major contaminants to undetectable levels, though comes with higher installation and filter costs The iSpring RCC7AK is a high-performing RO system that removes a wide range of contaminants while its remineralization stage improves both taste and pH balance Delivers nearly RO-level contaminant removal in an easy-to-use pitcher, though slower flow and higher filter costs may be a drawback for heavy users Delivers purified water with standout contaminant removal, but requires frequent filter replacements and has higher ongoing costs than average A filter system with a high upfront cost, but extremely low maintenance, low long-term cost, and a durable, long-lasting body A budget-friendly pitcher that delivers solid everyday filtration and great value, but falls short on serious contaminant removal An affordable, renter-friendly option for anyone who wants filtered water without the hassle of under-sink installation A convenient pick for anyone who wants clean, filtered water straight from the tap without the hassle of refilling pitchers or dealing with complex installation A convenient, space-saving pitcher that's great for individuals or small households, but its filtration falls short on health-related contaminants High-capacity, easy-to-use pitcher that improves convenience but offers limited contaminant removal A practical, affordable option for households with generally safe tap water looking for improved taste and large‑capacity convenience A middle-tier filter that works if you have few concerns about contaminants, but you want improved taste or clarity Pros Excellent contaminant removal, meets multiple NSF standards, Water Quality Association certified Tankless design, changing filters is easy, built-in TDS meter, filtered PFNA to undetectable levels, more efficient with wastewater than other RO systems Excellent contamination removal, NSF certified, longer filter life Great contaminant removal, good taste, filter change indicator, removes microplastics Filters a wide range of contaminants for a pitcher, low-effort setup, TDS meter included Filter lasts a long time, reduces lead and PFNA to undetectable levels, needs fewer daily refills Accepts multiple filter brands, budget friendly, spout cover Filtered water is available immediately, reduced lead and PFNA to undetectable levels Provides filtered water instantly, removes PFNA effectively, completely removes lead Smart filter alert, easy to fill, slim and compact design Quick filter change, flip-up lid for filling, fits in fridge doors or shelves Elite filter lasts longer than standard, reduces some PFAS, excellent lead removal, convenient spigot Reduces PFNA to near-undetectable levels, fast flow Cons Takes up significant under-sink space, wastes water, filter changes are less convenient than other RO systems Install is more involved, requires under sink electricity, expensive Takes up a lot of under-sink space, wastes water, filter changes aren't as easy as other systems, doesn't completely remove PFNA Small fill opening, more costly than others over time for filters, slower to filter than some pitchers Filters have a short lifespan, costly to maintain long-term, takes a long time to filter water Big upfront cost, doesn't fit in the fridge, requires a stand or edge placement to dispense water No flip top, no PFAS or heavy metal certification, not NSF certified for many serious contaminants, leached some aluminum to our water Slower flow compared to unfiltered tap, doesn't fit all faucet types, bulky Slower flow than tap water, does not fit all faucet types, bulky design Exposed spout may absorb fridge odors, removes fewer contaminants, limited PFNA reduction, added trace aluminum in testing, poor performance with acidic compounds No cover over the spout, less effective at removing lead and other contaminants, limited PFNA removal, some aluminum added to test water, doesn't filter acidic compounds well Adds aluminum to contaminated water, doesn't filter copper well, large size, must be placed at an edge or raised to fill cups No lead filtering, doesn't filter acidic compounds well, requires a second unit to use for both hot and cold lines Rating Categories APEC ROES-50 Essence... Waterdrop G3P600 Rev... iSpring RCC7AK Pur Plus 11-Cup Pitcher Culligan with Zerowa... Travel Berkey Amazon Basics 10-Cup... Pur Plus Vertical Fa... Brita Elite Advanced... Brita Metro Brita Large 10-Cup P... Brita Ultramax Dispe... Waterdrop WD-10UA Un... Critical Contaminant Removal (35%) 10.0 10.0 9.4 9.6 9.1 8.2 6.6 7.1 7.2 5.4 5.4 6.1 3.8 Secondary Contaminant Removal (25%) 9.8 9.4 9.2 6.5 9.3 7.9 7.5 7.3 6.9 7.1 7.3 4.8 4.0 Taste (20%) 8.8 8.8 8.4 8.6 6.1 6.3 7.0 6.5 6.8 6.6 6.4 7.7 6.2 Maintenance and Setup (10%) 3.6 6.4 3.6 8.3 8.1 6.3 8.5 8.4 8.7 8.5 8.5 9.5 8.1 Operating Cost (10%) 8.0 6.4 7.6 5.8 2.3 8.8 8.2 8.2 7.0 7.6 7.6 7.3 9.0 Specifications APEC ROES-50 Essence... Waterdrop G3P600 Rev... iSpring RCC7AK Pur Plus 11-Cup Pitcher Culligan with Zerowa... Travel Berkey Amazon Basics 10-Cup... Pur Plus Vertical Fa... Brita Elite Advanced... Brita Metro Brita Large 10-Cup P... Brita Ultramax Dispe... Waterdrop WD-10UA Un... Type Under Sink Reverse Osmosis Under Sink Reverse Osmosis Under Sink Reverse Osmosis Pitcher Pitcher Dispenser Pitcher Faucet Faucet Pitcher Pitcher Dispenser Under Sink Estimated cost per year (40 gal/month) $75 $145 $95 $108 $240 $41 $44 $59 $78 $60 $60 $66 $33 Certifications WQA NSF/ANSI certified against Standards 42, 58, and 372 NSF/ANSI 58 WQA certified to reduce lead NSF certified to reduce microplastics NSF/ANSI 42, 53, and 401 Exceeds EPA and ANSI/NSF Standard 53 protocols WQA certified against NSF Standards 42, 53, and 372 WQA and NSF certified to reduce 70 contaminants including lead, microplastics, mercury, chlorine taste and odor, DEET, and TTHM IAPMO R&T certified against NSF/ANSI Standard 53 NSF International certified against NSF/ANSI Standard 53 WQA certified against NSF/ANSI Standards 42, 53, and 401 WQA certified against NSF Standards 42 and 53 WQA certified against NSF Standards 42 and 53 IAPMO R&T certified against NSF/ANSI Standard 53 NSF International certified against NSF/ANSI Standard 53 WQA certified against NSF/ANSI Standards 42, 53, and 401 IAPMO R&T certified against NSF/ANSI Standard 42 and 372 Estimated cost per year (160 gal/month) $75 $145 $95 $432 $960 $41 $176 $90 $288 $240 $240 $264 $33 Wastewater Generated 3:1 ratio wastewater-to-filtered 1:2 ratio wastewater-to-filtered 2:1 ratio wastewater-to-filtered No No No No No No No No No No Replacement Schedule Stages 1, 2, 3: 6-12 months Stage 4: City: 2-4 years, Private well: 2 years Stage 5: 2-4 years Activated Carbon: 12 months Pre-sediment and Carbon Block: 6 months RO Membrane: 24 months Stages 1, 2, 3: 6-12 months Stage 4: 1-3 years Stage 5: 12 months Stage 6: 6-12 months 151 L \| 40 gallons (approx 2 months) When included TDS meter reads 006 (approx 2-4 weeks depending on water quality) 11356 L \| 3000 gallons (approx 4 years) 151 L \| 40 gallons (approx 2 months) 379 L \| 100 gallons (approx 3 months) 379 L \| 100 gallons (approx 4 months) 151 L \| 40 gallons (approx 2 months) 151 L \| 40 gallons (approx 2 months) 454 L \| 120 gallons (approx 6 months) 30283 L \| 8000 gallons (approx 12 months) Replacement Cost 1 full set - $85 Stage 1, 2, 3 set - $30 Stage 4 - $10 Stage 5 - $40 Single filters - $30 RO membrane - $110 1 year supply set (without membrane) - $90 Single Filters - $19-$38 1 year supply complete set - $80 1 pack - $10 ($13) 3 pack - $23 ($27) 2 pack - $36 12 pack - $160 2 pack - $166 3 pack ~ $13 6 pack ~ $22 1 pack - $19 6 pack - $75 1 pack - $18 2 pack - $30 1 pack - $8 6 pack - $30 1 pack - $8 6 pack - $30 1 pack - $20 2 pack - $33 1 pack - $33 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. Water Quality Lab Testing The majority of a filter's score hinges on its effectiveness in removing various contaminants and impurities. To ensure the accuracy of our ratings, we commissioned professional water-quality testing at an an independent water-quality lab . We focused on three major categories of contaminants: PFAS (forever chemicals), Critical Contaminants, and Heavy Metals. We ran two types of water samples through each filter: a highly contaminated “ super ” sample with elevated levels of each contaminant, and a standard tap water sample to mimic typical household conditions. We measured the concentration of each contaminant before and after filtration to determine how effectively each system reduced or eliminated these substances. This dual-sample approach allowed us to see both worst-case performance and everyday effectiveness. We tested filtered water for common contaminants using an independent lab, conducted taste tests, and measured for total dissolved solids. Credit: Matt Lighthart In addition to lab analysis, we used a Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) meter and chemical indicator strips to further assess the efficiency of each filter. For the taste metric, we assembled a panel of judges to do a blind taste test and rank each water sample. They evaluated whether the filter introduced any unpleasant taste to clean water and assessed its ability to remove undesirable flavors and odors. Finally, we evaluated each filter's user experience, taking into account factors such as installation, maintenance, operating costs, and efficiency. This comprehensive approach ensures our reviews are thorough, reliable, and beneficial to users seeking the best water filtration system for their home. To learn more about our procedures, check out our How We Test article . Our water filter rating scores are divided into six different metrics : Critical Contaminant Removal (35% of overall score weighting) Heavy Metal and Trace Element Removal (25% of overall score weighting) Taste (20% weighting) Setup and Use (10% weighting) Maintenance and Setup (10% weighting) Operating Cost (10% weighting) Why Trust GearLab Our testing team includes professionals in environmental research, engineering, and journalism. 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 brings substantial experience to the team when designing, analyzing, and communicating 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. Sam Hill is a journalist based in the Pacific Northwest who focuses his writing on a mix of environmental and tech topics. He leverages his extensive experience in the industry to break down complex topics into clear, understandable results. 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 . Your browser does not support charts × Worse Value Better Value What's the Best Value? When it comes to getting the best value in a water filter, the list price of the product doesn't tell the whole story. A higher sticker often means more filtration stages, but that doesn't always translate to better results. What really matters is how well the filter actually removes contaminants. Additionally, there can be a big difference between upfront costs and ongoing costs when you factor in the cost of filter replacements. Some simple pitchers or faucet filters can outperform pricier under-sink systems while keeping your annual filter costs low. But for high-volume users, undersink models are going to offer the best value. The APEC ROES-50 Essence Series or the iSpring RCC7AK are fantastic options. The APEC ROES-50 is the overall winner here with a slightly higher score in secondary contaminant testing and cheaper long-term operating costs — it is especially cost-effective when you look at annual operating costs for those households with a need for higher volumes of filtered water. For pitchers, the Pur Plus 11-Cup Pitcher is an excellent value and top performer for 1-2 person households. It's a pretty average price in the pitcher-style filter lineup, but it competes with some RO systems when it comes to filter quality. If you don't have major health concerns when it comes to water quality, the Amazon Basics 10-Cup Pitcher is also a great little budget pitcher. It provides serviceable filtering for most households and is one of the lower-cost pitchers out there due to its ability to use filter replacements from multiple brands. See more details below in the Operating Costs section . Heading Into the Great Outdoors? Then it's best to leave all of these products behind. Under-the-sink or faucet-mount filters aren't suited to the backcountry, and filter pitchers are designed to improve the taste and quality of already-potable water, not to render lake or stream water safe to drink. That task is better left to a water filter specifically designed for the backcountry . To ensure the filter you are considering is up to the task you have in mind, we recommend that you always consult the manufacturer's specifications. 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 Contaminant Removal Growing awareness of potential contaminants in tap water and their possible health effects has made reliable water filtration more important than ever. Many people don't realize what unseen pollutants could be in their water, but filters can provide peace of mind by delivering clean, safe drinking water. To test performance, we prepared water samples with elevated levels of chlorine, iron, sulfate, lead, fluoride, and copper - all well above EPA safe limits. We then send filtered and control samples to Tap Score for independent lab testing , ensuring accurate and trustworthy results. We defined Critical Contaminant Removal as the filter's ability to eliminate high-priority pollutants like lead, PFNA, arsenic, and uranium, while Secondary Contaminant Removal covers trace elements and minerals such as copper, zinc, iron, and barium that can affect taste and safety but are generally less immediately hazardous. What contaminants you're concerned about depends on your health and the water quality where you live. Opening the filter box to replace the internal filter on the Brita Elite Advanced. Credit: Matt Lighthart Critical Contaminant Removal We examined how well each filter handled the critical water contaminants, providing a more comprehensive understanding of which models truly deliver safer water and which ones fall short. The chart below primarily focuses on the most toxic heavy metals that can make their way into tap water . % Critical Contaminant Removal Product Lead Arsenic Uranium APEC Essence ROES-50 100 100 100 iSpring RCC7AK RO 100 100 100 Pur Plus Pitcher 100 100 100 Waterdrop G3P600 RO 100 100 100 Culligan Zerowater Pitcher 10-Cup 100 100 98 Travel Berkey 100 25 95 Brita Large Pitcher (10 cup) 94 9 97 Amazon Basics 97 0 97 Brita Metro 93 3 96 Brita Faucet Mount Elite 100 3 44 Pur Plus Faucet Mount 100 9 28 Brita UltraMax Elite 99 0 30 Waterdrop 10UA Under Sink 0 0 1 Again, the RO systems we tested came out on top, removing nearly all the contaminants we tested for in both contaminated samples and standard tap water. For pitchers, the Pur Plus 11-Cup Pitcher and Culligan with Zerowater 8-Cup Pitcher both neared RO-quality results. The Amazon Basics 10-Cup Pitcher filtered lead (97.2% removed) and uranium (100% removed) well, but it isn't NSF certified for many serious contaminants like fluoride or nitrates. The Waterdrop 10UA Under Sink came in toward the bottom of test results, making it the lowest-scored under-sink system. It was able to filter trace amounts of nitrate, but barely enough to mention. It only filtered out 3.8% of lead, 10% of uranium in water quality tests, and it isn't certified to reduce arsenic. PFAS Forever Chemical Removal PFAS are a group of “ forever chemicals ” that don't break down easily, and some reports say they may be more prevalent than we previously thought, and they are toxic even in very small amounts. They fall into our critical contaminant category. In the water quality test results, we specifically looked at two types: PFNA, which sticks around longer, and PFBA, which is smaller and exits the body more quickly. You don't want either in your drinking water. The results of PFAS removal lab tests are charted below. % 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 Across the systems we tested, the reverse osmosis units — particularly the APEC ROES-50 and the other under-sink RO models — delivered the strongest PFAS removal, consistently reducing both PFNA and PFBA to near- or fully undetectable levels in both tap water and super-contaminated samples. The two faucet filters we tested — the Brita Elite Advanced Faucet and the Pur Plus Vertical Faucet also hit near-top marks here. Pitcher filters showed far more mixed results: the high-end, specialty PFAS-targeting pitchers, like the Pur Plus 11-Cup Pitcher , performed respectably, but most standard carbon pitchers struggled, often removing only a portion of PFBA and doing very little against PFNA. The Brita Large 10-Cup Pitcher and Brita Metro were among the most disappointing performers in PFAS testing, with 68.99% and 50.78% PFNA removal rates, respectively. They removed far less PFNA and PFBA than comparable filters and fell well short of what we'd expect from trusted, everyday-use pitchers. The Waterdrop WD-10UA Under Sink essential only removes chlorine and light sediment. Credit: Matt Lighthart Secondary Contaminant Removal Certain heavy metals and trace elements get their own category because they behave differently from critical contaminants and often enter tap water through plumbing corrosion or natural mineral sources. Some of these are even nutritionally essential in small amounts, and while they're usually less urgent than issues like lead or PFNA, elevated levels of metals such as copper, zinc, or barium can impact long-term health and the taste of your water — so we test them separately to show which filters can reliably address these everyday concerns. These materials are typically more of a concern if you draw water from a private well. The results of heavy metal and trace element removal tests are charted below. Mineral and Trace Element Removal Product Iron (ppm) Copper (ppm) Barium (ppm) Zinc (ppm) APEC Essence ROES-50 100 100 100 100 Brita Faucet Mount Elite 100 100 100 100 Culligan Zerowater Pitcher 10-Cup 100 100 100 100 iSpring RCC7AK RO 100 100 100 100 Pur PlusFaucet Mount 100 100 100 100 Travel Berkey 100 100 100 100 Waterdrop G3P600 RO 100 96 88 87 Amazon Basics 96 93 85 74 Brita Large Pitcher (10 cup) 88 85 78 62 Brita Metro 87 86 77 62 Brita UltraMax Elite 99 66 61 0 Pur Plus Pitcher 100 100 0 0 Waterdrop 10UA Under Sink 4 0 0 100 The top reverse osmosis systems dealt with heavy metals and trace elements well across the board, reducing nearly all secondary contaminants to zero in tests of super-contaminated and tap water samples. The Culligan with Zerowater 8-Cup Pitcher also performed well here, reliably knocking out metals like copper, zinc, iron, and barium; while we did see minor copper and zinc leaching in the lab, the amounts were extremely small and stayed well below EPA health guidelines. Compared to other reverse osmosis systems, the Waterdrop G3P600 takes up much less cabinet space. Credit: Matt Lighthart The Travel Berkey delivered solid mid-tier results, effectively removing metals like barium, copper, strontium, nickel, zinc, and iron, with decent performance on vanadium, lithium, and boron; while it showed small amounts of aluminum, cobalt, and silver leaching, levels stayed safe, and only selenium and molybdenum proved unreliable. The Amazon Basics 10-Cup Pitcher was right behind, but there were some issues with the leaching of aluminum and very small amounts of silver. Again, the Waterdrop WD-10UA Under Sink came in last place. It reliably removed 100% of zinc from the contaminated samples (its primary certified target), but most other metals, like cobalt and chromium, passed through largely unchanged. It didn't introduce any noticeable leaching, so at least it isn't adding anything unwanted to your water. That's a low bar, though. The Brita Ultramax Dispenser with Elite Filter was also disappointing in this category, showing inconsistent removal of several metals and introducing some aluminum during testing. Brita's Elite filters used in the Brita Ultramax Dispenser last about three times as long as standard filters from Brita. Credit: Matt Lighthart Taste Filtered water can make a noticeable difference in how your tap water tastes, especially if it carries metallic or chemical notes. Enjoying crisp, clean-tasting water straight from your faucet or pitcher not only improves the everyday experience but can also encourage you to stay hydrated and cut down on bottled water use. Taste is subjective, though; some people like a hint of minerals, while others prefer a completely neutral flavor. We aimed to capture overall impressions across a range of preferences. For taste tests, we ran each filter with water from a garden hose to standardize the source, then conducted a blind taste test with five evaluators. Each tester sampled filtered water from every unit alongside unfiltered tap and garden hose water, ranking the results from best to worst to give us a clear sense of relative taste performance. When we weren't able to run water samples through taste tests, we crowdsourced opinions by researching online reviews to glean accurate notes about each model through user feedback. Your browser does not support charts × Overall, users consistently reported that filtered water tasted fresher across all models we tested, though a few naysayers occasionally noted plastic or flat flavors. Among our top performers, the APEC ROES-50 Essence Series , Waterdrop G3P600 Reverse Osmosis System , and Pur Plus 11-Cup Pitcher received the highest marks for crisp, clean taste. Models with slightly lower scores, namely the Culligan with Zerowater 8-Cup Pitcher , Travel Berkey , and Waterdrop WD-10UA Under Sink , still delivered noticeably improved water compared to unfiltered tap, even if minor off-flavors were reported by some users. We enlisted other members of our team to do blind taste tests. Credit: Matt Lighthart Maintenance and Setup We often take running water for granted, and a great water filter fits seamlessly into that everyday routine. However, setup, daily use, and ongoing upkeep can vary a lot from model to model. Our testing team dives in, handling installation and daily operation to see how each unit performs in real-world use. Some filters, like under-sink RO systems, require a bit of DIY know-how to install, while pitchers are ready to go after a quick rinse. Which model fits best really comes down to how much time and effort you're willing to put into setup and upkeep. Your browser does not support charts × The easiest water filters to use are, obviously, the pitcher-style filters. After a quick initial clean, all you need to do is drop in a filter and fill it up with water to have cleaner, tastier water at your disposal. These models are designed to be easy to clean regularly and during filter replacements. Some are even dishwasher safe. You won't need to check any instructions here — these are as “ plug and play ” as they come. The top performers in ease of use all follow the 'fill-and-go' philosophy. The Brita Ultramax Dispenser with Elite Filter is especially convenient, with a large capacity that means fewer refills. The Amazon Basics 10-Cup Pitcher and Brita Metro are compact, simple, and virtually maintenance-free, making them perfect for quick daily use. The Culligan with Zerowater 8-Cup Pitcher also shines here, with a straightforward drop-in filter and intuitive design that keeps clean water flowing with minimal effort. Some pitchers do filter at different speeds, though, so take individual reviews into account if you don't want to sacrifice speed. The Brita Ultramax Dispenser is pretty easy to fill, but it can get pretty heavy when it's full. Credit: Matt Lighthart The Amazon Basics 10-Cup Pitcher easily fits in the fridge, although it might be too wide to sit in a door shelf. Credit: Matt Lighthart The small size of the Brita Metro makes it easy to use on a daily basis, but it's best suited to smaller households of one or two people. Credit: Matt Lighthart Unfortunately, replacement filters for this pitcher are quite pricey, and they need to be changed more often than any other system we tested. Credit: Matt Lighthart Both of the faucet models were surprisingly easy to set up as well. The Pur Plus Vertical Faucet snaps onto most standard taps and delivers filtered water instantly. They require a filter change every few months, which we found easy to do, and daily use is effortless, making them a hassle-free alternative to pitchers. The Pur Plus is easily snapped onto many kitchen faucets. Credit: Matt Lighthart All of the RO systems received much lower scores in the category, not because they're a complete hassle, but because it takes a little more know-how to install them. Most require you to renovate (and abandon) under-sink spaces and some basic plumbing access. Once set up, they run quietly and efficiently, but the initial setup is more involved than pitchers or faucet models. The Waterdrop G3P600 Reverse Osmosis System is specifically designed to navigate those issues, though, with a more compact design and streamlined installation that reduces the hassle and space concerns typical of traditional RO setups. It's no water pitcher, but it's a bit simpler. The Waterdrop G3P600 Reverse Osmosis System has a pretty fast flow rate, which is impressive for an on-demand filter system. Credit: Matt Lighthart Operating Cost Operating costs are an important part of the equation. While filtered water tastes better and is safer, some systems require frequent, pricey replacement filters or produce extra wastewater, which can add up over time. It's worth factoring in both filter longevity and the amount of water wasted during the process when deciding which model offers the best long-term value. We divide annual operating costs into two key categories: costs for filtering 40 gallons a month vs. 160 gallons per month. Why? We want to capture the difference in value between households with low-volume needs (40 gallons) and higher-volume needs (160 gallons). At around 40 gallons per month, pitcher-style filters sit solidly in the middle of the value spectrum, thanks to zero installation costs and no wasted water. Your browser does not support charts × Once usage ramps up to 160 gallons per month, the picture changes. Frequent filter replacements make most pitchers less cost-effective at higher volumes, and for larger households or heavy water use, under-sink systems become the more economical choice. Your browser does not support charts × Those Filter Replacement Costs Add Up! The Culligan with Zerowater 8-Cup Pitcher offers good water quality performance; however, the frequent need for filter replacements significantly increases annual operating costs. You'll want to consider annual costs in your purchase decision to hit the right balance of water quality, convenience, and cost for your family. Reverse osmosis systems cost a lot more upfront than pitchers or faucet filters, and take more effort to install. But, for households that frequently need filtered water, their reasonable annual operating costs and higher-volume output may justify the higher initial cost. The APEC ROES-50 Essence Series emerged as the most affordable reverse osmosis system, with estimated annual filter costs of about $75, regardless of water usage . The iSpring RCC7AK followed at roughly $95 per year, slightly higher because it includes an extra filter in the rotation. The Waterdrop G3P600 Reverse Osmosis System was the priciest by far, with annual costs hitting around $145, significantly more than its RO counterparts. Pre-filters can last 6-12 months, depending on your water quality, so you don't have to worry about swapping them out too often. Credit: Matt Lighthart Every filter change adds up over time, and the difference between models can be striking. Among pitchers, the Amazon Basics 10-Cup Pitcher came out as the most affordable, with estimated annual costs of just $44 at 40 gallons per month. On the other end, the Culligan with Zerowater 8-Cup Pitcher was a major outlier, costing a whopping $240 for the same monthly usage. The drop-in filters are super easy to change and don't cost too much to replace, especially when you have the option to shop around. Credit: Matt Lighthart For faucet filters, the Pur Plus Vertical Faucet and Brita Elite Advanced Faucet show a notable annual cost difference: at 40 gallons per month, annual expenses are $41 versus $78, respectively. That gap widens even further with heavier use—at 160 gallons per month, the difference jumps to $90 versus $288. Bottom line : Reverse Osmosis systems generally make more sense for high-volume use since they're more economical if your needs go beyond just drinking water and can efficiently provide filtered water for cooking, coffee, and other household needs. Pitchers and faucet filters remain convenient and easy for light use and drinking water, but their costs can escalate quickly if you rely on them too heavily. Wastewater with Reverse Osmosis Another factor to keep in mind with reverse osmosis systems is wastewater. RO filters produce a surprising amount of wastewater as part of the filtration process as they need to flush contaminants off the membrane. This wastewater is plumbed into your kitchen sink drain pipe (although some people come up with creative solutions to plumb it into a rain barrel for watering plants). While not a deal-breaker for most people interested in cleaner water, this additional water used is a factor to be aware of and consider. For example, as shown in the chart below, the APEC ROES-50 Essence Series generates about 3 gallons of wastewater for every 1 gallon of filtered water and the iSpring RCC7AK runs at a 2:1 ratio. The Waterdrop G3P600 produces the least amount of wastewater , roughly 1/2 gallon of wastewater per each 1 gallon filtered. Your browser does not support charts × The iSpring RCC7AK showed good results in contaminant removal testing, but it doesn't stand out compared to the other reverse osmosis systems in our lineup. Credit: Matt Lighthart How to Pick A Water Filter We've put together four key considerations, including the type of filtration system, available space, and budget, to help you find the best water filtration for your home. All the standards, certifications, and labels attached to water filters can be confusing. NSF/ANSI standards are outlined by the National Sanitation Foundation and the American National Standards Institute. A full list can be found here , but in short, the one you want to look for most of the time is NSF/ANSI 53, which covers filters that are meant to handle contaminants with known health effects, like lead and PFAS. The NSF guide to Contaminant Reduction Claims by filter can be found here. Other acronyms to know are WQA (Water Quality Association) and IAPMO (International Association of Plumbing & Mechanical Officials), which are both organizations that can grant certifications to filters that pass NSF standards. While most people are accustomed to pitcher-style water filters, other options also exist, such as under-the-sink, faucet-mounted, and reverse osmosis systems. Deciding on the appropriate filtration system comes down to the level of contaminants in your water, your budget, and the level of setup needed. If you know your water has higher levels of contaminants and you need to cover a wide range of filtration, the upfront cost of a reverse osmosis system can be worth it. On the other hand, if you're more or less hoping to get cleaner, odor-free water, then a pitcher is your best bet. Depending on your household size, you may opt for larger capacity systems. While the simplicity and ease of use of a pitcher is great, larger households may find themselves refilling too often, especially if you use your filtered water for everything from drinking to boiling pasta and watering your houseplants. For those who consume more water, an under-the-sink option may work best for your needs. Also, consider how much free space you have. Under-the-sink options help keep counter space free, but you will have to clear a place to potentially store a tank along with the filters. Periodic maintenance of your water filter system is key to maintaining proper filtration. Some systems require changing filters after only two months, while others can run the same filter for a year (or longer, depending on usage). A simple pitcher-style system typically only needs one filter type to be replaced, while more complex filtration systems, such as reverse osmosis filters, require different replacements depending on the filter stage. For those undecided on a filtration system, consider whether the extra maintenance costs and time are worth it for the extra filtration capabilities. Installation of under-the-sink systems involves a variety of different parts and often requires cutting pipe and drilling for installation of the faucet. If you feel comfortable with DIY projects, installing a filtration system can be fairly straightforward. However, if you're renting, have limited space under your sink, or are not keen on self-installation, it's worth considering options that can be placed on the counter. Spigot dispensers like the one found on the Brita Ultramax can be convenient than pitcher pours. Credit: Matt Lighthart Conclusion Here at GearLab, we aim to provide you with firsthand knowledge from our testing experience, so you can purchase the best products that suit your needs and budget. For water filters, we looked closely at the subtle nuances that set pitchers, faucet models, and under-the-sink versions apart from one another. Whether you are looking to improve the taste of city water or want the perfect-tasting refreshment for a wedding or backyard BBQ, we hope you now have the knowledge to buy the perfect water filter for you. At GearLab, we cover in-depth reviews on a variety of products, spanning goods from air purifiers to blood pressure monitors . If you're looking for some new home or kitchen appliances, we've got testing-backed opinions on the top-rated air fryers and vacuum cleaners . Appendix For those who are interested, the detailed results of the Independent Water Quality Lab testing we conducted are listed in the tables below: Critical Contaminant Results Test Lead Reduction Lead (ppm) Arsenic Reduction Arsenic (ppm) Uranium Reduction Uranium (ppm) Nitrate Reduction Nitrate as N (ppm) Supply (baseline) - - 0.26 - 0.00265 - 0.00376 - 2.46 Health Guideline Limit (HGL) - - 0 - 0 - 0 - 10 EPA Limit - - 0 - 0.01 - 0.03 - 10 APEC Essence ROES-50 Tap Score Essential City Water Test 100% 0 100% 0 100% 0 - - iSpring RCC7AK RO Tap Score Essential City Water Test 100% 0 100% 0 100% 0 - - Waterdrop G3P600 RO Tap Score Essential City Water Test 100% 0 100% 0 100% 0 - - Pur Plus Tap Score Essential City Water Test 100% 0 100% 0 100% 0 92% 0.2 Culligan Zerowater Pitcher 10-Cup Tap Score Essential City Water Test 100% 0 100% 0 98% 0.00008 100% 0 Travel Berkey Tap Score Essential City Water Test 100% 0 25% 0.00198 95% 0.00017 20% 1.98 PUR PLUS Faucet Mount Tap Score Essential City Water Test 100% 0 9% 0.0024 28% 0.0027 37% 1.54 Brita Faucet Mount Elite Tap Score Essential City Water Test 100% 0 3% 0.00256 44% 0.00212 33% 1.66 Brita UltraMax Elite Tap Score Essential City Water Test 99% 0.0019 0% 0.00266 30% 0.00262 0% 2.47 Amazon Basics Tap Score Essential City Water Test 97% 0.0072 Added 13% 0.00299 97% 0.00011 64% 0.88 Brita Large Pitcher (10 cup) Tap Score Essential City Water Test 94% 0.016 9% 0.0024 97% 0.00013 70% 0.74 Brita Metro Tap Score Essential City Water Test 93% 0.017 3% 0.00258 96% 0.00015 61% 0.95 Waterdrop 10UA Under Sink Tap Score Essential City Water Test 0% 0.27 0% 0.00264 1% 0.00374 - - Metals and Trace Elements and % Removal Test Barium Removed Barium (ppm) Copper (Extreme) Removed Copper Extreme (ppm) Copper (Normal) Removed Copper Normal (ppm) Vanadium Removed Vanadium - Tap Water (ppm) Iron Removed Iron (ppm) Strontium Removed Strontium (ppm) Zinc Removed Zinc (ppm) Supply (baseline) - - 0.012 - 8 - 0.014 - 0.00794 - 4.5 - 0.31 - 0.039 Health Guideline Limit (HGL) - - 2 - 0.3 - 0.3 - 0.005 - 4 - 3 - 2 EPA Limit - - 2 - 1.3 - 1.3 - 0.23 - 0.3 (SMCL) - 4 (SMCL) - 5 Amazon Basics Tap Score Essential City Water Test 85% 0.0018 93% 0.56 95% 0.00065 70% 0.00242 96% 0.19 97% 0.01 74% 0.01 APEC Essence ROES-50 Tap Score Essential City Water Test 100% 0 100% 0 - - - - 100% 0 - - 100% 0 Brita Faucet Mount Elite Tap Score Essential City Water Test 100% 0 100% 0 100% 0 42% 0.00461 100% 0 97% 0.01 100% 0 Brita Large Pitcher (10 cup) Tap Score Essential City Water Test 78% 0.0026 85% 1.2 95% 0.00065 74% 0.00205 88% 0.53 90% 0.03 62% 0.015 Brita Metro Tap Score Essential City Water Test 77% 0.0028 86% 1.1 100% 0 64% 0.00282 87% 0.6 90% 0.03 62% 0.015 Brita UltraMax Elite Tap Score Essential City Water Test 61% 0.0047 66% 2.7 95% 0.00065 49% 0.00405 99% 0.066 35% 0.2 Added 5% 0.041 Culligan Zerowater Pitcher 10-Cup Tap Score Essential City Water Test 100% 0 100% 0 Added 114% 0.03 100% 0 100% 0 100% 0 100% 0 iSpring RCC7AK RO Tap Score Essential City Water Test 100% 0 100% 0 - - - - 100% 0 - - 100% 0 Pur Plus Tap Score Essential City Water Test Added 1150 - 1983% 0.25 100% 0 100% 0 100% 0 100% 0 97% 0.01 Added 151% 0.098 PUR PLUS Faucet Mount Tap Score Essential City Water Test 100% 0 100% 0 100% 0 53% 0.00376 100% 0 77% 0.07 100% 0 Travel Berkey Tap Score Essential City Water Test 100% 0 100% 0 93% 0.00096 84% 0.00128 100% 0 100% 0 100% 0 Waterdrop 10UA Under Sink Tap Score Essential City Water Test Added 8% 0.013 Added 2% 8.2 0% 0.014 - - 4% 4.3 - - 100% 0 Waterdrop G3P600 RO Tap Score Essential City Water Test 88% 0.0014 96% 0.29 - - - - 100% 0.013 - - 87% 0.0049
Markdown	[![GearLab logo](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/images/gl-logo-web-v1o.png)](https://www.techgearlab.com/) [![GearLab logo](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/images/gl-logo-web-v1o.png)](https://www.techgearlab.com/) Reviews You Can Rely On - [Home](https://www.techgearlab.com/) - [Electronics](https://www.techgearlab.com/electronics) - [All Electronics](https://www.techgearlab.com/electronics) - [Batteries & Chargers](https://www.techgearlab.com/t/batteries-and-chargers) - [Cars & Auto](https://www.techgearlab.com/t/cars-and-auto) - [Cool Gadgets](https://www.techgearlab.com/cool-gadgets) - [Drones](https://www.techgearlab.com/t/drones) - [Gaming](https://www.techgearlab.com/t/gaming) - [Home Electronics](https://www.techgearlab.com/t/home-electronics) - [Home Security](https://www.techgearlab.com/t/home-security) - [Laptops](https://www.techgearlab.com/t/laptops) - [Networking](https://www.techgearlab.com/t/networking) - [Photography](https://www.techgearlab.com/t/photography) - [Smartphone](https://www.techgearlab.com/t/smartphones) - [Storage](https://www.techgearlab.com/t/storage) - [Tablet](https://www.techgearlab.com/t/tablets) - [Tinkering & STEM](https://www.techgearlab.com/t/tinkering-and-stem) - [Kitchen](https://www.techgearlab.com/kitchen) - [All Kitchen & Dining](https://www.techgearlab.com/kitchen) - [Kitchen Appliances](https://www.techgearlab.com/t/kitchen-appliances) - [Baking](https://www.techgearlab.com/t/baking) - [Cleaning](https://www.techgearlab.com/t/cleaning) - [Coffee & Espresso](https://www.techgearlab.com/t/coffee) - [Cooking Tools & Utensils](https://www.techgearlab.com/t/cooking-tools) - [Cookware](https://www.techgearlab.com/t/cookware) - [Dining](https://www.techgearlab.com/t/dining) - [Kitchen Storage](https://www.techgearlab.com/t/kitchen-storage) - [Wine & Bar](https://www.techgearlab.com/t/wine-and-bar) - [Audio](https://www.techgearlab.com/audio) - [All Audio](https://www.techgearlab.com/audio) - [Earbuds](https://www.techgearlab.com/topics/audio/best-wireless-earbuds) - [Headphones](https://www.techgearlab.com/catalog/headphones) - [Speakers](https://www.techgearlab.com/t/speakers) - [Home & Garden](https://www.techgearlab.com/home) - [All Home & Garden](https://www.techgearlab.com/home) - [Home Appliances](https://www.techgearlab.com/t/home-appliances) - [Bathroom](https://www.techgearlab.com/t/bathroom) - [Bedroom](https://www.techgearlab.com/t/bedroom) - [Cleaning](https://www.techgearlab.com/t/cleaning) - [Furniture & Decor](https://www.techgearlab.com/t/furniture-and-decor) - [Gardening](https://www.techgearlab.com/t/gardening) - [Hobby & Crafts](https://www.techgearlab.com/t/hobby-and-crafts) - [Laundry & Storage](https://www.techgearlab.com/t/laundry-and-storage) - [Patio & Yard](https://www.techgearlab.com/t/patio-and-yard) - [Pets](https://www.techgearlab.com/t/pets) - [Skateboards & Scooters](https://www.techgearlab.com/t/skateboards-and-scooters) - [Smart Home](https://www.techgearlab.com/smart-home) - [Tools & DIY](https://www.techgearlab.com/tools) - [Toys & Games](https://www.techgearlab.com/t/toys-and-games) - [Vacuum Cleaners](https://www.techgearlab.com/catalog/vacuum-cleaner) - [Health](https://www.techgearlab.com/health-fitness) - [All Health & Fitness](https://www.techgearlab.com/health-fitness) - [Fitness](https://www.techgearlab.com/t/fitness) - [Home Appliances](https://www.techgearlab.com/t/home-appliances) - [Personal Care](https://www.techgearlab.com/t/personal-care) - [Wellness](https://www.techgearlab.com/t/wellness) - [Floor Cleaning](https://www.techgearlab.com/floor-cleaning) - [All Floor Cleaning](https://www.techgearlab.com/floor-cleaning) - [Steam Cleaners](https://www.techgearlab.com/topics/floor-cleaning/best-steam-mop) - [Vacuums](https://www.techgearlab.com/catalog/vacuum-cleaner) - [Office](https://www.techgearlab.com/small-and-home-office) - [All Office](https://www.techgearlab.com/small-and-home-office) - [Keyboard & Mouse](https://www.techgearlab.com/t/keyboard-and-mouse) - [Networking](https://www.techgearlab.com/t/networking) - [Office Accessories](https://www.techgearlab.com/t/office-accessories) - [Office Furniture](https://www.techgearlab.com/t/office-furniture) - [Printers & Scanners](https://www.techgearlab.com/t/printers-and-scanners) - [Smart Home](https://www.techgearlab.com/smart-home) - [More](https://www.techgearlab.com/topics/kitchen/best-water-filter) - [Tools & DIY](https://www.techgearlab.com/tools) - [Cool Gadgets](https://www.techgearlab.com/cool-gadgets) - [Smart Home](https://www.techgearlab.com/smart-home) - [About GearLab](https://www.techgearlab.com/about) 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.](https://www.techgearlab.com/about) 1. [Wellness](https://www.techgearlab.com/t/wellness) 2. [Water Filter Reviews](https://www.techgearlab.com/catalog/water-filter) - [Review](https://www.techgearlab.com/topics/kitchen/best-water-filter) - [Compare](https://www.techgearlab.com/topics/kitchen/best-water-filter/ratings) - [Buying Advice](https://www.techgearlab.com/topics/kitchen/best-water-filter/buying-advice) - [How We Tested](https://www.techgearlab.com/topics/kitchen/best-water-filter/how-we-test) # The Best Water Filters of 2026 \\| Lab Tested & Ranked We put 13 top water filters from Brita, PUR, Waterdrop, iSpring, and more head-to-head to find the best ![gearlab tested logo](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/images/gearlab_tested_v4_80w.png) [![Best Water Filter Review (A few of the different filters included in this review.)](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/40/37/525265_15068_XXL.jpg)](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/40/37/525265_15068_XXXL.jpg) A few of the different filters included in this review. Credit: Matt Lighthart ![Graham Faulknor](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/37/60/497514_8305_XSS.jpg) By [Graham Faulknor](https://www.techgearlab.com/author/graham-faulknor) ⋅ Senior Review Analyst ⋅ Updated December 5, 2025 Contributions From: [Austin Palmer](https://www.techgearlab.com/author/austin-palmer) & [Sam Hill](https://www.techgearlab.com/author/sam-hill) Clean water is a no brainer when trying to take care of your health and hydration. We bought the 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](https://mytapscore.com/) to measure precisely the effectiveness of each filter. We also evaluated annual operating costs, ease of installation, and daily ease of use. The water quality lab tests examined filter performance for critically important contaminants such as: [PFAS](https://sustainability.yale.edu/explainers/yale-experts-explain-pfas-forever-chemicals) (forever chemicals), Heavy Metals (like [lead](https://www.epa.gov/ground-water-and-drinking-water/basic-information-about-lead-drinking-water)), and other critical contaminants. The [Pur Plus 11-Cup Pitcher](https://www.techgearlab.com/topics/kitchen/best-water-filter#best-pitcher-filter) 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](https://www.techgearlab.com/topics/kitchen/best-water-filter#best-reverse-osmosis-system). It received nearly perfect scores in contaminant removal and also offers compelling long-term annual costs. You might also be interested in our [water bottle review](https://www.outdoorgearlab.com/topics/camping-and-hiking/best-water-bottle) and if you want to purify water from a non-potable source, take a look at a [backpacking water purification systems](https://www.outdoorgearlab.com/topics/camping-and-hiking/best-backpacking-water-filter). ## Quick Look ![Thumbnail photo of Pur Plus 11-Cup Pitcher](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/40/37/525195_10566_S.jpg) Best Pitcher Filter Pur Plus 11-Cup Pitcher [READ MORE ↓](https://www.techgearlab.com/topics/kitchen/best-water-filter#best-pitcher-filter) ![Thumbnail photo of APEC ROES-50 Essence Series](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/40/36/525128_4018_S.jpg) Best Reverse Osmosis System APEC ROES-50 Essence Series [READ MORE ↓](https://www.techgearlab.com/topics/kitchen/best-water-filter#best-reverse-osmosis-system) ![Thumbnail photo of Amazon Basics 10-Cup Pitcher](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/40/37/525186_13185_S.jpg) Best Value Pitcher Amazon Basics 10-Cup Pitcher [READ MORE ↓](https://www.techgearlab.com/topics/kitchen/best-water-filter#best-value-pitcher) ![Thumbnail photo of Travel Berkey](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/40/36/525092_8898_S.jpg) Best Long Term Value Travel Berkey [READ MORE ↓](https://www.techgearlab.com/topics/kitchen/best-water-filter#best-long-term-value) ![Thumbnail photo of Waterdrop G3P600 Reverse Osmosis System](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/40/36/525119_4042_S.jpg) Favorite Modern Reverse Osmosis System Waterdrop G3P600 Reverse Osmosis System [READ MORE ↓](https://www.techgearlab.com/topics/kitchen/best-water-filter#favorite-modern-reverse-osmosis-system) ![Thumbnail photo of Pur Plus Vertical Faucet](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/40/36/525158_5687_S.jpg) Best Faucet Pur Plus Vertical Faucet [READ MORE ↓](https://www.techgearlab.com/topics/kitchen/best-water-filter#best-faucet) ![Thumbnail photo of Culligan with Zerowater 8-Cup Pitcher](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/40/37/525212_18030_S.jpg) Best Pitcher for Secondary Contaminant Removal Culligan with Zerowater 8-Cup Pitcher [READ MORE ↓](https://www.techgearlab.com/topics/kitchen/best-water-filter#best-pitcher-for-secondary-contaminant-removal) [Show 3 More ▼]() [Show 3 Less ▲]() ## The Best Water Filters Full results from testing 13 top products are in our [Product Comparison Table](https://www.techgearlab.com/topics/kitchen/best-water-filter#product-comparison-table) and [Analysis & Test Results](https://www.techgearlab.com/topics/kitchen/best-water-filter#analysis-and-test-results) sections. Your browser does not support charts× ## Best Pitcher Filter ### Pur Plus 11-Cup Pitcher ![Editors' Choice Award](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/images/editors-choice_47x107.png) ![pur plus 11-cup pitcher](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/40/37/525195_10566_M.jpg) ![Editors' Choice Award](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/images/editors-choice_47x107.png) [Read the Review](https://www.techgearlab.com/reviews/kitchen/water-filter/pur-plus-11-cup-pitcher) 81 OVERALL SCORE - Critical Contaminant Removal 9\.6 - Secondary Contaminant Removal 6\.5 - Taste 8\.6 - Maintenance and Setup 8\.3 - Operating Cost 5\.8 PROS Great contaminant removal Good taste Filter change light Removes microplastics CONS Small fill opening More costly than others over time for filters Slower to filter than some other pitchers The [Pur Plus 11-Cup Pitcher](https://www.techgearlab.com/reviews/kitchen/water-filter/pur-plus-11-cup-pitcher) stands out because it delivers filtration performance nearly on par with what we expect from under-sink reverse osmosis (RO) systems without requiring a complicated install. This would be a great choice for renters or others who want cleaner water without embarking on a DIY project. The 3-in-1 PUR PLUS filter is NSF-certified for lead, microplastics, chlorine, and more than 20 chemical and physical impurities, providing an impressive level of purification. In testing, it lived up to its certifications, removing nearly all major contaminants, including 100% of lead, arsenic, and uranium, plus over 96% of PFNA, making it one of the most capable pitcher filters we have used. It has a slim, fridge-friendly shape and a built-in filter change indicator that removes the guesswork from maintenance. SPECIFICATIONS \| \| \| \|---\|---\| \| Type \| Pitcher \| \| Estimated cost per year (40 gal/month) i \| \$108 \| \| Certifications \| WQA certified to reduce lead NSF certified to reduce microplastics \| \| Estimated cost per year (160 gal/month) \| \$432 \| \| Wastewater Generated i \| No \| Its downsides are relatively minor but worth considering: filtration is slower than some competing pitchers, and replacement filters cost more than the average pitcher, which can add up quickly if your household goes through a lot of water. For anyone who wants serious contaminant reduction without stepping up to an RO system, the Pur Plus 11-Cup Pitcher is the most well-rounded, high-performance choice. If you're shopping around for a pitcher-style filter, you should also take a look at the [Culligan with Zerowater 8-Cup Pitcher](https://www.techgearlab.com/reviews/kitchen/water-filter/culligan-with-zerowater-8-cup-pitcher), which did a great job with trace elements and minerals, and the [Amazon Basics 10-Cup Pitcher](https://www.techgearlab.com/reviews/kitchen/water-filter/amazon-basics-10-cup-pitcher), which provides a good value in the pitcher category. Read more: [Pur Plus 11-Cup Pitcher review](https://www.techgearlab.com/reviews/kitchen/water-filter/pur-plus-11-cup-pitcher) The Pur Plus provides some impressively clean water for a pitcher style filter. Credit: Matt Lighthart ## Best Reverse Osmosis System ### APEC ROES-50 Essence Series ![Editors' Choice Award](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/images/editors-choice_47x107.png) ![apec roes-50 essence series](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/40/36/525128_4018_M.jpg) ![Editors' Choice Award](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/images/editors-choice_47x107.png) [Check price at Amazon CA](https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0D4PJYHJK?tag=tglcom20-20) 89 OVERALL SCORE - Critical Contaminant Removal 10\.0 - Secondary Contaminant Removal 9\.8 - Taste 8\.8 - Maintenance and Setup 3\.6 - Operating Cost 8\.0 PROS Excellent contaminant removal NSF certified in multiple categories CONS Takes up significant under-sink space Wastes water Filter changes are less convenient than other RO systems The [APEC ROES-50 Essence Series](https://www.techgearlab.com/reviews/kitchen/water-filter/apec-roes-50-essence-series) is a straightforward, highly capable reverse-osmosis (RO) system that delivers some of the most impressive filtration results in water quality tests. Reverse osmosis works by pushing water through an ultrafine membrane that blocks contaminants at the molecular level, producing exceptionally clean, low-TDS water — and in water quality lab tests, the ROES-50 excelled at exactly that. It brought every critical contaminant we measured, including lead, PFNA, arsenic, and uranium, down to undetectable levels and posted nearly perfect scores for secondary contaminants like zinc and copper as well. It has a no-frills design, but this system produces excellent-tasting water thanks to its carbon polishing stage, earning high marks in blind taste tests and frequent praise from long-term users. SPECIFICATIONS \| \| \| \|---\|---\| \| Type \| Under Sink Reverse Osmosis \| \| Estimated cost per year (40 gal/month) i \| \$75 \| \| Certifications \| WQA \| \| Estimated cost per year (160 gal/month) \| \$75 \| \| Wastewater Generated i \| 3:1 ratio wastewater-to-filtered \| The main hesitation many have with the APEC ROES is that installing an under-sink system requires some DIY skills and some modifications to your kitchen. It also requires a more significant upfront investment; therefore, this model is best suited for those who own their home and plan to use the filter system for many years. If this is the case it is a great value. The classic five-stage layout is a bit old-school, but it's also one of the reasons this model is such a strong value: replacement filters are inexpensive, long-lasting, and easy to buy individually. That said, maintenance is more hands-on than modern RO units, and the system takes up a lot of under-sink space. It also produces a lot of wastewater, an inevitable trade-off with RO designs. Still, for shoppers prioritizing maximum contaminant removal without spending premium RO money, the ROES-50 stands out as a top performer. If you like the idea of RO-quality water but want a sleeker, easier-to-maintain setup, consider the [Waterdrop G3P600 tankless system](https://www.techgearlab.com/reviews/kitchen/water-filter/waterdrop-g3p600-reverse-osmosis-system) — it performs nearly as well with far less bulk under your sink. Read more: [APEC ROES-50 Essence Series review](https://www.techgearlab.com/reviews/kitchen/water-filter/apec-roes-50-essence-series) Though the APEC produces excellent quality water, filter changes are pretty inconvenient. Credit: Matt Lighthart ## Best Value Pitcher ### Amazon Basics 10-Cup Pitcher ![Best Buy Award](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/images/best-buy_47x107.png) ![amazon basics 10-cup pitcher](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/40/37/525186_13185_M.jpg) ![Best Buy Award](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/images/best-buy_47x107.png) [Read the Review](https://www.techgearlab.com/reviews/kitchen/water-filter/amazon-basics-10-cup-pitcher) 73 OVERALL SCORE - Critical Contaminant Removal 6\.6 - Secondary Contaminant Removal 7\.5 - Taste 7\.0 - Maintenance and Setup 8\.5 - Operating Cost 8\.2 PROS Accepts multiple filter brands Budget friendly Spout cover CONS No flip top No PFAS or heavy metal certification Not NSF certified for many serious contaminants Leached some aluminum into our water The [Amazon Basics 10-Cup Pitcher](https://www.techgearlab.com/reviews/kitchen/water-filter/amazon-basics-10-cup-pitcher) delivers far better filtration performance than its price tag suggests, making it one of the best-value options for everyday use. It didn't come back with the strongest filtration results, but for a budget pitcher, it isn't too shabby. It removed 97.2% of lead, and 100% of uranium. It produced an impressive 84.88% cut in PFAS, even though it is not certified to remove this. For households with typical tap water concerns, those numbers put it well ahead of many inexpensive competitors. Upfront cost is slightly lower than other models, but where this pitcher really stands out is its long-term affordability. Most pitcher systems lock you into proprietary filters with fixed pricing and limited buying options. The Amazon Basics model accepts multiple filter brands, meaning you can comparison shop, switch filter types as needed, and take advantage of bulk deals. Replacement filters are inexpensive to begin with, and that flexibility can help drive yearly costs even lower if you're a savvy shopper. SPECIFICATIONS \| \| \| \|---\|---\| \| Type \| Pitcher \| \| Estimated cost per year (40 gal/month) i \| \$44 \| \| Certifications \| WQA certified against NSF Standards 42, 53, and 372 \| \| Estimated cost per year (160 gal/month) \| \$176 \| \| Wastewater Generated i \| No \| The Amazon Basics is not certified to remove many trace elements and minerals, and its PFAS removal was lower than we would prefer. If those are a concern for you, this might not be the best option. While it's not certified for all contaminants, its performance with common pollutants like lead makes it reliable for general day-to-day use. It's not going to match the performance of a RO system, but for casual filtration on a budget, it does a decent job. For anyone who wants clean, better-tasting water without the long-term expense, this pitcher offers unmatched cost control. If you need stronger filtration and can stretch the budget, the [Pur Plus 11-Cup](https://www.techgearlab.com/reviews/kitchen/water-filter/pur-plus-11-cup-pitcher) is the top-performing pitcher overall. And if you want the convenience of purified water straight from the tap (but no install), the [Pur Plus Vertical Faucet Filter](https://www.techgearlab.com/reviews/kitchen/water-filter/pur-plus-vertical-faucet) offers better contaminant removal. Read more: [Amazon Basics 10-Cup Pitcher review](https://www.techgearlab.com/reviews/kitchen/water-filter/amazon-basics-10-cup-pitcher) The Amazon Basics pitcher has a simple design that is compatible with filters from multiple brands, allowing you to shop around for the ones that fit your filtration needs and budget. Credit: Matt Lighthart ## Best Long Term Value ### Travel Berkey ![Best Buy Award](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/images/best-buy_47x107.png) ![travel berkey](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/40/36/525092_8898_M.jpg) ![Best Buy Award](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/images/best-buy_47x107.png) [Check price at Amazon CA](https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00FQP2CUU?tag=tglcom20-20) 76 OVERALL SCORE - Critical Contaminant Removal 8\.2 - Secondary Contaminant Removal 7\.9 - Taste 6\.3 - Maintenance and Setup 6\.3 - Operating Cost 8\.8 PROS Good performance with lead and PFAS Filters last a long time Less plastic in the construction CONS Big initial investment Large size won't fit in fridge Filters require upkeep The [Travel Berkey](https://www.techgearlab.com/reviews/kitchen/water-filter/travel-berkey) is a stainless steel gravity filter that has a high 1.5-gallon capacity, and shows excellent results when it comes to critical contaminants, removing 100% of PFAS and lead, as well as effectively removing many trace elements and minerals. It comes at a high up-front cost, almost on par with reverse osmosis systems. However, with filters that last up to 4 years, you'll make up the difference in replacement costs; our team estimated annual costs to be about \$41, even at high-volume usage. This is significantly less than all other pitchers in our lineup, which makes it a great choice for large households that want a filter that can take care of most critical contaminants with minimal maintenance and low long-term costs. SPECIFICATIONS \| \| \| \|---\|---\| \| Type \| Dispenser \| \| Estimated cost per year (40 gal/month) i \| \$41 \| \| Certifications \| Exceeds EPA and ANSI/NSF Standard 53 protocols \| \| Estimated cost per year (160 gal/month) \| \$41 \| \| Wastewater Generated i \| No \| The filters last a long time, provided they are properly maintained. You have to remove and scrub them every 6 months or so to keep them in working condition, and our testing team noted that this is more of a pain than simply dropping in a fresh filter every month or two. We like the spigot spout, but note that the unit must be placed on a stand or ledge in order to dispense water. It is also too tall to fit in the fridge, so you have to be ok with room-temperature water. If you're looking for a large capacity and low cost filter that doesn't depend on plumbing or electric hookups, the Travel Berkey is the way to go, but if you want filtered water straight from the tap, consider an under-sink system like the [APEC ROES-50 Essence Series](https://www.techgearlab.com/reviews/kitchen/water-filter/apec-roes-50-essence-series), which is the most affordable RO system in the lineup. Read more: [Travel Berkey review](https://www.techgearlab.com/reviews/kitchen/water-filter/travel-berkey) ![the travel berkey is a big investment at first, but it is a great...](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/40/37/525201_19864_L2.jpg) 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...](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/40/37/525204_21264_L2.jpg) 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...](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/40/37/525205_11799_L2.jpg) 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...](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/40/36/525093_1312_L2.jpg) 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...](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/36/25/483995_28144_L2.jpg) This model did a fantastic job of removing chlorine from drinking water. Credit: Abriah Wofford Previous Next ![Button for slide 1](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/40/37/525201_19864_XS.jpg) ![Button for slide 2](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/40/37/525204_21264_XS.jpg) ![Button for slide 3](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/40/37/525205_11799_XS.jpg) ![Button for slide 4](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/40/36/525093_1312_XS.jpg) ![Button for slide 5](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/36/25/483995_28144_XS.jpg) ## Favorite Modern Reverse Osmosis System ### Waterdrop G3P600 Reverse Osmosis System ![Top Pick Award](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/images/top-pick_47x107.png) ![waterdrop g3p600 reverse osmosis system](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/40/36/525119_4042_M.jpg) ![Top Pick Award](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/images/top-pick_47x107.png) [Read the Review](https://www.techgearlab.com/reviews/kitchen/water-filter/waterdrop-g3p600-reverse-osmosis-system) 89 OVERALL SCORE - Critical Contaminant Removal 10\.0 - Secondary Contaminant Removal 9\.4 - Taste 8\.8 - Maintenance and Setup 6\.4 - Operating Cost 6\.4 PROS Easier to maintain than most RO systems Great PFAS and lead removal Produces less waste water CONS More expensive than most filters Installation is a DIY home project The [Waterdrop G3P600 Reverse Osmosis System](https://www.techgearlab.com/reviews/kitchen/water-filter/waterdrop-g3p600-reverse-osmosis-system) performs just as well as our Editors' Choice RO filter in critical contaminant removal, and has an additional alkaline remineralization stage that improves flavor and adds back some essential trace minerals to your water (which accounts for its lower score in removing secondary contaminants). In addition to near-flawless filtration, this system is one of the easiest RO systems to use after initial installation. It has modern features that make it easy to use and maintain on a daily basis. The tankless design takes up much less space under your sink, and filter changes require a simple twist and pull to remove them from dedicated slots. Overall, the unit is a bit bulky, but its completely enclosed design means you don't have a bunch of tubes and wires hanging around, and it's still smaller than a storage tank. Wastewater is an inevitable byproduct of reverse osmosis systems, but the Waterdrop produces about a quarter of the amount produced by competing models. SPECIFICATIONS \| \| \| \|---\|---\| \| Type \| Under Sink Reverse Osmosis \| \| Estimated cost per year (40 gal/month) i \| \$145 \| \| Certifications \| NSF/ANSI certified against Standards 42, 58, and 372 \| \| Estimated cost per year (160 gal/month) \| \$145 \| \| Wastewater Generated i \| 1:2 ratio wastewater-to-filtered \| The downside is primarily the cost and the more involved installation. It is the most expensive unit in our lineup, and like all RO systems, it requires you to do some plumbing work and drill a hole into your countertop to install the separate faucet. If you choose to hire a professional to do this work, it pushes the cost up even higher, and is likely only something that you'll want to commit to if you own your home and plan to use the filter for many years. However, after this initial push, the ongoing costs are less than a pitcher, and maintenance is relatively easy compared to other under-sink filters. If you like the idea of on-demand filtration, but are renting or can't justify the high cost of the Waterdrop, then a faucet filter like the [Pur Plus Vertical Faucet](https://www.techgearlab.com/reviews/kitchen/water-filter/pur-plus-vertical-faucet) is a good alternative. Read more: [Waterdrop G3P600 RO review](https://www.techgearlab.com/reviews/kitchen/water-filter/waterdrop-g3p600-reverse-osmosis-system) Swapping filters on the Waterdrop G3P600 is as easy as a slide and twist motion. Credit: Matt Lighthart ## Best Faucet ### Pur Plus Vertical Faucet ![Top Pick Award](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/images/top-pick_47x107.png) ![pur plus vertical faucet](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/40/36/525158_5687_M.jpg) ![Top Pick Award](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/images/top-pick_47x107.png) [Check price at Amazon CA](https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07MLSVLZH?tag=tglcom20-20) Deal Alert: on sale for 39% off at Amazon [See Deal](https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07MLSVLZH?tag=tglcom20-20&linkCode=ogi&th=1&psc=1) 73 OVERALL SCORE - Critical Contaminant Removal 7\.1 - Secondary Contaminant Removal 7\.3 - Taste 6\.5 - Maintenance and Setup 8\.4 - Operating Cost 8\.2 PROS Filtered water is available immediately Reduces lead and PFNA to undetectable levels CONS Slower flow compared to unfiltered tap Doesn't fit all faucet types Bulky The [Pur Plus Vertical Faucet](https://www.techgearlab.com/reviews/kitchen/water-filter/pur-plus-vertical-faucet) is an ideal solution for anyone looking to improve their tap water without committing to an under-sink system or dealing with constantly refilling pitchers. Faucet filters like this one deliver water immediately, avoid counter clutter, and don't require permanent plumbing changes, making them perfect for renters or small kitchens. This vertical design, while slightly bulky, fits most faucets and includes a simple one-click installation that makes setup and filter changes easy. In testing, the Pur Plus Vertical Faucet excelled at reducing lead and PFAS to near-undetectable levels while removing chlorine to improve taste. It also performed well on common heavy metals like barium, copper, zinc, and iron, ensuring a safe, clean pour for daily drinking and cooking. SPECIFICATIONS \| \| \| \|---\|---\| \| Type \| Faucet \| \| Estimated cost per year (40 gal/month) i \| \$59 \| \| Certifications \| WQA and NSF certified to reduce 70 contaminants including lead, microplastics, mercury, chlorine taste and odor, DEET, and TTHM \| \| Estimated cost per year (160 gal/month) \| \$90 \| \| Wastewater Generated i \| No \| It is not designed to filter fluoride, arsenic, or high uranium levels, so households with extreme contamination concerns may need a more robust system. It also requires you to remove the aerator on your faucet and replace it with an adapter, and our tester worried about thread damage on the faucet head. You can avoid this with a pitcher-style option, and the Pur Plus 11-Cup Pitcher remains our top pick for critical contaminant removal while being simple to use and maintain. Read more: [Pur Plus Vertical Faucet review](https://www.techgearlab.com/reviews/kitchen/water-filter/pur-plus-vertical-faucet) [![water filter - the pur plus is a renter-friendly option for on-demand filtered water.](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/40/36/525161_17870_L2.jpg)](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/40/36/525161_17870_XXXL.jpg) The PUR Plus is a renter-friendly option for on-demand filtered water. Credit: Matt Lighthart ## Best Pitcher for Secondary Contaminant Removal ### Culligan with Zerowater 8-Cup Pitcher ![culligan with zerowater 8-cup pitcher](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/40/37/525212_18030_M.jpg) [Read the Review](https://www.techgearlab.com/reviews/kitchen/water-filter/culligan-with-zerowater-8-cup-pitcher) PROS Filters a wide range of contaminants for a pitcher Low-effort setup Fits in the fridge CONS Filters have a short lifespan Costly to maintain long-term Takes a long time to filter water The [Culligan with Zerowater 8-Cup Pitcher](https://www.techgearlab.com/reviews/kitchen/water-filter/culligan-with-zerowater-8-cup-pitcher) provides a great balance of critical and secondary contaminant removal, coming in just behind competitors like the Pur Plus 11-Cup Pitcher thanks to its superior performance with trace elements and minerals. While both pitchers excel at removing critical contaminants like lead and arsenic, this Culligan model consistently scored higher in reducing metals such as nickel, iron, and barium, making it an excellent choice for households with older plumbing or questionable municipal water. The star of the system is its 5-stage Zerowater filtration, which strips contaminants down to near-zero levels and even includes a built-in TDS meter so you can verify performance in real time. In testing, it removed 100% of lead, uranium, and mercury. Taste results were solid—clean, crisp water with chlorine and chemical notes fully removed. SPECIFICATIONS \| \| \| \|---\|---\| \| Type \| Pitcher \| \| Estimated cost per year (40 gal/month) i \| \$240 \| \| Certifications \| NSF/ANSI 42, 53, and 401 \| \| Estimated cost per year (160 gal/month) \| \$960 \| \| Wastewater Generated i \| No \| Where this pitcher falters is the long-term cost. Its impressive performance comes at the price of very short filter life — often only two to four weeks — and the replacements are expensive. For heavy water drinkers or families, long-term operating costs can reach several hundred dollars per year, far higher than the average pitcher. It also didn't remove as much PFAS as we would like, only reaching 87% removal. If your priority is more on trace element and mineral removal (like iron, copper or zinc), this is the one to get. If you'd prefer lower maintenance and lower cost, consider the [Amazon Basics 10-Cup](https://www.techgearlab.com/reviews/kitchen/water-filter/amazon-basics-10-cup-pitcher) or [Pur Plus 11-Cup Pitcher](https://www.techgearlab.com/reviews/kitchen/water-filter/pur-plus-11-cup-pitcher), or step up to a budget-friendly RO system like the [APEC ROES-50](https://www.techgearlab.com/reviews/kitchen/water-filter/apec-roes-50-essence-series). Read more: [Culligan with Zerowater 8-Cup Pitcher review](https://www.techgearlab.com/reviews/kitchen/water-filter/culligan-with-zerowater-8-cup-pitcher) The Culligan with Zerowater did a great job with many contaminants across the board. Credit: Matt Lighthart ## 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. #### Water Quality Lab Testing The majority of a filter's score hinges on its effectiveness in removing various contaminants and impurities. To ensure the accuracy of our ratings, we commissioned professional water-quality testing at an an [independent water-quality lab](https://mytapscore.com/). We focused on three major categories of contaminants: PFAS (forever chemicals), Critical Contaminants, and Heavy Metals. We ran two types of water samples through each filter: a highly contaminated “super” sample with elevated levels of each contaminant, and a standard tap water sample to mimic typical household conditions. We measured the concentration of each contaminant before and after filtration to determine how effectively each system reduced or eliminated these substances. This dual-sample approach allowed us to see both worst-case performance and everyday effectiveness. [![water filter - we tested filtered water for common contaminants using an...](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/40/36/525095_12863_L2.jpg)](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/40/36/525095_12863_XXXL.jpg) We tested filtered water for common contaminants using an independent lab, conducted taste tests, and measured for total dissolved solids. Credit: Matt Lighthart In addition to lab analysis, we used a Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) meter and chemical indicator strips to further assess the efficiency of each filter. For the taste metric, we assembled a panel of judges to do a blind taste test and rank each water sample. They evaluated whether the filter introduced any unpleasant taste to clean water and assessed its ability to remove undesirable flavors and odors. Finally, we evaluated each filter's user experience, taking into account factors such as installation, maintenance, operating costs, and efficiency. This comprehensive approach ensures our reviews are thorough, reliable, and beneficial to users seeking the best water filtration system for their home. To learn more about our procedures, check out our [How We Test article](https://www.techgearlab.com/topics/kitchen/best-water-filter/how-we-test). Our water filter rating scores are divided into six different metrics: - Critical Contaminant Removal (35% of overall score weighting) - Heavy Metal and Trace Element Removal (25% of overall score weighting) - Taste (20% weighting) - Setup and Use (10% weighting) - Maintenance and Setup (10% weighting) - Operating Cost (10% weighting) ## Why Trust GearLab Our testing team includes professionals in environmental research, engineering, and journalism. [Graham Faulknor](https://www.techgearlab.com/author/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 brings substantial experience to the team when designing, analyzing, and communicating our findings. [Austin Palmer](https://www.techgearlab.com/author/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. [Sam Hill](https://www.techgearlab.com/author/sam-hill) is a journalist based in the Pacific Northwest who focuses his writing on a mix of environmental and tech topics. He leverages his extensive experience in the industry to break down complex topics into clear, understandable results. ![pair this article with our buying advice article to make the best...](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/37/26/494151_23271_L2.jpg) 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.](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/37/29/494400_16255_L2.jpg) A small subset of our blind taste test. Credit: Graham Faulknor ![we built a custom test counter to conduct true side-by-side tests.](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/37/29/494396_2423_L2.jpg) We built a custom test counter to conduct true side-by-side tests. Credit: Graham Faulknor Previous Next ![Button for slide 1](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/37/26/494151_23271_XS.jpg) ![Button for slide 2](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/37/29/494400_16255_XS.jpg) ![Button for slide 3](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/37/29/494396_2423_XS.jpg) ## 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](https://www.techgearlab.com/topics/kitchen/best-water-filter/buying-advice). Your browser does not support charts× Worse Value Better Value ### What's the Best Value? When it comes to getting the best value in a water filter, the list price of the product doesn't tell the whole story. A higher sticker often means more filtration stages, but that doesn't always translate to better results. What really matters is how well the filter actually removes contaminants. Additionally, there can be a big difference between upfront costs and ongoing costs when you factor in the cost of filter replacements. Some simple pitchers or faucet filters can outperform pricier under-sink systems while keeping your annual filter costs low. But for high-volume users, undersink models are going to offer the best value. The APEC ROES-50 Essence Series or the iSpring RCC7AK are fantastic options. The APEC ROES-50 is the overall winner here with a slightly higher score in secondary contaminant testing and cheaper long-term operating costs — it is especially cost-effective when you look at annual operating costs for those households with a need for higher volumes of filtered water. For pitchers, the Pur Plus 11-Cup Pitcher is an excellent value and top performer for 1-2 person households. It's a pretty average price in the pitcher-style filter lineup, but it competes with some RO systems when it comes to filter quality. If you don't have major health concerns when it comes to water quality, the Amazon Basics 10-Cup Pitcher is also a great little budget pitcher. It provides serviceable filtering for most households and is one of the lower-cost pitchers out there due to its ability to use filter replacements from multiple brands. See more details below in the [Operating Costs section](https://www.techgearlab.com/topics/kitchen/best-water-filter#operating-cost). Heading Into the Great Outdoors? Then it's best to leave all of these products behind. Under-the-sink or faucet-mount filters aren't suited to the backcountry, and filter pitchers are designed to improve the taste and quality of already-potable water, not to render lake or stream water safe to drink. That task is better left to a [water filter specifically designed for the backcountry](https://www.outdoorgearlab.com/topics/camping-and-hiking/best-backpacking-water-filter). To ensure the filter you are considering is up to the task you have in mind, we recommend that you always consult the manufacturer's specifications. 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 ### Contaminant Removal Growing awareness of potential contaminants in tap water and their possible health effects has made reliable water filtration more important than ever. Many people don't realize what unseen pollutants could be in their water, but filters can provide peace of mind by delivering clean, safe drinking water. To test performance, we prepared water samples with elevated levels of chlorine, iron, sulfate, lead, fluoride, and copper - all well above EPA safe limits. We then send filtered and control samples to [Tap Score for independent lab testing](https://mytapscore.com/), ensuring accurate and trustworthy results. We defined Critical Contaminant Removal as the filter's ability to eliminate high-priority pollutants like lead, PFNA, arsenic, and uranium, while Secondary Contaminant Removal covers trace elements and minerals such as copper, zinc, iron, and barium that can affect taste and safety but are generally less immediately hazardous. What contaminants you're concerned about depends on your health and the water quality where you live. [![water filter - opening the filter box to replace the internal filter on the brita...](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/40/36/525155_14728_L2.jpg)](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/40/36/525155_14728_XXXL.jpg) Opening the filter box to replace the internal filter on the Brita Elite Advanced. Credit: Matt Lighthart ### Critical Contaminant Removal We examined how well each filter handled the critical water contaminants, providing a more comprehensive understanding of which models truly deliver safer water and which ones fall short. The chart below primarily focuses on the most toxic [heavy metals that can make their way into tap water](https://www.ewg.org/news-insights/news/2025/05/harmful-heavy-metals-why-theyre-tap-water-and-how-reduce-your-exposure). 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 94% 97% 93% 100% 100% 99% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 25% 9% 3% 3% 9% 100% 100% 100% 100% 98% 95% 97% 97% 96% 44% 28% 30% 1% APEC Essence ROES-50 iSpring RCC7AK RO Pur Plus Pitcher Waterdrop G3P600 RO Culligan Zerowater P... Travel Berkey Brita Large Pitcher... Amazon Basics Brita Metro Brita Faucet Mount E... Pur Plus Faucet Mount Brita UltraMax Elite Waterdrop 10UA Under... Percent removed by filter (100% = Fully Removed) 0 100 200 300 % Critical Contaminant Removal Lead Arsenic Uranium % Critical Contaminant Removal \| Product \| Lead \| Arsenic \| Uranium \| \|---\|---\|---\|---\| \| APEC Essence ROES-50 \| 100 \| 100 \| 100 \| \| iSpring RCC7AK RO \| 100 \| 100 \| 100 \| \| Pur Plus Pitcher \| 100 \| 100 \| 100 \| \| Waterdrop G3P600 RO \| 100 \| 100 \| 100 \| \| Culligan Zerowater Pitcher 10-Cup \| 100 \| 100 \| 98 \| \| Travel Berkey \| 100 \| 25 \| 95 \| \| Brita Large Pitcher (10 cup) \| 94 \| 9 \| 97 \| \| Amazon Basics \| 97 \| 0 \| 97 \| \| Brita Metro \| 93 \| 3 \| 96 \| \| Brita Faucet Mount Elite \| 100 \| 3 \| 44 \| \| Pur Plus Faucet Mount \| 100 \| 9 \| 28 \| \| Brita UltraMax Elite \| 99 \| 0 \| 30 \| \| Waterdrop 10UA Under Sink \| 0 \| 0 \| 1 \| Again, the RO systems we tested came out on top, removing nearly all the contaminants we tested for in both contaminated samples and standard tap water. For pitchers, the Pur Plus 11-Cup Pitcher and Culligan with Zerowater 8-Cup Pitcher both neared RO-quality results. The Amazon Basics 10-Cup Pitcher filtered lead (97.2% removed) and uranium (100% removed) well, but it isn't NSF certified for many serious contaminants like fluoride or nitrates. The [Waterdrop 10UA Under Sink](https://www.techgearlab.com/reviews/kitchen/water-filter/waterdrop-wd-10ua-under-sink) came in toward the bottom of test results, making it the lowest-scored under-sink system. It was able to filter trace amounts of nitrate, but barely enough to mention. It only filtered out 3.8% of lead, 10% of uranium in water quality tests, and it isn't certified to reduce arsenic. ### PFAS Forever Chemical Removal PFAS are a group of “forever chemicals” that don't break down easily, and [some reports say they may be more prevalent](https://www.ewg.org/research/national-pfas-testing) than we previously thought, and they are toxic even in very small amounts. They fall into our critical contaminant category. In the water quality test results, we specifically looked at two types: PFNA, which sticks around longer, and PFBA, which is smaller and exits the body more quickly. You don't want either in your drinking water. The results of PFAS removal lab tests are charted below. 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 97% 93% 91% 91% 87% 87% 73% 54% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 96% 92% 90% 89% 85% 85% 69% 51% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 72% APEC Essence ROES-50 Brita Faucet Mount E... Pur Plus Faucet Mount Travel Berkey Waterdrop G3P600 RO Pur Plus Pitcher Waterdrop 10UA Under... iSpring RCC7AK RO Brita UltraMax Elite Amazon Basics Culligan Zerowater P... Brita Large Pitcher... Brita Metro Percent removed by filter (100% = Fully Removed) 0 100 200 300 % PFAS Removal Total Reduction PFNA Reduction PFBA Reduction % 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 \| Across the systems we tested, the reverse osmosis units — particularly the APEC ROES-50 and the other under-sink RO models — delivered the strongest PFAS removal, consistently reducing both PFNA and PFBA to near- or fully undetectable levels in both tap water and super-contaminated samples. The two faucet filters we tested — the Brita Elite Advanced Faucet and the Pur Plus Vertical Faucet also hit near-top marks here. Pitcher filters showed far more mixed results: the high-end, specialty PFAS-targeting pitchers, like the Pur Plus 11-Cup Pitcher, performed respectably, but most standard carbon pitchers struggled, often removing only a portion of PFBA and doing very little against PFNA. The [Brita Large 10-Cup Pitcher](https://www.techgearlab.com/reviews/kitchen/water-filter/brita-large-10-cup-pitcher) and [Brita Metro](https://www.techgearlab.com/reviews/kitchen/water-filter/brita-metro) were among the most disappointing performers in PFAS testing, with 68.99% and 50.78% PFNA removal rates, respectively. They removed far less PFNA and PFBA than comparable filters and fell well short of what we'd expect from trusted, everyday-use pitchers. [![water filter - the waterdrop wd-10ua under sink essential only removes chlorine and...](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/40/37/525253_15841_L2.jpg)](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/40/37/525253_15841_XXXL.jpg) The Waterdrop WD-10UA Under Sink essential only removes chlorine and light sediment. Credit: Matt Lighthart ### Secondary Contaminant Removal Certain heavy metals and trace elements get their own category because they behave differently from critical contaminants and often enter tap water through plumbing corrosion or natural mineral sources. Some of these are even nutritionally essential in small amounts, and while they're usually less urgent than issues like lead or PFNA, elevated levels of metals such as copper, zinc, or barium [can impact long-term health](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK218751/) and the taste of your water — so we test them separately to show which filters can reliably address these everyday concerns. These materials are typically more of a concern if you draw water from a private well. The results of heavy metal and trace element removal tests are charted below. 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 96% 88% 87% 99% 100% 4% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 96% 93% 85% 86% 66% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 88% 85% 78% 77% 61% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 87% 74% 62% 62% 100% APEC Essence ROES-50 Brita Faucet Mount E... Culligan Zerowater P... iSpring RCC7AK RO Pur PlusFaucet Mount Travel Berkey Waterdrop G3P600 RO Amazon Basics Brita Large Pitcher... Brita Metro Brita UltraMax Elite Pur Plus Pitcher Waterdrop 10UA Under... Percent removed by filter (100% = Fully Removed) 0 100 200 300 400 Mineral and Trace Element Removal Iron (ppm) Copper (ppm) Barium (ppm) Zinc (ppm) Mineral and Trace Element Removal \| Product \| Iron (ppm) \| Copper (ppm) \| Barium (ppm) \| Zinc (ppm) \| \|---\|---\|---\|---\|---\| \| APEC Essence ROES-50 \| 100 \| 100 \| 100 \| 100 \| \| Brita Faucet Mount Elite \| 100 \| 100 \| 100 \| 100 \| \| Culligan Zerowater Pitcher 10-Cup \| 100 \| 100 \| 100 \| 100 \| \| iSpring RCC7AK RO \| 100 \| 100 \| 100 \| 100 \| \| Pur PlusFaucet Mount \| 100 \| 100 \| 100 \| 100 \| \| Travel Berkey \| 100 \| 100 \| 100 \| 100 \| \| Waterdrop G3P600 RO \| 100 \| 96 \| 88 \| 87 \| \| Amazon Basics \| 96 \| 93 \| 85 \| 74 \| \| Brita Large Pitcher (10 cup) \| 88 \| 85 \| 78 \| 62 \| \| Brita Metro \| 87 \| 86 \| 77 \| 62 \| \| Brita UltraMax Elite \| 99 \| 66 \| 61 \| 0 \| \| Pur Plus Pitcher \| 100 \| 100 \| 0 \| 0 \| \| Waterdrop 10UA Under Sink \| 4 \| 0 \| 0 \| 100 \| The top reverse osmosis systems dealt with heavy metals and trace elements well across the board, reducing nearly all secondary contaminants to zero in tests of super-contaminated and tap water samples. The Culligan with Zerowater 8-Cup Pitcher also performed well here, reliably knocking out metals like copper, zinc, iron, and barium; while we did see minor copper and zinc leaching in the lab, the amounts were extremely small and stayed well below EPA health guidelines. [![water filter - compared to other reverse osmosis systems, the waterdrop g3p600...](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/40/37/525235_5358_L2.jpg)](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/40/37/525235_5358_XXXL.jpg) Compared to other reverse osmosis systems, the Waterdrop G3P600 takes up much less cabinet space. Credit: Matt Lighthart The [Travel Berkey](https://www.techgearlab.com/reviews/kitchen/water-filter/travel-berkey) delivered solid mid-tier results, effectively removing metals like barium, copper, strontium, nickel, zinc, and iron, with decent performance on vanadium, lithium, and boron; while it showed small amounts of aluminum, cobalt, and silver leaching, levels stayed safe, and only selenium and molybdenum proved unreliable. The Amazon Basics 10-Cup Pitcher was right behind, but there were some issues with the leaching of aluminum and very small amounts of silver. Again, the Waterdrop WD-10UA Under Sink came in last place. It reliably removed 100% of zinc from the contaminated samples (its primary certified target), but most other metals, like cobalt and chromium, passed through largely unchanged. It didn't introduce any noticeable leaching, so at least it isn't adding anything unwanted to your water. That's a low bar, though. The [Brita Ultramax Dispenser with Elite Filter](https://www.techgearlab.com/reviews/kitchen/water-filter/brita-ultramax-dispenser-with-elite-filter) was also disappointing in this category, showing inconsistent removal of several metals and introducing some aluminum during testing. [![water filter - brita\&\#039;s elite filters used in the brita ultramax dispenser last...](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/40/36/525090_4489_L2.jpg)](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/40/36/525090_4489_XXXL.jpg) Brita's Elite filters used in the Brita Ultramax Dispenser last about three times as long as standard filters from Brita. Credit: Matt Lighthart ### Taste Filtered water can make a noticeable difference in how your tap water tastes, especially if it carries metallic or chemical notes. Enjoying crisp, clean-tasting water straight from your faucet or pitcher not only improves the everyday experience but can also encourage you to stay hydrated and cut down on bottled water use. Taste is subjective, though; some people like a hint of minerals, while others prefer a completely neutral flavor. We aimed to capture overall impressions across a range of preferences. For taste tests, we ran each filter with water from a garden hose to standardize the source, then conducted a blind taste test with five evaluators. Each tester sampled filtered water from every unit alongside unfiltered tap and garden hose water, ranking the results from best to worst to give us a clear sense of relative taste performance. When we weren't able to run water samples through taste tests, we crowdsourced opinions by researching online reviews to glean accurate notes about each model through user feedback. Your browser does not support charts× Overall, users consistently reported that filtered water tasted fresher across all models we tested, though a few naysayers occasionally noted plastic or flat flavors. Among our top performers, the APEC ROES-50 Essence Series, Waterdrop G3P600 Reverse Osmosis System, and Pur Plus 11-Cup Pitcher received the highest marks for crisp, clean taste. Models with slightly lower scores, namely the Culligan with Zerowater 8-Cup Pitcher, Travel Berkey, and Waterdrop WD-10UA Under Sink, still delivered noticeably improved water compared to unfiltered tap, even if minor off-flavors were reported by some users. [![water filter - we enlisted other members of our team to do blind taste tests.](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/40/37/525243_30827_L2.jpg)](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/40/37/525243_30827_XXXL.jpg) We enlisted other members of our team to do blind taste tests. Credit: Matt Lighthart ### Maintenance and Setup We often take running water for granted, and a great water filter fits seamlessly into that everyday routine. However, setup, daily use, and ongoing upkeep can vary a lot from model to model. Our testing team dives in, handling installation and daily operation to see how each unit performs in real-world use. Some filters, like under-sink RO systems, require a bit of DIY know-how to install, while pitchers are ready to go after a quick rinse. Which model fits best really comes down to how much time and effort you're willing to put into setup and upkeep. Your browser does not support charts× The easiest water filters to use are, obviously, the pitcher-style filters. After a quick initial clean, all you need to do is drop in a filter and fill it up with water to have cleaner, tastier water at your disposal. These models are designed to be easy to clean regularly and during filter replacements. Some are even dishwasher safe. You won't need to check any instructions here — these are as “plug and play” as they come. The top performers in ease of use all follow the 'fill-and-go' philosophy. The Brita Ultramax Dispenser with Elite Filter is especially convenient, with a large capacity that means fewer refills. The Amazon Basics 10-Cup Pitcher and Brita Metro are compact, simple, and virtually maintenance-free, making them perfect for quick daily use. The Culligan with Zerowater 8-Cup Pitcher also shines here, with a straightforward drop-in filter and intuitive design that keeps clean water flowing with minimal effort. Some pitchers do filter at different speeds, though, so take individual reviews into account if you don't want to sacrifice speed. ![the brita ultramax dispenser is pretty easy to fill, but it can get...](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/40/36/525076_12553_L2.jpg) The Brita Ultramax Dispenser is pretty easy to fill, but it can get pretty heavy when it's full. Credit: Matt Lighthart ![the amazon basics 10-cup pitcher easily fits in the fridge, although...](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/40/36/525096_24581_L2.jpg) The Amazon Basics 10-Cup Pitcher easily fits in the fridge, although it might be too wide to sit in a door shelf. Credit: Matt Lighthart ![the small size of the brita metro makes it easy to use on a daily...](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/40/36/525084_8381_L2.jpg) The small size of the Brita Metro makes it easy to use on a daily basis, but it's best suited to smaller households of one or two people. Credit: Matt Lighthart ![unfortunately, replacement filters for this pitcher are quite...](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/40/36/525101_8556_L2.jpg) Unfortunately, replacement filters for this pitcher are quite pricey, and they need to be changed more often than any other system we tested. Credit: Matt Lighthart Previous Next ![Button for slide 1](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/40/36/525076_12553_XS.jpg) ![Button for slide 2](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/40/36/525096_24581_XS.jpg) ![Button for slide 3](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/40/36/525084_8381_XS.jpg) ![Button for slide 4](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/40/36/525101_8556_XS.jpg) Both of the faucet models were surprisingly easy to set up as well. The Pur Plus Vertical Faucet snaps onto most standard taps and delivers filtered water instantly. They require a filter change every few months, which we found easy to do, and daily use is effortless, making them a hassle-free alternative to pitchers. The Pur Plus is easily snapped onto many kitchen faucets. Credit: Matt Lighthart All of the RO systems received much lower scores in the category, not because they're a complete hassle, but because it takes a little more know-how to install them. Most require you to renovate (and abandon) under-sink spaces and some basic plumbing access. Once set up, they run quietly and efficiently, but the initial setup is more involved than pitchers or faucet models. The Waterdrop G3P600 Reverse Osmosis System is specifically designed to navigate those issues, though, with a more compact design and streamlined installation that reduces the hassle and space concerns typical of traditional RO setups. It's no water pitcher, but it's a bit simpler. The Waterdrop G3P600 Reverse Osmosis System has a pretty fast flow rate, which is impressive for an on-demand filter system. Credit: Matt Lighthart ### Operating Cost Operating costs are an important part of the equation. While filtered water tastes better and is safer, some systems require frequent, pricey replacement filters or produce extra wastewater, which can add up over time. It's worth factoring in both filter longevity and the amount of water wasted during the process when deciding which model offers the best long-term value. We divide annual operating costs into two key categories: costs for filtering 40 gallons a month vs. 160 gallons per month. Why? We want to capture the difference in value between households with low-volume needs (40 gallons) and higher-volume needs (160 gallons). At around 40 gallons per month, pitcher-style filters sit solidly in the middle of the value spectrum, thanks to zero installation costs and no wasted water. Your browser does not support charts× Once usage ramps up to 160 gallons per month, the picture changes. Frequent filter replacements make most pitchers less cost-effective at higher volumes, and for larger households or heavy water use, under-sink systems become the more economical choice. Your browser does not support charts× Those Filter Replacement Costs Add Up\! The Culligan with Zerowater 8-Cup Pitcher offers good water quality performance; however, the frequent need for filter replacements significantly increases annual operating costs. You'll want to consider annual costs in your purchase decision to hit the right balance of water quality, convenience, and cost for your family. Reverse osmosis systems cost a lot more upfront than pitchers or faucet filters, and take more effort to install. But, for households that frequently need filtered water, their reasonable annual operating costs and higher-volume output may justify the higher initial cost. The APEC ROES-50 Essence Series emerged as the most affordable reverse osmosis system, with estimated annual filter costs of about \$75, regardless of water usage. The iSpring RCC7AK followed at roughly \$95 per year, slightly higher because it includes an extra filter in the rotation. The Waterdrop G3P600 Reverse Osmosis System was the priciest by far, with annual costs hitting around \$145, significantly more than its RO counterparts. Pre-filters can last 6-12 months, depending on your water quality, so you don't have to worry about swapping them out too often. Credit: Matt Lighthart Every filter change adds up over time, and the difference between models can be striking. Among pitchers, the Amazon Basics 10-Cup Pitcher came out as the most affordable, with estimated annual costs of just \$44 at 40 gallons per month. On the other end, the Culligan with Zerowater 8-Cup Pitcher was a major outlier, costing a whopping \$240 for the same monthly usage. The drop-in filters are super easy to change and don't cost too much to replace, especially when you have the option to shop around. Credit: Matt Lighthart For faucet filters, the Pur Plus Vertical Faucet and Brita Elite Advanced Faucet show a notable annual cost difference: at 40 gallons per month, annual expenses are \$41 versus \$78, respectively. That gap widens even further with heavier use—at 160 gallons per month, the difference jumps to \$90 versus \$288. Bottom line: Reverse Osmosis systems generally make more sense for high-volume use since they're more economical if your needs go beyond just drinking water and can efficiently provide filtered water for cooking, coffee, and other household needs. Pitchers and faucet filters remain convenient and easy for light use and drinking water, but their costs can escalate quickly if you rely on them too heavily. #### Wastewater with Reverse Osmosis Another factor to keep in mind with reverse osmosis systems is wastewater. RO filters produce a surprising amount of wastewater as part of the filtration process as they need to flush contaminants off the membrane. This wastewater is plumbed into your kitchen sink drain pipe (although some people come up with creative solutions to plumb it into a rain barrel for watering plants). While not a deal-breaker for most people interested in cleaner water, this additional water used is a factor to be aware of and consider. For example, as shown in the chart below, the APEC ROES-50 Essence Series generates about 3 gallons of wastewater for every 1 gallon of filtered water and the iSpring RCC7AK runs at a 2:1 ratio. The Waterdrop G3P600 produces the least amount of wastewater, roughly 1/2 gallon of wastewater per each 1 gallon filtered. Your browser does not support charts× [![water filter - the ispring rcc7ak showed good results in contaminant removal...](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/40/36/525140_26754_L2.jpg)](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/40/36/525140_26754_XXXL.jpg) The iSpring RCC7AK showed good results in contaminant removal testing, but it doesn't stand out compared to the other reverse osmosis systems in our lineup. Credit: Matt Lighthart ## How to Pick A Water Filter We've put together four key considerations, including the type of filtration system, available space, and budget, to help you find the best water filtration for your home. ### What Do All These Certifications Mean? All the standards, certifications, and labels attached to water filters can be confusing. NSF/ANSI standards are outlined by the National Sanitation Foundation and the American National Standards Institute. A full list can be [found here](https://www.nsf.org/consumer-resources/articles/standards-water-treatment-systems), but in short, the one you want to look for most of the time is NSF/ANSI 53, which covers filters that are meant to handle contaminants with known health effects, like lead and PFAS. The [NSF guide to Contaminant Reduction Claims](https://www.nsf.org/consumer-resources/articles/contaminant-reduction-claims-guide) by filter can be found here. Other acronyms to know are WQA (Water Quality Association) and IAPMO (International Association of Plumbing & Mechanical Officials), which are both organizations that can grant certifications to filters that pass NSF standards. ### What Type of Water Filter Do You Need? While most people are accustomed to pitcher-style water filters, other options also exist, such as under-the-sink, faucet-mounted, and reverse osmosis systems. Deciding on the appropriate filtration system comes down to the level of contaminants in your water, your budget, and the level of setup needed. If you know your water has higher levels of contaminants and you need to cover a wide range of filtration, the upfront cost of a reverse osmosis system can be worth it. On the other hand, if you're more or less hoping to get cleaner, odor-free water, then a pitcher is your best bet. ### How Big is Your Household? Depending on your household size, you may opt for larger capacity systems. While the simplicity and ease of use of a pitcher is great, larger households may find themselves refilling too often, especially if you use your filtered water for everything from drinking to boiling pasta and watering your houseplants. For those who consume more water, an under-the-sink option may work best for your needs. Also, consider how much free space you have. Under-the-sink options help keep counter space free, but you will have to clear a place to potentially store a tank along with the filters. ### Which System Requires the Least Maintenance? Periodic maintenance of your water filter system is key to maintaining proper filtration. Some systems require changing filters after only two months, while others can run the same filter for a year (or longer, depending on usage). A simple pitcher-style system typically only needs one filter type to be replaced, while more complex filtration systems, such as reverse osmosis filters, require different replacements depending on the filter stage. For those undecided on a filtration system, consider whether the extra maintenance costs and time are worth it for the extra filtration capabilities. ### Is Setup Going to Be a Hassle? Installation of under-the-sink systems involves a variety of different parts and often requires cutting pipe and drilling for installation of the faucet. If you feel comfortable with DIY projects, installing a filtration system can be fairly straightforward. However, if you're renting, have limited space under your sink, or are not keen on self-installation, it's worth considering options that can be placed on the counter. [![water filter - spigot dispensers like the one found on the brita ultramax can be...](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/40/37/525191_19943_L2.jpg)](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/40/37/525191_19943_XXXL.jpg) Spigot dispensers like the one found on the Brita Ultramax can be convenient than pitcher pours. Credit: Matt Lighthart ## Conclusion Here at GearLab, we aim to provide you with firsthand knowledge from our testing experience, so you can purchase the best products that suit your needs and budget. For water filters, we looked closely at the subtle nuances that set pitchers, faucet models, and under-the-sink versions apart from one another. Whether you are looking to improve the taste of city water or want the perfect-tasting refreshment for a wedding or backyard BBQ, we hope you now have the knowledge to buy the perfect water filter for you. At GearLab, we cover in-depth reviews on a variety of products, spanning goods from [air purifiers](https://www.techgearlab.com/topics/health-fitness/best-air-purifier) to [blood pressure monitors](https://www.techgearlab.com/topics/health-fitness/best-blood-pressure-monitor). If you're looking for some new home or kitchen appliances, we've got testing-backed opinions on the [top-rated air fryers](https://www.techgearlab.com/topics/kitchen/best-air-fryer) and [vacuum cleaners](https://www.techgearlab.com/topics/floor-cleaning/best-vacuum-cleaner). ## Appendix For those who are interested, the detailed results of the [Independent Water Quality Lab](https://mytapscore.com/) testing we conducted are listed in the tables below: Critical Contaminant Results \| \| Test \| Lead Reduction \| Lead (ppm) \| Arsenic Reduction \| Arsenic (ppm) \| Uranium Reduction \| Uranium (ppm) \| Nitrate Reduction \| Nitrate as N (ppm) \| \|---\|---\|---\|---\|---\|---\|---\|---\|---\|---\| \| Supply (baseline) \| \- \| \- \| 0\.26 \| \- \| 0\.00265 \| \- \| 0\.00376 \| \- \| 2\.46 \| \| Health Guideline Limit (HGL) \| \- \| \- \| 0 \| \- \| 0 \| \- \| 0 \| \- \| 10 \| \| EPA Limit \| \- \| \- \| 0 \| \- \| 0\.01 \| \- \| 0\.03 \| \- \| 10 \| \| APEC Essence ROES-50 \| Tap Score Essential City Water Test \| 100% \| 0 \| 100% \| 0 \| 100% \| 0 \| \- \| \- \| \| iSpring RCC7AK RO \| Tap Score Essential City Water Test \| 100% \| 0 \| 100% \| 0 \| 100% \| 0 \| \- \| \- \| \| Waterdrop G3P600 RO \| Tap Score Essential City Water Test \| 100% \| 0 \| 100% \| 0 \| 100% \| 0 \| \- \| \- \| \| Pur Plus \| Tap Score Essential City Water Test \| 100% \| 0 \| 100% \| 0 \| 100% \| 0 \| 92% \| 0\.2 \| \| Culligan Zerowater Pitcher 10-Cup \| Tap Score Essential City Water Test \| 100% \| 0 \| 100% \| 0 \| 98% \| 0\.00008 \| 100% \| 0 \| \| Travel Berkey \| Tap Score Essential City Water Test \| 100% \| 0 \| 25% \| 0\.00198 \| 95% \| 0\.00017 \| 20% \| 1\.98 \| \| PUR PLUS Faucet Mount \| Tap Score Essential City Water Test \| 100% \| 0 \| 9% \| 0\.0024 \| 28% \| 0\.0027 \| 37% \| 1\.54 \| \| Brita Faucet Mount Elite \| Tap Score Essential City Water Test \| 100% \| 0 \| 3% \| 0\.00256 \| 44% \| 0\.00212 \| 33% \| 1\.66 \| \| Brita UltraMax Elite \| Tap Score Essential City Water Test \| 99% \| 0\.0019 \| 0% \| 0\.00266 \| 30% \| 0\.00262 \| 0% \| 2\.47 \| \| Amazon Basics \| Tap Score Essential City Water Test \| 97% \| 0\.0072 \| Added 13% \| 0\.00299 \| 97% \| 0\.00011 \| 64% \| 0\.88 \| \| Brita Large Pitcher (10 cup) \| Tap Score Essential City Water Test \| 94% \| 0\.016 \| 9% \| 0\.0024 \| 97% \| 0\.00013 \| 70% \| 0\.74 \| \| Brita Metro \| Tap Score Essential City Water Test \| 93% \| 0\.017 \| 3% \| 0\.00258 \| 96% \| 0\.00015 \| 61% \| 0\.95 \| \| Waterdrop 10UA Under Sink \| Tap Score Essential City Water Test \| 0% \| 0\.27 \| 0% \| 0\.00264 \| 1% \| 0\.00374 \| \- \| \- \| Metals and Trace Elements and % Removal \| \| Test \| Barium Removed \| Barium (ppm) \| Copper (Extreme) Removed \| Copper Extreme (ppm) \| Copper (Normal) Removed \| Copper Normal (ppm) \| Vanadium Removed \| Vanadium - Tap Water (ppm) \| Iron Removed \| Iron (ppm) \| Strontium Removed \| Strontium (ppm) \| Zinc Removed \| Zinc (ppm) \| \|---\|---\|---\|---\|---\|---\|---\|---\|---\|---\|---\|---\|---\|---\|---\|---\| \| Supply (baseline) \| \- \| \- \| 0\.012 \| \- \| 8 \| \- \| 0\.014 \| \- \| 0\.00794 \| \- \| 4\.5 \| \- \| 0\.31 \| \- \| 0\.039 \| \| Health Guideline Limit (HGL) \| \- \| \- \| 2 \| \- \| 0\.3 \| \- \| 0\.3 \| \- \| 0\.005 \| \- \| 4 \| \- \| 3 \| \- \| 2 \| \| EPA Limit \| \- \| \- \| 2 \| \- \| 1\.3 \| \- \| 1\.3 \| \- \| 0\.23 \| \- \| 0\.3 (SMCL) \| \- \| 4 (SMCL) \| \- \| 5 \| \| Amazon Basics \| Tap Score Essential City Water Test \| 85% \| 0\.0018 \| 93% \| 0\.56 \| 95% \| 0\.00065 \| 70% \| 0\.00242 \| 96% \| 0\.19 \| 97% \| 0\.01 \| 74% \| 0\.01 \| \| APEC Essence ROES-50 \| Tap Score Essential City Water Test \| 100% \| 0 \| 100% \| 0 \| \- \| \- \| \- \| \- \| 100% \| 0 \| \- \| \- \| 100% \| 0 \| \| Brita Faucet Mount Elite \| Tap Score Essential City Water Test \| 100% \| 0 \| 100% \| 0 \| 100% \| 0 \| 42% \| 0\.00461 \| 100% \| 0 \| 97% \| 0\.01 \| 100% \| 0 \| \| Brita Large Pitcher (10 cup) \| Tap Score Essential City Water Test \| 78% \| 0\.0026 \| 85% \| 1\.2 \| 95% \| 0\.00065 \| 74% \| 0\.00205 \| 88% \| 0\.53 \| 90% \| 0\.03 \| 62% \| 0\.015 \| \| Brita Metro \| Tap Score Essential City Water Test \| 77% \| 0\.0028 \| 86% \| 1\.1 \| 100% \| 0 \| 64% \| 0\.00282 \| 87% \| 0\.6 \| 90% \| 0\.03 \| 62% \| 0\.015 \| \| Brita UltraMax Elite \| Tap Score Essential City Water Test \| 61% \| 0\.0047 \| 66% \| 2\.7 \| 95% \| 0\.00065 \| 49% \| 0\.00405 \| 99% \| 0\.066 \| 35% \| 0\.2 \| Added 5% \| 0\.041 \| \| Culligan Zerowater Pitcher 10-Cup \| Tap Score Essential City Water Test \| 100% \| 0 \| 100% \| 0 \| Added 114% \| 0\.03 \| 100% \| 0 \| 100% \| 0 \| 100% \| 0 \| 100% \| 0 \| \| iSpring RCC7AK RO \| Tap Score Essential City Water Test \| 100% \| 0 \| 100% \| 0 \| \- \| \- \| \- \| \- \| 100% \| 0 \| \- \| \- \| 100% \| 0 \| \| Pur Plus \| Tap Score Essential City Water Test \| Added 1150 - 1983% \| 0\.25 \| 100% \| 0 \| 100% \| 0 \| 100% \| 0 \| 100% \| 0 \| 97% \| 0\.01 \| Added 151% \| 0\.098 \| \| PUR PLUS Faucet Mount \| Tap Score Essential City Water Test \| 100% \| 0 \| 100% \| 0 \| 100% \| 0 \| 53% \| 0\.00376 \| 100% \| 0 \| 77% \| 0\.07 \| 100% \| 0 \| \| Travel Berkey \| Tap Score Essential City Water Test \| 100% \| 0 \| 100% \| 0 \| 93% \| 0\.00096 \| 84% \| 0\.00128 \| 100% \| 0 \| 100% \| 0 \| 100% \| 0 \| \| Waterdrop 10UA Under Sink \| Tap Score Essential City Water Test \| Added 8% \| 0\.013 \| Added 2% \| 8\.2 \| 0% \| 0\.014 \| \- \| \- \| 4% \| 4\.3 \| \- \| \- \| 100% \| 0 \| \| Waterdrop G3P600 RO \| Tap Score Essential City Water Test \| 88% \| 0\.0014 \| 96% \| 0\.29 \| \- \| \- \| \- \| \- \| 100% \| 0\.013 \| \- \| \- \| 87% \| 0\.0049 \| —Graham Faulknor, Austin Palmer, and Sam Hill Table of Contents - [The Best Water Filters](https://www.techgearlab.com/topics/kitchen/best-water-filter#the-best-water-filters) - - [Best Pitcher Filter](https://www.techgearlab.com/topics/kitchen/best-water-filter#best-pitcher-filter) - - [Best Reverse Osmosis System](https://www.techgearlab.com/topics/kitchen/best-water-filter#best-reverse-osmosis-system) - - [Best Value Pitcher](https://www.techgearlab.com/topics/kitchen/best-water-filter#best-value-pitcher) - - [Best Long Term Value](https://www.techgearlab.com/topics/kitchen/best-water-filter#best-long-term-value) - - [Favorite Modern Reverse Osmosis System](https://www.techgearlab.com/topics/kitchen/best-water-filter#favorite-modern-reverse-osmosis-system) - - [Best Faucet](https://www.techgearlab.com/topics/kitchen/best-water-filter#best-faucet) - - [Best Pitcher for Secondary Contaminant Removal](https://www.techgearlab.com/topics/kitchen/best-water-filter#best-pitcher-for-secondary-contaminant-removal) - [Product Comparison Table](https://www.techgearlab.com/topics/kitchen/best-water-filter#product-comparison-table) - [How We Tested](https://www.techgearlab.com/topics/kitchen/best-water-filter#how-we-tested) - [Why Trust GearLab](https://www.techgearlab.com/topics/kitchen/best-water-filter#why-trust-gearlab) - [Analysis and Test Results](https://www.techgearlab.com/topics/kitchen/best-water-filter#analysis-and-test-results) - - [What's the Best Value?](https://www.techgearlab.com/topics/kitchen/best-water-filter#whats-the-best-value) - - [Contaminant Removal](https://www.techgearlab.com/topics/kitchen/best-water-filter#contaminant-removal) - - [Critical Contaminant Removal](https://www.techgearlab.com/topics/kitchen/best-water-filter#critical-contaminant-removal) - - [PFAS Forever Chemical Removal](https://www.techgearlab.com/topics/kitchen/best-water-filter#pfas-forever-chemical-removal) - - [Secondary Contaminant Removal](https://www.techgearlab.com/topics/kitchen/best-water-filter#secondary-contaminant-removal) - - [Taste](https://www.techgearlab.com/topics/kitchen/best-water-filter#taste) - - [Maintenance and Setup](https://www.techgearlab.com/topics/kitchen/best-water-filter#maintenance-and-setup) - - [Operating Cost](https://www.techgearlab.com/topics/kitchen/best-water-filter#operating-cost) - [How to Pick A Water Filter](https://www.techgearlab.com/topics/kitchen/best-water-filter#how-to-pick-a-water-filter) - [Conclusion](https://www.techgearlab.com/topics/kitchen/best-water-filter#conclusion) - [Appendix](https://www.techgearlab.com/topics/kitchen/best-water-filter#appendix) ## Recommended Water Filters Water Filters [![Lead photo for APEC ROES-50 Essence Series](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/40/36/525128_4018_M2.jpg)](https://www.techgearlab.com/reviews/kitchen/water-filter/apec-roes-50-essence-series) [APEC ROES-50 Essence Series](https://www.techgearlab.com/reviews/kitchen/water-filter/apec-roes-50-essence-series) ![Editors' Choice Award](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/images/editors-choice_30x69.png) \$231 List [Check Price at Amazon](https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0D4PJYHJK?tag=tglcom20-20&linkCode=ogi&th=1&psc=1) [![Lead photo for iSpring RCC7](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/37/26/494081_17070_M2.jpg)](https://www.techgearlab.com/reviews/kitchen/water-filter/ispring-rcc7) [iSpring RCC7](https://www.techgearlab.com/reviews/kitchen/water-filter/ispring-rcc7) ![Editors' Choice Award](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/images/editors-choice_30x69.png) \$220 List [Check Price at Amazon](https://www.amazon.com/dp/B003XELTTG?tag=tglcom20-20&linkCode=ogi&th=1&psc=1) [![Lead photo for ZeroWater 10-Cup 5-Stage Pitcher](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/37/26/494108_3542_M2.jpg)](https://www.techgearlab.com/reviews/kitchen/water-filter/zerowater-10-cup-5-stage-pitcher) [ZeroWater 10-Cup 5-Stage Pitcher](https://www.techgearlab.com/reviews/kitchen/water-filter/zerowater-10-cup-5-stage-pitcher) ![Editors' Choice Award](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/images/editors-choice_30x69.png) \$35 List [Check Price at Amazon](https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0073PZ6O0?tag=tglcom20-20&linkCode=ogi&th=1&psc=1) [![Lead photo for Pur Plus 11-Cup Pitcher](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/40/37/525195_10566_M2.jpg)](https://www.techgearlab.com/reviews/kitchen/water-filter/pur-plus-11-cup-pitcher) [Pur Plus 11-Cup Pitcher](https://www.techgearlab.com/reviews/kitchen/water-filter/pur-plus-11-cup-pitcher) ![Editors' Choice Award](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/images/editors-choice_30x69.png) \$25 List [![Lead photo for Travel Berkey](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/40/36/525092_8898_M2.jpg)](https://www.techgearlab.com/reviews/kitchen/water-filter/travel-berkey) [Travel Berkey](https://www.techgearlab.com/reviews/kitchen/water-filter/travel-berkey) ![Best Buy Award](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/images/best-buy_30x69.png) \$362 List [Check Amazon (on sale!)](https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00FQP2CUU?tag=tglcom20-20&linkCode=ogi&th=1&psc=1) [![Lead photo for PUR Classic 11 Cup Pitcher](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/37/26/494116_23959_M2.jpg)](https://www.techgearlab.com/reviews/kitchen/water-filter/pur-classic-11-cup-pitcher) [PUR Classic 11 Cup Pitcher](https://www.techgearlab.com/reviews/kitchen/water-filter/pur-classic-11-cup-pitcher) ![Best Buy Award](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/images/best-buy_30x69.png) \$30 List [Check Price at Amazon](https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00G15A8E6?tag=tglcom20-20&linkCode=ogi&th=1&psc=1) [![Lead photo for APEC WFS-1000](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/37/26/494099_12386_M2.jpg)](https://www.techgearlab.com/reviews/kitchen/water-filter/apec-wfs-1000) [APEC WFS-1000](https://www.techgearlab.com/reviews/kitchen/water-filter/apec-wfs-1000) ![Best Buy Award](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/images/best-buy_30x69.png) \$145 List [Check Price at Amazon](https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00TT9I2PS?tag=tglcom20-20&linkCode=ogi&th=1&psc=1) [![Lead photo for Amazon Basics 10-Cup Pitcher](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/40/37/525186_13185_M2.jpg)](https://www.techgearlab.com/reviews/kitchen/water-filter/amazon-basics-10-cup-pitcher) [Amazon Basics 10-Cup Pitcher](https://www.techgearlab.com/reviews/kitchen/water-filter/amazon-basics-10-cup-pitcher) ![Best Buy Award](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/images/best-buy_30x69.png) \$26 List [![Lead photo for Pur Plus Vertical Faucet](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/40/36/525158_5687_M2.jpg)](https://www.techgearlab.com/reviews/kitchen/water-filter/pur-plus-vertical-faucet) [Pur Plus Vertical Faucet](https://www.techgearlab.com/reviews/kitchen/water-filter/pur-plus-vertical-faucet) ![Top Pick Award](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/images/top-pick_30x69.png) \$22 List [Check Amazon (on sale!)](https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07MLSVLZH?tag=tglcom20-20&linkCode=ogi&th=1&psc=1) [![Lead photo for Bluevua RO100ROPOT](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/37/26/494133_29262_M2.jpg)](https://www.techgearlab.com/reviews/kitchen/water-filter/bluevua-ro100ropot) [Bluevua RO100ROPOT](https://www.techgearlab.com/reviews/kitchen/water-filter/bluevua-ro100ropot) ![Top Pick Award](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/images/top-pick_30x69.png) \$434 List [Check Amazon (on sale!)](https://www.amazon.com/dp/B09KRDK677?tag=tglcom20-20&linkCode=ogi&th=1&psc=1) [![Lead photo for Waterdrop G3P600 Reverse Osmosis System](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/40/36/525119_4042_M2.jpg)](https://www.techgearlab.com/reviews/kitchen/water-filter/waterdrop-g3p600-reverse-osmosis-system) [Waterdrop G3P600 Reverse Osmosis System](https://www.techgearlab.com/reviews/kitchen/water-filter/waterdrop-g3p600-reverse-osmosis-system) ![Top Pick Award](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/images/top-pick_30x69.png) \$539 List See the review: [Best Water Filters](https://www.techgearlab.com/topics/kitchen/best-water-filter) You Might Also Like [![best blenders](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/39/88/520320_20324_M2.jpg)](https://www.techgearlab.com/topics/kitchen/best-blender) ### [Blenders](https://www.techgearlab.com/topics/kitchen/best-blender) [![best kitchen appliances](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/34/18/463358_16306_M2.jpg)](https://www.techgearlab.com/topics/kitchen/best-kitchen-appliances) ### [Best Kitchen Appliances](https://www.techgearlab.com/topics/kitchen/best-kitchen-appliances) [![10 top coffee makers](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/39/75/519064_11306_M2.jpg)](https://www.techgearlab.com/topics/kitchen/best-coffee-maker) ### [10 Top Coffee Makers](https://www.techgearlab.com/topics/kitchen/best-coffee-maker) [![best stand mixers](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/39/43/515836_81_M2.jpg)](https://www.techgearlab.com/topics/kitchen/best-stand-mixer) ### [Stand Mixers](https://www.techgearlab.com/topics/kitchen/best-stand-mixer) [![best juicers](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/36/83/489824_24160_M2.jpg)](https://www.techgearlab.com/topics/kitchen/best-juicer) ### [Juicers](https://www.techgearlab.com/topics/kitchen/best-juicer) [![best food processors](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/38/67/508224_22054_M2.jpg)](https://www.techgearlab.com/topics/kitchen/best-food-processor) ### [Food Processors](https://www.techgearlab.com/topics/kitchen/best-food-processor) How can we improve GearLab? Got feedback? [Let us know\!](https://www.techgearlab.com/feedback) GearLab is reader-supported. We buy all the products we test — no freebies from manufacturers. If you click on our links, we may earn a commission, which helps support [our testing work](https://www.techgearlab.com/about). - [Home](https://www.techgearlab.com/) - [Best-in-Class Reviews](https://www.techgearlab.com/reviews) - [How To Articles](https://www.techgearlab.com/articles) - [FAQ](https://www.techgearlab.com/faq) - [Jobs](https://www.techgearlab.com/jobs) - [Feedback](https://www.techgearlab.com/feedback) - [Contact](https://www.techgearlab.com/contact) - [About Us](https://www.techgearlab.com/about) Material on GearLab is copyrighted. Reproduction without permission is prohibited. All trademarks property of their respective owners. [Privacy](https://www.techgearlab.com/privacy) \\| [Cookies](https://www.techgearlab.com/cookies) \\| [Terms](https://www.techgearlab.com/terms) Zinc (ppm) Lead Arsenic Uranium Total Reduction PFNA Reduction PFBA Reduction Iron (ppm) Copper (ppm) Barium (ppm) Zinc (ppm)
Readable Markdown	## The Best Water Filters Full results from testing 13 top products are in our [Product Comparison Table](https://www.techgearlab.com/topics/kitchen/best-water-filter#product-comparison-table) and [Analysis & Test Results](https://www.techgearlab.com/topics/kitchen/best-water-filter#analysis-and-test-results) sections. Your browser does not support charts× Best Pitcher FilterPur Plus 11-Cup Pitcher ![Editors' Choice Award](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/images/editors-choice_47x107.png) ![pur plus 11-cup pitcher](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/40/37/525195_10566_M.jpg) ![Editors' Choice Award](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/images/editors-choice_47x107.png) 81 OVERALL SCORE - Critical Contaminant Removal 9\.6 - Secondary Contaminant Removal 6\.5 - Taste 8\.6 - Maintenance and Setup 8\.3 - Operating Cost 5\.8 PROS Great contaminant removal Good taste Filter change light Removes microplastics CONS Small fill opening More costly than others over time for filters Slower to filter than some other pitchers The [Pur Plus 11-Cup Pitcher](https://www.techgearlab.com/reviews/kitchen/water-filter/pur-plus-11-cup-pitcher) stands out because it delivers filtration performance nearly on par with what we expect from under-sink reverse osmosis (RO) systems without requiring a complicated install. This would be a great choice for renters or others who want cleaner water without embarking on a DIY project. The 3-in-1 PUR PLUS filter is NSF-certified for lead, microplastics, chlorine, and more than 20 chemical and physical impurities, providing an impressive level of purification. In testing, it lived up to its certifications, removing nearly all major contaminants, including 100% of lead, arsenic, and uranium, plus over 96% of PFNA, making it one of the most capable pitcher filters we have used. It has a slim, fridge-friendly shape and a built-in filter change indicator that removes the guesswork from maintenance. SPECIFICATIONS \| \| \| \|---\|---\| \| Type \| Pitcher \| \| Estimated cost per year (40 gal/month) \| \$108 \| \| Certifications \| WQA certified to reduce lead NSF certified to reduce microplastics \| \| Estimated cost per year (160 gal/month) \| \$432 \| \| Wastewater Generated \| No \| Its downsides are relatively minor but worth considering: filtration is slower than some competing pitchers, and replacement filters cost more than the average pitcher, which can add up quickly if your household goes through a lot of water. For anyone who wants serious contaminant reduction without stepping up to an RO system, the Pur Plus 11-Cup Pitcher is the most well-rounded, high-performance choice. If you're shopping around for a pitcher-style filter, you should also take a look at the [Culligan with Zerowater 8-Cup Pitcher](https://www.techgearlab.com/reviews/kitchen/water-filter/culligan-with-zerowater-8-cup-pitcher), which did a great job with trace elements and minerals, and the [Amazon Basics 10-Cup Pitcher](https://www.techgearlab.com/reviews/kitchen/water-filter/amazon-basics-10-cup-pitcher), which provides a good value in the pitcher category. Read more: [Pur Plus 11-Cup Pitcher review](https://www.techgearlab.com/reviews/kitchen/water-filter/pur-plus-11-cup-pitcher) The Pur Plus provides some impressively clean water for a pitcher style filter. Credit: Matt Lighthart Best Reverse Osmosis SystemAPEC ROES-50 Essence Series ![Editors' Choice Award](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/images/editors-choice_47x107.png) ![apec roes-50 essence series](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/40/36/525128_4018_M.jpg) ![Editors' Choice Award](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/images/editors-choice_47x107.png) 89 OVERALL SCORE - Critical Contaminant Removal 10\.0 - Secondary Contaminant Removal 9\.8 - Taste 8\.8 - Maintenance and Setup 3\.6 - Operating Cost 8\.0 PROS Excellent contaminant removal NSF certified in multiple categories CONS Takes up significant under-sink space Wastes water Filter changes are less convenient than other RO systems The [APEC ROES-50 Essence Series](https://www.techgearlab.com/reviews/kitchen/water-filter/apec-roes-50-essence-series) is a straightforward, highly capable reverse-osmosis (RO) system that delivers some of the most impressive filtration results in water quality tests. Reverse osmosis works by pushing water through an ultrafine membrane that blocks contaminants at the molecular level, producing exceptionally clean, low-TDS water — and in water quality lab tests, the ROES-50 excelled at exactly that. It brought every critical contaminant we measured, including lead, PFNA, arsenic, and uranium, down to undetectable levels and posted nearly perfect scores for secondary contaminants like zinc and copper as well. It has a no-frills design, but this system produces excellent-tasting water thanks to its carbon polishing stage, earning high marks in blind taste tests and frequent praise from long-term users. SPECIFICATIONS \| \| \| \|---\|---\| \| Type \| Under Sink Reverse Osmosis \| \| Estimated cost per year (40 gal/month) \| \$75 \| \| Certifications \| WQA \| \| Estimated cost per year (160 gal/month) \| \$75 \| \| Wastewater Generated \| 3:1 ratio wastewater-to-filtered \| The main hesitation many have with the APEC ROES is that installing an under-sink system requires some DIY skills and some modifications to your kitchen. It also requires a more significant upfront investment; therefore, this model is best suited for those who own their home and plan to use the filter system for many years. If this is the case it is a great value. The classic five-stage layout is a bit old-school, but it's also one of the reasons this model is such a strong value: replacement filters are inexpensive, long-lasting, and easy to buy individually. That said, maintenance is more hands-on than modern RO units, and the system takes up a lot of under-sink space. It also produces a lot of wastewater, an inevitable trade-off with RO designs. Still, for shoppers prioritizing maximum contaminant removal without spending premium RO money, the ROES-50 stands out as a top performer. If you like the idea of RO-quality water but want a sleeker, easier-to-maintain setup, consider the [Waterdrop G3P600 tankless system](https://www.techgearlab.com/reviews/kitchen/water-filter/waterdrop-g3p600-reverse-osmosis-system) — it performs nearly as well with far less bulk under your sink. Read more: [APEC ROES-50 Essence Series review](https://www.techgearlab.com/reviews/kitchen/water-filter/apec-roes-50-essence-series) Though the APEC produces excellent quality water, filter changes are pretty inconvenient. Credit: Matt Lighthart Best Value PitcherAmazon Basics 10-Cup Pitcher ![Best Buy Award](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/images/best-buy_47x107.png) ![amazon basics 10-cup pitcher](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/40/37/525186_13185_M.jpg) ![Best Buy Award](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/images/best-buy_47x107.png) 73 OVERALL SCORE - Critical Contaminant Removal 6\.6 - Secondary Contaminant Removal 7\.5 - Taste 7\.0 - Maintenance and Setup 8\.5 - Operating Cost 8\.2 PROS Accepts multiple filter brands Budget friendly Spout cover CONS No flip top No PFAS or heavy metal certification Not NSF certified for many serious contaminants Leached some aluminum into our water The [Amazon Basics 10-Cup Pitcher](https://www.techgearlab.com/reviews/kitchen/water-filter/amazon-basics-10-cup-pitcher) delivers far better filtration performance than its price tag suggests, making it one of the best-value options for everyday use. It didn't come back with the strongest filtration results, but for a budget pitcher, it isn't too shabby. It removed 97.2% of lead, and 100% of uranium. It produced an impressive 84.88% cut in PFAS, even though it is not certified to remove this. For households with typical tap water concerns, those numbers put it well ahead of many inexpensive competitors. Upfront cost is slightly lower than other models, but where this pitcher really stands out is its long-term affordability. Most pitcher systems lock you into proprietary filters with fixed pricing and limited buying options. The Amazon Basics model accepts multiple filter brands, meaning you can comparison shop, switch filter types as needed, and take advantage of bulk deals. Replacement filters are inexpensive to begin with, and that flexibility can help drive yearly costs even lower if you're a savvy shopper. SPECIFICATIONS \| \| \| \|---\|---\| \| Type \| Pitcher \| \| Estimated cost per year (40 gal/month) \| \$44 \| \| Certifications \| WQA certified against NSF Standards 42, 53, and 372 \| \| Estimated cost per year (160 gal/month) \| \$176 \| \| Wastewater Generated \| No \| The Amazon Basics is not certified to remove many trace elements and minerals, and its PFAS removal was lower than we would prefer. If those are a concern for you, this might not be the best option. While it's not certified for all contaminants, its performance with common pollutants like lead makes it reliable for general day-to-day use. It's not going to match the performance of a RO system, but for casual filtration on a budget, it does a decent job. For anyone who wants clean, better-tasting water without the long-term expense, this pitcher offers unmatched cost control. If you need stronger filtration and can stretch the budget, the [Pur Plus 11-Cup](https://www.techgearlab.com/reviews/kitchen/water-filter/pur-plus-11-cup-pitcher) is the top-performing pitcher overall. And if you want the convenience of purified water straight from the tap (but no install), the [Pur Plus Vertical Faucet Filter](https://www.techgearlab.com/reviews/kitchen/water-filter/pur-plus-vertical-faucet) offers better contaminant removal. Read more: [Amazon Basics 10-Cup Pitcher review](https://www.techgearlab.com/reviews/kitchen/water-filter/amazon-basics-10-cup-pitcher) The Amazon Basics pitcher has a simple design that is compatible with filters from multiple brands, allowing you to shop around for the ones that fit your filtration needs and budget. Credit: Matt Lighthart Best Long Term ValueTravel Berkey ![Best Buy Award](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/images/best-buy_47x107.png) ![travel berkey](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/40/36/525092_8898_M.jpg) ![Best Buy Award](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/images/best-buy_47x107.png) 76 OVERALL SCORE - Critical Contaminant Removal 8\.2 - Secondary Contaminant Removal 7\.9 - Taste 6\.3 - Maintenance and Setup 6\.3 - Operating Cost 8\.8 PROS Good performance with lead and PFAS Filters last a long time Less plastic in the construction CONS Big initial investment Large size won't fit in fridge Filters require upkeep The [Travel Berkey](https://www.techgearlab.com/reviews/kitchen/water-filter/travel-berkey) is a stainless steel gravity filter that has a high 1.5-gallon capacity, and shows excellent results when it comes to critical contaminants, removing 100% of PFAS and lead, as well as effectively removing many trace elements and minerals. It comes at a high up-front cost, almost on par with reverse osmosis systems. However, with filters that last up to 4 years, you'll make up the difference in replacement costs; our team estimated annual costs to be about \$41, even at high-volume usage. This is significantly less than all other pitchers in our lineup, which makes it a great choice for large households that want a filter that can take care of most critical contaminants with minimal maintenance and low long-term costs. SPECIFICATIONS \| \| \| \|---\|---\| \| Type \| Dispenser \| \| Estimated cost per year (40 gal/month) \| \$41 \| \| Certifications \| Exceeds EPA and ANSI/NSF Standard 53 protocols \| \| Estimated cost per year (160 gal/month) \| \$41 \| \| Wastewater Generated \| No \| The filters last a long time, provided they are properly maintained. You have to remove and scrub them every 6 months or so to keep them in working condition, and our testing team noted that this is more of a pain than simply dropping in a fresh filter every month or two. We like the spigot spout, but note that the unit must be placed on a stand or ledge in order to dispense water. It is also too tall to fit in the fridge, so you have to be ok with room-temperature water. If you're looking for a large capacity and low cost filter that doesn't depend on plumbing or electric hookups, the Travel Berkey is the way to go, but if you want filtered water straight from the tap, consider an under-sink system like the [APEC ROES-50 Essence Series](https://www.techgearlab.com/reviews/kitchen/water-filter/apec-roes-50-essence-series), which is the most affordable RO system in the lineup. Read more: [Travel Berkey review](https://www.techgearlab.com/reviews/kitchen/water-filter/travel-berkey) ![the travel berkey is a big investment at first, but it is a great...](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/40/37/525201_19864_L2.jpg) 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...](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/40/37/525204_21264_L2.jpg) 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...](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/40/37/525205_11799_L2.jpg) 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...](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/40/36/525093_1312_L2.jpg) 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...](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/36/25/483995_28144_L2.jpg) This model did a fantastic job of removing chlorine from drinking water. Credit: Abriah Wofford Favorite Modern Reverse Osmosis SystemWaterdrop G3P600 Reverse Osmosis System ![Top Pick Award](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/images/top-pick_47x107.png) ![waterdrop g3p600 reverse osmosis system](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/40/36/525119_4042_M.jpg) ![Top Pick Award](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/images/top-pick_47x107.png) 89 OVERALL SCORE - Critical Contaminant Removal 10\.0 - Secondary Contaminant Removal 9\.4 - Taste 8\.8 - Maintenance and Setup 6\.4 - Operating Cost 6\.4 PROS Easier to maintain than most RO systems Great PFAS and lead removal Produces less waste water CONS More expensive than most filters Installation is a DIY home project The [Waterdrop G3P600 Reverse Osmosis System](https://www.techgearlab.com/reviews/kitchen/water-filter/waterdrop-g3p600-reverse-osmosis-system) performs just as well as our Editors' Choice RO filter in critical contaminant removal, and has an additional alkaline remineralization stage that improves flavor and adds back some essential trace minerals to your water (which accounts for its lower score in removing secondary contaminants). In addition to near-flawless filtration, this system is one of the easiest RO systems to use after initial installation. It has modern features that make it easy to use and maintain on a daily basis. The tankless design takes up much less space under your sink, and filter changes require a simple twist and pull to remove them from dedicated slots. Overall, the unit is a bit bulky, but its completely enclosed design means you don't have a bunch of tubes and wires hanging around, and it's still smaller than a storage tank. Wastewater is an inevitable byproduct of reverse osmosis systems, but the Waterdrop produces about a quarter of the amount produced by competing models. SPECIFICATIONS \| \| \| \|---\|---\| \| Type \| Under Sink Reverse Osmosis \| \| Estimated cost per year (40 gal/month) \| \$145 \| \| Certifications \| NSF/ANSI certified against Standards 42, 58, and 372 \| \| Estimated cost per year (160 gal/month) \| \$145 \| \| Wastewater Generated \| 1:2 ratio wastewater-to-filtered \| The downside is primarily the cost and the more involved installation. It is the most expensive unit in our lineup, and like all RO systems, it requires you to do some plumbing work and drill a hole into your countertop to install the separate faucet. If you choose to hire a professional to do this work, it pushes the cost up even higher, and is likely only something that you'll want to commit to if you own your home and plan to use the filter for many years. However, after this initial push, the ongoing costs are less than a pitcher, and maintenance is relatively easy compared to other under-sink filters. If you like the idea of on-demand filtration, but are renting or can't justify the high cost of the Waterdrop, then a faucet filter like the [Pur Plus Vertical Faucet](https://www.techgearlab.com/reviews/kitchen/water-filter/pur-plus-vertical-faucet) is a good alternative. Read more: [Waterdrop G3P600 RO review](https://www.techgearlab.com/reviews/kitchen/water-filter/waterdrop-g3p600-reverse-osmosis-system) Swapping filters on the Waterdrop G3P600 is as easy as a slide and twist motion. Credit: Matt Lighthart Best FaucetPur Plus Vertical Faucet ![Top Pick Award](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/images/top-pick_47x107.png) ![pur plus vertical faucet](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/40/36/525158_5687_M.jpg) ![Top Pick Award](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/images/top-pick_47x107.png) Deal Alert: on sale for 39% off at Amazon [See Deal](https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07MLSVLZH?tag=tglcom20-20&linkCode=ogi&th=1&psc=1) 73 OVERALL SCORE - Critical Contaminant Removal 7\.1 - Secondary Contaminant Removal 7\.3 - Taste 6\.5 - Maintenance and Setup 8\.4 - Operating Cost 8\.2 PROS Filtered water is available immediately Reduces lead and PFNA to undetectable levels CONS Slower flow compared to unfiltered tap Doesn't fit all faucet types Bulky The [Pur Plus Vertical Faucet](https://www.techgearlab.com/reviews/kitchen/water-filter/pur-plus-vertical-faucet) is an ideal solution for anyone looking to improve their tap water without committing to an under-sink system or dealing with constantly refilling pitchers. Faucet filters like this one deliver water immediately, avoid counter clutter, and don't require permanent plumbing changes, making them perfect for renters or small kitchens. This vertical design, while slightly bulky, fits most faucets and includes a simple one-click installation that makes setup and filter changes easy. In testing, the Pur Plus Vertical Faucet excelled at reducing lead and PFAS to near-undetectable levels while removing chlorine to improve taste. It also performed well on common heavy metals like barium, copper, zinc, and iron, ensuring a safe, clean pour for daily drinking and cooking. SPECIFICATIONS \| \| \| \|---\|---\| \| Type \| Faucet \| \| Estimated cost per year (40 gal/month) \| \$59 \| \| Certifications \| WQA and NSF certified to reduce 70 contaminants including lead, microplastics, mercury, chlorine taste and odor, DEET, and TTHM \| \| Estimated cost per year (160 gal/month) \| \$90 \| \| Wastewater Generated \| No \| It is not designed to filter fluoride, arsenic, or high uranium levels, so households with extreme contamination concerns may need a more robust system. It also requires you to remove the aerator on your faucet and replace it with an adapter, and our tester worried about thread damage on the faucet head. You can avoid this with a pitcher-style option, and the Pur Plus 11-Cup Pitcher remains our top pick for critical contaminant removal while being simple to use and maintain. Read more: [Pur Plus Vertical Faucet review](https://www.techgearlab.com/reviews/kitchen/water-filter/pur-plus-vertical-faucet) [![water filter - the pur plus is a renter-friendly option for on-demand filtered water.](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/40/36/525161_17870_L2.jpg)](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/40/36/525161_17870_XXXL.jpg) The PUR Plus is a renter-friendly option for on-demand filtered water. Credit: Matt Lighthart Best Pitcher for Secondary Contaminant RemovalCulligan with Zerowater 8-Cup Pitcher ![culligan with zerowater 8-cup pitcher](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/40/37/525212_18030_M.jpg) PROS Filters a wide range of contaminants for a pitcher Low-effort setup Fits in the fridge CONS Filters have a short lifespan Costly to maintain long-term Takes a long time to filter water The [Culligan with Zerowater 8-Cup Pitcher](https://www.techgearlab.com/reviews/kitchen/water-filter/culligan-with-zerowater-8-cup-pitcher) provides a great balance of critical and secondary contaminant removal, coming in just behind competitors like the Pur Plus 11-Cup Pitcher thanks to its superior performance with trace elements and minerals. While both pitchers excel at removing critical contaminants like lead and arsenic, this Culligan model consistently scored higher in reducing metals such as nickel, iron, and barium, making it an excellent choice for households with older plumbing or questionable municipal water. The star of the system is its 5-stage Zerowater filtration, which strips contaminants down to near-zero levels and even includes a built-in TDS meter so you can verify performance in real time. In testing, it removed 100% of lead, uranium, and mercury. Taste results were solid—clean, crisp water with chlorine and chemical notes fully removed. SPECIFICATIONS \| \| \| \|---\|---\| \| Type \| Pitcher \| \| Estimated cost per year (40 gal/month) \| \$240 \| \| Certifications \| NSF/ANSI 42, 53, and 401 \| \| Estimated cost per year (160 gal/month) \| \$960 \| \| Wastewater Generated \| No \| Where this pitcher falters is the long-term cost. Its impressive performance comes at the price of very short filter life — often only two to four weeks — and the replacements are expensive. For heavy water drinkers or families, long-term operating costs can reach several hundred dollars per year, far higher than the average pitcher. It also didn't remove as much PFAS as we would like, only reaching 87% removal. If your priority is more on trace element and mineral removal (like iron, copper or zinc), this is the one to get. If you'd prefer lower maintenance and lower cost, consider the [Amazon Basics 10-Cup](https://www.techgearlab.com/reviews/kitchen/water-filter/amazon-basics-10-cup-pitcher) or [Pur Plus 11-Cup Pitcher](https://www.techgearlab.com/reviews/kitchen/water-filter/pur-plus-11-cup-pitcher), or step up to a budget-friendly RO system like the [APEC ROES-50](https://www.techgearlab.com/reviews/kitchen/water-filter/apec-roes-50-essence-series). Read more: [Culligan with Zerowater 8-Cup Pitcher review](https://www.techgearlab.com/reviews/kitchen/water-filter/culligan-with-zerowater-8-cup-pitcher) The Culligan with Zerowater did a great job with many contaminants across the board. Credit: Matt Lighthart ## 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. #### Water Quality Lab Testing The majority of a filter's score hinges on its effectiveness in removing various contaminants and impurities. To ensure the accuracy of our ratings, we commissioned professional water-quality testing at an an [independent water-quality lab](https://mytapscore.com/). We focused on three major categories of contaminants: PFAS (forever chemicals), Critical Contaminants, and Heavy Metals. We ran two types of water samples through each filter: a highly contaminated “super” sample with elevated levels of each contaminant, and a standard tap water sample to mimic typical household conditions. We measured the concentration of each contaminant before and after filtration to determine how effectively each system reduced or eliminated these substances. This dual-sample approach allowed us to see both worst-case performance and everyday effectiveness. [![water filter - we tested filtered water for common contaminants using an...](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/40/36/525095_12863_L2.jpg)](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/40/36/525095_12863_XXXL.jpg) We tested filtered water for common contaminants using an independent lab, conducted taste tests, and measured for total dissolved solids. Credit: Matt Lighthart In addition to lab analysis, we used a Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) meter and chemical indicator strips to further assess the efficiency of each filter. For the taste metric, we assembled a panel of judges to do a blind taste test and rank each water sample. They evaluated whether the filter introduced any unpleasant taste to clean water and assessed its ability to remove undesirable flavors and odors. Finally, we evaluated each filter's user experience, taking into account factors such as installation, maintenance, operating costs, and efficiency. This comprehensive approach ensures our reviews are thorough, reliable, and beneficial to users seeking the best water filtration system for their home. To learn more about our procedures, check out our [How We Test article](https://www.techgearlab.com/topics/kitchen/best-water-filter/how-we-test). Our water filter rating scores are divided into six different metrics: - Critical Contaminant Removal (35% of overall score weighting) - Heavy Metal and Trace Element Removal (25% of overall score weighting) - Taste (20% weighting) - Setup and Use (10% weighting) - Maintenance and Setup (10% weighting) - Operating Cost (10% weighting) ## Why Trust GearLab Our testing team includes professionals in environmental research, engineering, and journalism. [Graham Faulknor](https://www.techgearlab.com/author/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 brings substantial experience to the team when designing, analyzing, and communicating our findings. [Austin Palmer](https://www.techgearlab.com/author/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. [Sam Hill](https://www.techgearlab.com/author/sam-hill) is a journalist based in the Pacific Northwest who focuses his writing on a mix of environmental and tech topics. He leverages his extensive experience in the industry to break down complex topics into clear, understandable results. ![pair this article with our buying advice article to make the best...](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/37/26/494151_23271_L2.jpg) 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.](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/37/29/494400_16255_L2.jpg) A small subset of our blind taste test. Credit: Graham Faulknor ![we built a custom test counter to conduct true side-by-side tests.](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/37/29/494396_2423_L2.jpg) 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](https://www.techgearlab.com/topics/kitchen/best-water-filter/buying-advice). Your browser does not support charts× Worse Value Better Value ### What's the Best Value? When it comes to getting the best value in a water filter, the list price of the product doesn't tell the whole story. A higher sticker often means more filtration stages, but that doesn't always translate to better results. What really matters is how well the filter actually removes contaminants. Additionally, there can be a big difference between upfront costs and ongoing costs when you factor in the cost of filter replacements. Some simple pitchers or faucet filters can outperform pricier under-sink systems while keeping your annual filter costs low. But for high-volume users, undersink models are going to offer the best value. The APEC ROES-50 Essence Series or the iSpring RCC7AK are fantastic options. The APEC ROES-50 is the overall winner here with a slightly higher score in secondary contaminant testing and cheaper long-term operating costs — it is especially cost-effective when you look at annual operating costs for those households with a need for higher volumes of filtered water. For pitchers, the Pur Plus 11-Cup Pitcher is an excellent value and top performer for 1-2 person households. It's a pretty average price in the pitcher-style filter lineup, but it competes with some RO systems when it comes to filter quality. If you don't have major health concerns when it comes to water quality, the Amazon Basics 10-Cup Pitcher is also a great little budget pitcher. It provides serviceable filtering for most households and is one of the lower-cost pitchers out there due to its ability to use filter replacements from multiple brands. See more details below in the [Operating Costs section](https://www.techgearlab.com/topics/kitchen/best-water-filter#operating-cost). Heading Into the Great Outdoors? Then it's best to leave all of these products behind. Under-the-sink or faucet-mount filters aren't suited to the backcountry, and filter pitchers are designed to improve the taste and quality of already-potable water, not to render lake or stream water safe to drink. That task is better left to a [water filter specifically designed for the backcountry](https://www.outdoorgearlab.com/topics/camping-and-hiking/best-backpacking-water-filter). To ensure the filter you are considering is up to the task you have in mind, we recommend that you always consult the manufacturer's specifications. 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 ### Contaminant Removal Growing awareness of potential contaminants in tap water and their possible health effects has made reliable water filtration more important than ever. Many people don't realize what unseen pollutants could be in their water, but filters can provide peace of mind by delivering clean, safe drinking water. To test performance, we prepared water samples with elevated levels of chlorine, iron, sulfate, lead, fluoride, and copper - all well above EPA safe limits. We then send filtered and control samples to [Tap Score for independent lab testing](https://mytapscore.com/), ensuring accurate and trustworthy results. We defined Critical Contaminant Removal as the filter's ability to eliminate high-priority pollutants like lead, PFNA, arsenic, and uranium, while Secondary Contaminant Removal covers trace elements and minerals such as copper, zinc, iron, and barium that can affect taste and safety but are generally less immediately hazardous. What contaminants you're concerned about depends on your health and the water quality where you live. [![water filter - opening the filter box to replace the internal filter on the brita...](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/40/36/525155_14728_L2.jpg)](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/40/36/525155_14728_XXXL.jpg) Opening the filter box to replace the internal filter on the Brita Elite Advanced. Credit: Matt Lighthart ### Critical Contaminant Removal We examined how well each filter handled the critical water contaminants, providing a more comprehensive understanding of which models truly deliver safer water and which ones fall short. The chart below primarily focuses on the most toxic [heavy metals that can make their way into tap water](https://www.ewg.org/news-insights/news/2025/05/harmful-heavy-metals-why-theyre-tap-water-and-how-reduce-your-exposure). % Critical Contaminant Removal \| Product \| Lead \| Arsenic \| Uranium \| \|---\|---\|---\|---\| \| APEC Essence ROES-50 \| 100 \| 100 \| 100 \| \| iSpring RCC7AK RO \| 100 \| 100 \| 100 \| \| Pur Plus Pitcher \| 100 \| 100 \| 100 \| \| Waterdrop G3P600 RO \| 100 \| 100 \| 100 \| \| Culligan Zerowater Pitcher 10-Cup \| 100 \| 100 \| 98 \| \| Travel Berkey \| 100 \| 25 \| 95 \| \| Brita Large Pitcher (10 cup) \| 94 \| 9 \| 97 \| \| Amazon Basics \| 97 \| 0 \| 97 \| \| Brita Metro \| 93 \| 3 \| 96 \| \| Brita Faucet Mount Elite \| 100 \| 3 \| 44 \| \| Pur Plus Faucet Mount \| 100 \| 9 \| 28 \| \| Brita UltraMax Elite \| 99 \| 0 \| 30 \| \| Waterdrop 10UA Under Sink \| 0 \| 0 \| 1 \| Again, the RO systems we tested came out on top, removing nearly all the contaminants we tested for in both contaminated samples and standard tap water. For pitchers, the Pur Plus 11-Cup Pitcher and Culligan with Zerowater 8-Cup Pitcher both neared RO-quality results. The Amazon Basics 10-Cup Pitcher filtered lead (97.2% removed) and uranium (100% removed) well, but it isn't NSF certified for many serious contaminants like fluoride or nitrates. The [Waterdrop 10UA Under Sink](https://www.techgearlab.com/reviews/kitchen/water-filter/waterdrop-wd-10ua-under-sink) came in toward the bottom of test results, making it the lowest-scored under-sink system. It was able to filter trace amounts of nitrate, but barely enough to mention. It only filtered out 3.8% of lead, 10% of uranium in water quality tests, and it isn't certified to reduce arsenic. ### PFAS Forever Chemical Removal PFAS are a group of “forever chemicals” that don't break down easily, and [some reports say they may be more prevalent](https://www.ewg.org/research/national-pfas-testing) than we previously thought, and they are toxic even in very small amounts. They fall into our critical contaminant category. In the water quality test results, we specifically looked at two types: PFNA, which sticks around longer, and PFBA, which is smaller and exits the body more quickly. You don't want either in your drinking water. The results of PFAS removal lab tests are charted below. % 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 \| Across the systems we tested, the reverse osmosis units — particularly the APEC ROES-50 and the other under-sink RO models — delivered the strongest PFAS removal, consistently reducing both PFNA and PFBA to near- or fully undetectable levels in both tap water and super-contaminated samples. The two faucet filters we tested — the Brita Elite Advanced Faucet and the Pur Plus Vertical Faucet also hit near-top marks here. Pitcher filters showed far more mixed results: the high-end, specialty PFAS-targeting pitchers, like the Pur Plus 11-Cup Pitcher, performed respectably, but most standard carbon pitchers struggled, often removing only a portion of PFBA and doing very little against PFNA. The [Brita Large 10-Cup Pitcher](https://www.techgearlab.com/reviews/kitchen/water-filter/brita-large-10-cup-pitcher) and [Brita Metro](https://www.techgearlab.com/reviews/kitchen/water-filter/brita-metro) were among the most disappointing performers in PFAS testing, with 68.99% and 50.78% PFNA removal rates, respectively. They removed far less PFNA and PFBA than comparable filters and fell well short of what we'd expect from trusted, everyday-use pitchers. [![water filter - the waterdrop wd-10ua under sink essential only removes chlorine and...](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/40/37/525253_15841_L2.jpg)](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/40/37/525253_15841_XXXL.jpg) The Waterdrop WD-10UA Under Sink essential only removes chlorine and light sediment. Credit: Matt Lighthart ### Secondary Contaminant Removal Certain heavy metals and trace elements get their own category because they behave differently from critical contaminants and often enter tap water through plumbing corrosion or natural mineral sources. Some of these are even nutritionally essential in small amounts, and while they're usually less urgent than issues like lead or PFNA, elevated levels of metals such as copper, zinc, or barium [can impact long-term health](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK218751/) and the taste of your water — so we test them separately to show which filters can reliably address these everyday concerns. These materials are typically more of a concern if you draw water from a private well. The results of heavy metal and trace element removal tests are charted below. Mineral and Trace Element Removal \| Product \| Iron (ppm) \| Copper (ppm) \| Barium (ppm) \| Zinc (ppm) \| \|---\|---\|---\|---\|---\| \| APEC Essence ROES-50 \| 100 \| 100 \| 100 \| 100 \| \| Brita Faucet Mount Elite \| 100 \| 100 \| 100 \| 100 \| \| Culligan Zerowater Pitcher 10-Cup \| 100 \| 100 \| 100 \| 100 \| \| iSpring RCC7AK RO \| 100 \| 100 \| 100 \| 100 \| \| Pur PlusFaucet Mount \| 100 \| 100 \| 100 \| 100 \| \| Travel Berkey \| 100 \| 100 \| 100 \| 100 \| \| Waterdrop G3P600 RO \| 100 \| 96 \| 88 \| 87 \| \| Amazon Basics \| 96 \| 93 \| 85 \| 74 \| \| Brita Large Pitcher (10 cup) \| 88 \| 85 \| 78 \| 62 \| \| Brita Metro \| 87 \| 86 \| 77 \| 62 \| \| Brita UltraMax Elite \| 99 \| 66 \| 61 \| 0 \| \| Pur Plus Pitcher \| 100 \| 100 \| 0 \| 0 \| \| Waterdrop 10UA Under Sink \| 4 \| 0 \| 0 \| 100 \| The top reverse osmosis systems dealt with heavy metals and trace elements well across the board, reducing nearly all secondary contaminants to zero in tests of super-contaminated and tap water samples. The Culligan with Zerowater 8-Cup Pitcher also performed well here, reliably knocking out metals like copper, zinc, iron, and barium; while we did see minor copper and zinc leaching in the lab, the amounts were extremely small and stayed well below EPA health guidelines. [![water filter - compared to other reverse osmosis systems, the waterdrop g3p600...](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/40/37/525235_5358_L2.jpg)](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/40/37/525235_5358_XXXL.jpg) Compared to other reverse osmosis systems, the Waterdrop G3P600 takes up much less cabinet space. Credit: Matt Lighthart The [Travel Berkey](https://www.techgearlab.com/reviews/kitchen/water-filter/travel-berkey) delivered solid mid-tier results, effectively removing metals like barium, copper, strontium, nickel, zinc, and iron, with decent performance on vanadium, lithium, and boron; while it showed small amounts of aluminum, cobalt, and silver leaching, levels stayed safe, and only selenium and molybdenum proved unreliable. The Amazon Basics 10-Cup Pitcher was right behind, but there were some issues with the leaching of aluminum and very small amounts of silver. Again, the Waterdrop WD-10UA Under Sink came in last place. It reliably removed 100% of zinc from the contaminated samples (its primary certified target), but most other metals, like cobalt and chromium, passed through largely unchanged. It didn't introduce any noticeable leaching, so at least it isn't adding anything unwanted to your water. That's a low bar, though. The [Brita Ultramax Dispenser with Elite Filter](https://www.techgearlab.com/reviews/kitchen/water-filter/brita-ultramax-dispenser-with-elite-filter) was also disappointing in this category, showing inconsistent removal of several metals and introducing some aluminum during testing. [![water filter - brita\&\#039;s elite filters used in the brita ultramax dispenser last...](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/40/36/525090_4489_L2.jpg)](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/40/36/525090_4489_XXXL.jpg) Brita's Elite filters used in the Brita Ultramax Dispenser last about three times as long as standard filters from Brita. Credit: Matt Lighthart ### Taste Filtered water can make a noticeable difference in how your tap water tastes, especially if it carries metallic or chemical notes. Enjoying crisp, clean-tasting water straight from your faucet or pitcher not only improves the everyday experience but can also encourage you to stay hydrated and cut down on bottled water use. Taste is subjective, though; some people like a hint of minerals, while others prefer a completely neutral flavor. We aimed to capture overall impressions across a range of preferences. For taste tests, we ran each filter with water from a garden hose to standardize the source, then conducted a blind taste test with five evaluators. Each tester sampled filtered water from every unit alongside unfiltered tap and garden hose water, ranking the results from best to worst to give us a clear sense of relative taste performance. When we weren't able to run water samples through taste tests, we crowdsourced opinions by researching online reviews to glean accurate notes about each model through user feedback. Your browser does not support charts× Overall, users consistently reported that filtered water tasted fresher across all models we tested, though a few naysayers occasionally noted plastic or flat flavors. Among our top performers, the APEC ROES-50 Essence Series, Waterdrop G3P600 Reverse Osmosis System, and Pur Plus 11-Cup Pitcher received the highest marks for crisp, clean taste. Models with slightly lower scores, namely the Culligan with Zerowater 8-Cup Pitcher, Travel Berkey, and Waterdrop WD-10UA Under Sink, still delivered noticeably improved water compared to unfiltered tap, even if minor off-flavors were reported by some users. [![water filter - we enlisted other members of our team to do blind taste tests.](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/40/37/525243_30827_L2.jpg)](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/40/37/525243_30827_XXXL.jpg) We enlisted other members of our team to do blind taste tests. Credit: Matt Lighthart ### Maintenance and Setup We often take running water for granted, and a great water filter fits seamlessly into that everyday routine. However, setup, daily use, and ongoing upkeep can vary a lot from model to model. Our testing team dives in, handling installation and daily operation to see how each unit performs in real-world use. Some filters, like under-sink RO systems, require a bit of DIY know-how to install, while pitchers are ready to go after a quick rinse. Which model fits best really comes down to how much time and effort you're willing to put into setup and upkeep. Your browser does not support charts× The easiest water filters to use are, obviously, the pitcher-style filters. After a quick initial clean, all you need to do is drop in a filter and fill it up with water to have cleaner, tastier water at your disposal. These models are designed to be easy to clean regularly and during filter replacements. Some are even dishwasher safe. You won't need to check any instructions here — these are as “plug and play” as they come. The top performers in ease of use all follow the 'fill-and-go' philosophy. The Brita Ultramax Dispenser with Elite Filter is especially convenient, with a large capacity that means fewer refills. The Amazon Basics 10-Cup Pitcher and Brita Metro are compact, simple, and virtually maintenance-free, making them perfect for quick daily use. The Culligan with Zerowater 8-Cup Pitcher also shines here, with a straightforward drop-in filter and intuitive design that keeps clean water flowing with minimal effort. Some pitchers do filter at different speeds, though, so take individual reviews into account if you don't want to sacrifice speed. ![the brita ultramax dispenser is pretty easy to fill, but it can get...](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/40/36/525076_12553_L2.jpg) The Brita Ultramax Dispenser is pretty easy to fill, but it can get pretty heavy when it's full. Credit: Matt Lighthart ![the amazon basics 10-cup pitcher easily fits in the fridge, although...](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/40/36/525096_24581_L2.jpg) The Amazon Basics 10-Cup Pitcher easily fits in the fridge, although it might be too wide to sit in a door shelf. Credit: Matt Lighthart ![the small size of the brita metro makes it easy to use on a daily...](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/40/36/525084_8381_L2.jpg) The small size of the Brita Metro makes it easy to use on a daily basis, but it's best suited to smaller households of one or two people. Credit: Matt Lighthart ![unfortunately, replacement filters for this pitcher are quite...](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/40/36/525101_8556_L2.jpg) Unfortunately, replacement filters for this pitcher are quite pricey, and they need to be changed more often than any other system we tested. Credit: Matt Lighthart Both of the faucet models were surprisingly easy to set up as well. The Pur Plus Vertical Faucet snaps onto most standard taps and delivers filtered water instantly. They require a filter change every few months, which we found easy to do, and daily use is effortless, making them a hassle-free alternative to pitchers. The Pur Plus is easily snapped onto many kitchen faucets. Credit: Matt Lighthart All of the RO systems received much lower scores in the category, not because they're a complete hassle, but because it takes a little more know-how to install them. Most require you to renovate (and abandon) under-sink spaces and some basic plumbing access. Once set up, they run quietly and efficiently, but the initial setup is more involved than pitchers or faucet models. The Waterdrop G3P600 Reverse Osmosis System is specifically designed to navigate those issues, though, with a more compact design and streamlined installation that reduces the hassle and space concerns typical of traditional RO setups. It's no water pitcher, but it's a bit simpler. The Waterdrop G3P600 Reverse Osmosis System has a pretty fast flow rate, which is impressive for an on-demand filter system. Credit: Matt Lighthart ### Operating Cost Operating costs are an important part of the equation. While filtered water tastes better and is safer, some systems require frequent, pricey replacement filters or produce extra wastewater, which can add up over time. It's worth factoring in both filter longevity and the amount of water wasted during the process when deciding which model offers the best long-term value. We divide annual operating costs into two key categories: costs for filtering 40 gallons a month vs. 160 gallons per month. Why? We want to capture the difference in value between households with low-volume needs (40 gallons) and higher-volume needs (160 gallons). At around 40 gallons per month, pitcher-style filters sit solidly in the middle of the value spectrum, thanks to zero installation costs and no wasted water. Your browser does not support charts× Once usage ramps up to 160 gallons per month, the picture changes. Frequent filter replacements make most pitchers less cost-effective at higher volumes, and for larger households or heavy water use, under-sink systems become the more economical choice. Your browser does not support charts× Those Filter Replacement Costs Add Up\! The Culligan with Zerowater 8-Cup Pitcher offers good water quality performance; however, the frequent need for filter replacements significantly increases annual operating costs. You'll want to consider annual costs in your purchase decision to hit the right balance of water quality, convenience, and cost for your family. Reverse osmosis systems cost a lot more upfront than pitchers or faucet filters, and take more effort to install. But, for households that frequently need filtered water, their reasonable annual operating costs and higher-volume output may justify the higher initial cost. The APEC ROES-50 Essence Series emerged as the most affordable reverse osmosis system, with estimated annual filter costs of about \$75, regardless of water usage. The iSpring RCC7AK followed at roughly \$95 per year, slightly higher because it includes an extra filter in the rotation. The Waterdrop G3P600 Reverse Osmosis System was the priciest by far, with annual costs hitting around \$145, significantly more than its RO counterparts. Pre-filters can last 6-12 months, depending on your water quality, so you don't have to worry about swapping them out too often. Credit: Matt Lighthart Every filter change adds up over time, and the difference between models can be striking. Among pitchers, the Amazon Basics 10-Cup Pitcher came out as the most affordable, with estimated annual costs of just \$44 at 40 gallons per month. On the other end, the Culligan with Zerowater 8-Cup Pitcher was a major outlier, costing a whopping \$240 for the same monthly usage. The drop-in filters are super easy to change and don't cost too much to replace, especially when you have the option to shop around. Credit: Matt Lighthart For faucet filters, the Pur Plus Vertical Faucet and Brita Elite Advanced Faucet show a notable annual cost difference: at 40 gallons per month, annual expenses are \$41 versus \$78, respectively. That gap widens even further with heavier use—at 160 gallons per month, the difference jumps to \$90 versus \$288. Bottom line: Reverse Osmosis systems generally make more sense for high-volume use since they're more economical if your needs go beyond just drinking water and can efficiently provide filtered water for cooking, coffee, and other household needs. Pitchers and faucet filters remain convenient and easy for light use and drinking water, but their costs can escalate quickly if you rely on them too heavily. #### Wastewater with Reverse Osmosis Another factor to keep in mind with reverse osmosis systems is wastewater. RO filters produce a surprising amount of wastewater as part of the filtration process as they need to flush contaminants off the membrane. This wastewater is plumbed into your kitchen sink drain pipe (although some people come up with creative solutions to plumb it into a rain barrel for watering plants). While not a deal-breaker for most people interested in cleaner water, this additional water used is a factor to be aware of and consider. For example, as shown in the chart below, the APEC ROES-50 Essence Series generates about 3 gallons of wastewater for every 1 gallon of filtered water and the iSpring RCC7AK runs at a 2:1 ratio. The Waterdrop G3P600 produces the least amount of wastewater, roughly 1/2 gallon of wastewater per each 1 gallon filtered. Your browser does not support charts× [![water filter - the ispring rcc7ak showed good results in contaminant removal...](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/40/36/525140_26754_L2.jpg)](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/40/36/525140_26754_XXXL.jpg) The iSpring RCC7AK showed good results in contaminant removal testing, but it doesn't stand out compared to the other reverse osmosis systems in our lineup. Credit: Matt Lighthart ## How to Pick A Water Filter We've put together four key considerations, including the type of filtration system, available space, and budget, to help you find the best water filtration for your home. ### All the standards, certifications, and labels attached to water filters can be confusing. NSF/ANSI standards are outlined by the National Sanitation Foundation and the American National Standards Institute. A full list can be [found here](https://www.nsf.org/consumer-resources/articles/standards-water-treatment-systems), but in short, the one you want to look for most of the time is NSF/ANSI 53, which covers filters that are meant to handle contaminants with known health effects, like lead and PFAS. The [NSF guide to Contaminant Reduction Claims](https://www.nsf.org/consumer-resources/articles/contaminant-reduction-claims-guide) by filter can be found here. Other acronyms to know are WQA (Water Quality Association) and IAPMO (International Association of Plumbing & Mechanical Officials), which are both organizations that can grant certifications to filters that pass NSF standards. ### While most people are accustomed to pitcher-style water filters, other options also exist, such as under-the-sink, faucet-mounted, and reverse osmosis systems. Deciding on the appropriate filtration system comes down to the level of contaminants in your water, your budget, and the level of setup needed. If you know your water has higher levels of contaminants and you need to cover a wide range of filtration, the upfront cost of a reverse osmosis system can be worth it. On the other hand, if you're more or less hoping to get cleaner, odor-free water, then a pitcher is your best bet. ### Depending on your household size, you may opt for larger capacity systems. While the simplicity and ease of use of a pitcher is great, larger households may find themselves refilling too often, especially if you use your filtered water for everything from drinking to boiling pasta and watering your houseplants. For those who consume more water, an under-the-sink option may work best for your needs. Also, consider how much free space you have. Under-the-sink options help keep counter space free, but you will have to clear a place to potentially store a tank along with the filters. ### Periodic maintenance of your water filter system is key to maintaining proper filtration. Some systems require changing filters after only two months, while others can run the same filter for a year (or longer, depending on usage). A simple pitcher-style system typically only needs one filter type to be replaced, while more complex filtration systems, such as reverse osmosis filters, require different replacements depending on the filter stage. For those undecided on a filtration system, consider whether the extra maintenance costs and time are worth it for the extra filtration capabilities. ### Installation of under-the-sink systems involves a variety of different parts and often requires cutting pipe and drilling for installation of the faucet. If you feel comfortable with DIY projects, installing a filtration system can be fairly straightforward. However, if you're renting, have limited space under your sink, or are not keen on self-installation, it's worth considering options that can be placed on the counter. [![water filter - spigot dispensers like the one found on the brita ultramax can be...](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/40/37/525191_19943_L2.jpg)](https://djd1xqjx2kdnv.cloudfront.net/photos/40/37/525191_19943_XXXL.jpg) Spigot dispensers like the one found on the Brita Ultramax can be convenient than pitcher pours. Credit: Matt Lighthart ## Conclusion Here at GearLab, we aim to provide you with firsthand knowledge from our testing experience, so you can purchase the best products that suit your needs and budget. For water filters, we looked closely at the subtle nuances that set pitchers, faucet models, and under-the-sink versions apart from one another. Whether you are looking to improve the taste of city water or want the perfect-tasting refreshment for a wedding or backyard BBQ, we hope you now have the knowledge to buy the perfect water filter for you. At GearLab, we cover in-depth reviews on a variety of products, spanning goods from [air purifiers](https://www.techgearlab.com/topics/health-fitness/best-air-purifier) to [blood pressure monitors](https://www.techgearlab.com/topics/health-fitness/best-blood-pressure-monitor). If you're looking for some new home or kitchen appliances, we've got testing-backed opinions on the [top-rated air fryers](https://www.techgearlab.com/topics/kitchen/best-air-fryer) and [vacuum cleaners](https://www.techgearlab.com/topics/floor-cleaning/best-vacuum-cleaner). ## Appendix For those who are interested, the detailed results of the [Independent Water Quality Lab](https://mytapscore.com/) testing we conducted are listed in the tables below: Critical Contaminant Results \| \| Test \| Lead Reduction \| Lead (ppm) \| Arsenic Reduction \| Arsenic (ppm) \| Uranium Reduction \| Uranium (ppm) \| Nitrate Reduction \| Nitrate as N (ppm) \| \|---\|---\|---\|---\|---\|---\|---\|---\|---\|---\| \| Supply (baseline) \| \- \| \- \| 0\.26 \| \- \| 0\.00265 \| \- \| 0\.00376 \| \- \| 2\.46 \| \| Health Guideline Limit (HGL) \| \- \| \- \| 0 \| \- \| 0 \| \- \| 0 \| \- \| 10 \| \| EPA Limit \| \- \| \- \| 0 \| \- \| 0\.01 \| \- \| 0\.03 \| \- \| 10 \| \| APEC Essence ROES-50 \| Tap Score Essential City Water Test \| 100% \| 0 \| 100% \| 0 \| 100% \| 0 \| \- \| \- \| \| iSpring RCC7AK RO \| Tap Score Essential City Water Test \| 100% \| 0 \| 100% \| 0 \| 100% \| 0 \| \- \| \- \| \| Waterdrop G3P600 RO \| Tap Score Essential City Water Test \| 100% \| 0 \| 100% \| 0 \| 100% \| 0 \| \- \| \- \| \| Pur Plus \| Tap Score Essential City Water Test \| 100% \| 0 \| 100% \| 0 \| 100% \| 0 \| 92% \| 0\.2 \| \| Culligan Zerowater Pitcher 10-Cup \| Tap Score Essential City Water Test \| 100% \| 0 \| 100% \| 0 \| 98% \| 0\.00008 \| 100% \| 0 \| \| Travel Berkey \| Tap Score Essential City Water Test \| 100% \| 0 \| 25% \| 0\.00198 \| 95% \| 0\.00017 \| 20% \| 1\.98 \| \| PUR PLUS Faucet Mount \| Tap Score Essential City Water Test \| 100% \| 0 \| 9% \| 0\.0024 \| 28% \| 0\.0027 \| 37% \| 1\.54 \| \| Brita Faucet Mount Elite \| Tap Score Essential City Water Test \| 100% \| 0 \| 3% \| 0\.00256 \| 44% \| 0\.00212 \| 33% \| 1\.66 \| \| Brita UltraMax Elite \| Tap Score Essential City Water Test \| 99% \| 0\.0019 \| 0% \| 0\.00266 \| 30% \| 0\.00262 \| 0% \| 2\.47 \| \| Amazon Basics \| Tap Score Essential City Water Test \| 97% \| 0\.0072 \| Added 13% \| 0\.00299 \| 97% \| 0\.00011 \| 64% \| 0\.88 \| \| Brita Large Pitcher (10 cup) \| Tap Score Essential City Water Test \| 94% \| 0\.016 \| 9% \| 0\.0024 \| 97% \| 0\.00013 \| 70% \| 0\.74 \| \| Brita Metro \| Tap Score Essential City Water Test \| 93% \| 0\.017 \| 3% \| 0\.00258 \| 96% \| 0\.00015 \| 61% \| 0\.95 \| \| Waterdrop 10UA Under Sink \| Tap Score Essential City Water Test \| 0% \| 0\.27 \| 0% \| 0\.00264 \| 1% \| 0\.00374 \| \- \| \- \| Metals and Trace Elements and % Removal \| \| Test \| Barium Removed \| Barium (ppm) \| Copper (Extreme) Removed \| Copper Extreme (ppm) \| Copper (Normal) Removed \| Copper Normal (ppm) \| Vanadium Removed \| Vanadium - Tap Water (ppm) \| Iron Removed \| Iron (ppm) \| Strontium Removed \| Strontium (ppm) \| Zinc Removed \| Zinc (ppm) \| \|---\|---\|---\|---\|---\|---\|---\|---\|---\|---\|---\|---\|---\|---\|---\|---\| \| Supply (baseline) \| \- \| \- \| 0\.012 \| \- \| 8 \| \- \| 0\.014 \| \- \| 0\.00794 \| \- \| 4\.5 \| \- \| 0\.31 \| \- \| 0\.039 \| \| Health Guideline Limit (HGL) \| \- \| \- \| 2 \| \- \| 0\.3 \| \- \| 0\.3 \| \- \| 0\.005 \| \- \| 4 \| \- \| 3 \| \- \| 2 \| \| EPA Limit \| \- \| \- \| 2 \| \- \| 1\.3 \| \- \| 1\.3 \| \- \| 0\.23 \| \- \| 0\.3 (SMCL) \| \- \| 4 (SMCL) \| \- \| 5 \| \| Amazon Basics \| Tap Score Essential City Water Test \| 85% \| 0\.0018 \| 93% \| 0\.56 \| 95% \| 0\.00065 \| 70% \| 0\.00242 \| 96% \| 0\.19 \| 97% \| 0\.01 \| 74% \| 0\.01 \| \| APEC Essence ROES-50 \| Tap Score Essential City Water Test \| 100% \| 0 \| 100% \| 0 \| \- \| \- \| \- \| \- \| 100% \| 0 \| \- \| \- \| 100% \| 0 \| \| Brita Faucet Mount Elite \| Tap Score Essential City Water Test \| 100% \| 0 \| 100% \| 0 \| 100% \| 0 \| 42% \| 0\.00461 \| 100% \| 0 \| 97% \| 0\.01 \| 100% \| 0 \| \| Brita Large Pitcher (10 cup) \| Tap Score Essential City Water Test \| 78% \| 0\.0026 \| 85% \| 1\.2 \| 95% \| 0\.00065 \| 74% \| 0\.00205 \| 88% \| 0\.53 \| 90% \| 0\.03 \| 62% \| 0\.015 \| \| Brita Metro \| Tap Score Essential City Water Test \| 77% \| 0\.0028 \| 86% \| 1\.1 \| 100% \| 0 \| 64% \| 0\.00282 \| 87% \| 0\.6 \| 90% \| 0\.03 \| 62% \| 0\.015 \| \| Brita UltraMax Elite \| Tap Score Essential City Water Test \| 61% \| 0\.0047 \| 66% \| 2\.7 \| 95% \| 0\.00065 \| 49% \| 0\.00405 \| 99% \| 0\.066 \| 35% \| 0\.2 \| Added 5% \| 0\.041 \| \| Culligan Zerowater Pitcher 10-Cup \| Tap Score Essential City Water Test \| 100% \| 0 \| 100% \| 0 \| Added 114% \| 0\.03 \| 100% \| 0 \| 100% \| 0 \| 100% \| 0 \| 100% \| 0 \| \| iSpring RCC7AK RO \| Tap Score Essential City Water Test \| 100% \| 0 \| 100% \| 0 \| \- \| \- \| \- \| \- \| 100% \| 0 \| \- \| \- \| 100% \| 0 \| \| Pur Plus \| Tap Score Essential City Water Test \| Added 1150 - 1983% \| 0\.25 \| 100% \| 0 \| 100% \| 0 \| 100% \| 0 \| 100% \| 0 \| 97% \| 0\.01 \| Added 151% \| 0\.098 \| \| PUR PLUS Faucet Mount \| Tap Score Essential City Water Test \| 100% \| 0 \| 100% \| 0 \| 100% \| 0 \| 53% \| 0\.00376 \| 100% \| 0 \| 77% \| 0\.07 \| 100% \| 0 \| \| Travel Berkey \| Tap Score Essential City Water Test \| 100% \| 0 \| 100% \| 0 \| 93% \| 0\.00096 \| 84% \| 0\.00128 \| 100% \| 0 \| 100% \| 0 \| 100% \| 0 \| \| Waterdrop 10UA Under Sink \| Tap Score Essential City Water Test \| Added 8% \| 0\.013 \| Added 2% \| 8\.2 \| 0% \| 0\.014 \| \- \| \- \| 4% \| 4\.3 \| \- \| \- \| 100% \| 0 \| \| Waterdrop G3P600 RO \| Tap Score Essential City Water Test \| 88% \| 0\.0014 \| 96% \| 0\.29 \| \- \| \- \| \- \| \- \| 100% \| 0\.013 \| \- \| \- \| 87% \| 0\.0049 \|
Shard	38 (laksa)
Root Hash	5555427083778775638
Unparsed URL	com,techgearlab!www,/topics/kitchen/best-water-filter s443