Materials · PLA and PETG · every number attributed

PLA and PETG materials for 3D printing

Four sets of numbers sit behind this page. Three of them were published by companies that sell filament. The fourth was not. Where they disagree we print both readings and name who said what, because a data sheet is a source with an interest in the answer and you are entitled to know which is which.

We print to your drawing, and the numbers that decide how your part behaves belong to your part: wall count, infill, layer height and the direction it went through the machine. What follows is the background that helps you choose.

Who is telling you this

Three interested parties, and one with nothing to sell.

A manufacturer's number is worth having the moment the manufacturer names the test standard behind it. It is still not a verdict, and all three of them say as much in their own small print.

PartyWhat they publish Their own disclaimer
Manufacturer Bambu Lab A per product technical data sheet with a named standard against nearly every value: density to ISO 1183, glass transition by DSC, Vicat to ISO 306, heat deflection to ISO 75, tensile to ISO 527, bending to ISO 178, Charpy impact to ISO 179. Values are given separately for the X-Y plane and the Z axis, and the specimen printing conditions are published with them.1 Verbatim on every sheet: the performance values are tested by standard samples at Bambu Lab, and the values are for design reference and comparison only. The coupons are 100 percent infill and most were annealed before testing.
Manufacturer Anycubic Twelve technical data sheets, each citing ISO 527, ISO 178, ISO 179, ISO 75-2, ISO 306, ISO 11357-1 and ISO 1183. Specimens are printed rather than moulded, which makes them more relevant to a printed part. Nineteen product pages carry a second, standardless dataset that disagrees with the sheets.2 Verbatim on page three of every sheet: the values shown in this chart are for comparison purposes only and are not appropriate for design specifications or quality assurance.
Manufacturer Creality No technical data sheet for any PLA or PETG filament, and no safety data sheet reachable on any Creality property. The only per product numbers are the six fields printed on the spool label. Everything else is a generic polymer figure in a blog article.3 Its own footnote on the one table it calls a specification: the parameter settings are only used for Creality's filaments. Its material guides tell the reader to check a data sheet that does not exist.
Independent The literature Binding regulation, agency guidance from NIOSH, the US EPA and the WHO, and peer reviewed measurement. Nothing to sell, and no reason to be kind to either plastic. Sample sizes are small in places, and several of these questions have been asked once, which the entries here say alongside the figure.

The number most people need

Heat, from four sources at once.

Heat deflection is measured under load. It is the lower number and the one worth knowing, because a real object is usually holding something up. Glass transition is the higher number, and it is the one that turns up in marketing.

SourcePLAPETG Method named
Heat deflection under load
Bambu Lab 53 to 62 C, sixteen products 69 to 74 C, four products ISO 75 at 0.45 MPa
Anycubic 50 to 60 C, nine products 69 C plain, 67 C carbon filled ISO 75-2 at 0.45 MPa. The 1.8 MPa figure is unmeasured on every sheet
Creality Not published for any product, in any document None
Independent4 about 55 C unannealed about 70 C Approximate. Varies with grade and crystallinity
Glass transition
Bambu Lab 52 to 63 C66 to 70 C DSC at 10 C per minute
Anycubic 54.2 to 64 C74.1 C ISO 11357-1 at 10 C per minute
Creality5 approximately 60 Capproximately 80 C None. A blog table of generic polymer figures, no product named
Independent about 55 to 65 Cabout 80 to 85 C Approximate. Not a measurement of any product

Here is the cautious reading of the rows above, and it is what we tell everybody. PLA softens from about 55 C, so keep it out of parked cars, off summer windowsills and away from a hob. PETG holds shape to roughly 70 C, which covers a warm room and a conservatory shelf, and does not cover hot water, a dishwasher or an oven. Both deform in a steam autoclave at 121 C, which has been measured directly6.

Where the sources part company

Nine arguments, printed rather than averaged.

Somebody claimed a number. Somebody else went and measured it. These are the nine places where those two came back with different answers, and not one of them gets better by splitting the difference, so we do not.

How warm PETG can get

The manufacturer

Creality prints approximately 80 C as PETG's glass transition, in a table headed 3D Printing Filament Heat Resistance Comparison, with no test method and no product named. Its plain language version is that PETG holds shape up to around 80 C.

The measurement

Bambu Lab's own DSC scans give 66 to 70 C across four PETG products. Anycubic's ISO 11357-1 scan gives 74.1 C. Both name a standard. Both are lower than the marketed figure.

The two companies that actually ran the test came back with the lower numbers. The one with no laboratory came back with the cheerful one. We plan around the measured figures.

Whether PETG is a low emission material

The manufacturer, twice

Bambu Lab's PETG Basic store page says the product is certified to UL GREENGUARD under UL 2904 and that its particles and volatile organic compounds measure below the levels of an average kitchen, living room or office7. Bambu Lab's own air filtration guide puts PETG in the high emissions bucket, giving about one month of carbon cartridge life against about three months for PLA at eight hours of printing a day8.

The measurement

Wojnowski and colleagues found PETG volatile organic compound emission more than an order of magnitude lower than ABS9. Bernatikova and colleagues measured a total particle count of 3.88 x 10^10 for PETG against 6.01 x 10^9 for a styrene free co-polyester, and identified styrene in the PETG emissions despite PETG being marketed as styrene free10.

One company says both things on two of its own web properties, and the independent evidence behind the question is three or four studies deep. Nobody can put a confident number on PETG emissions yet, in either direction. So we print both readings and add none of our own.

Whether PLA breaks down

The manufacturer

Anycubic product pages describe PLA as a biodegradable and eco-friendly material, and its own filament as made from renewable plant based materials, eco-friendly and user-safe11. The word industrial does not appear.

The measurement

Nothing biodegraded after 31 weeks in home composting conditions12. 60 percent of items certified home compostable failed to fully disintegrate in a UK citizen science trial13. PLA did not degrade in seawater over 428 days, exactly like polypropylene and PET14, and it fragments into microplastic faster than petroleum based plastics do15.

The measurements point the other way from the marketing, and the error runs in the direction nobody expects. The European Commission has already said generic claims of this kind should not be made, and that a biodegradable claim has to name the receiving environment and the timeframe16, and Directive (EU) 2024/825 makes generic environmental claims unlawful from 27 September 202617. We do not use the words.

Whether PETG is an outdoor material

The manufacturer, three ways

Anycubic: excellent water and weather resistance for all outdoor applications. Creality on one page: strong resistance to impact, wear and UV exposure. Creality on another: for long term outdoor use, verify the exact product's weathering claims and service temperature18.

The measurement

No manufacturer cites any weathering standard for any PLA or PETG product. No ISO 4892, no ASTM G154, no accelerated hours, no colour retention figure. PLA degrades measurably under up to 2000 hours of ultraviolet B with controlled humidity, by chain scission confirmed with infrared spectroscopy19. PETG is better and still not ultraviolet stable; the recognised outdoor extrusion material is ASA.

The most careful page Creality wrote sends you to check a data sheet Creality does not publish. So we make no outdoor claim for either material. Sunlight is the problem and rain is not: a covered porch is fine, a south facing wall for three years is not.

Whether printing is harmless to be near

The manufacturer

Anycubic: user-safe, low odour, zero irritating emissions. Creality's odour table for PLA: generally safe, minimal irritation, suitable for indoor printing. Creality's ventilation guide, on the same domain: a printer can release ultrafine particles and volatile organic compounds, and containment is not the same as removal20. Bambu Lab, on its own certified PLA: designed to print with the filtration system off by default21.

The measurement

Ultrafine particle emission rates of roughly 10^8 to 10^11 particles per minute across printer and filament combinations22. A US EPA meta-analysis of sixteen studies gives an overall mean of 65,482 particles per cm3 for PLA and states that PLA may present a risk of exposure to respirable particles23. 216 individual volatile organic compounds identified, with filament colour among the variables that changed emissions24.

Here the institutions win, and they are unanimous. NIOSH asks for HEPA filtered local exhaust ventilation, gas and vapour filters where volatile organic compounds are a concern, printing away from other work, and no eating or drinking in the area25. Scientists at the German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment, reviewing fifty studies, recommend a separated and ventilated room and the lowest possible print temperature26. This is a hazard to us and not to you holding the finished piece, which is exactly why it is cheap for us to be honest about it, and why we run enclosed machines with particle and carbon filtration in a dedicated room. An enclosure on its own was measured removing 99.7 percent of particles and only 53.2 percent of total organic chemicals27. The enclosure that ships with a printer is a particle control, not a vapour one. One thing to hold on to when you see printing particle counts set against air quality figures: they are not like for like. WHO calls an ambient particle number concentration above 10,000 per cm3 high, over a 24 hour mean, and declined to set a health based guideline for ultrafine particles at all32. Printing measurements are near field and taken while the machine runs, so the two numbers answer two different questions.

What the plastics survive

The manufacturer

Bambu Lab publishes one chemical resistance block, word for word identical on every PLA and PETG sheet in the range: not resistant to acid, not resistant to alkali, not resistant to some organic solvents, resistant to most kinds of oil and grease. No method is named and nothing varies by product.

The measurement

Eight filaments immersed for seven days and then tested to ASTM D638 and ASTM D256. PETG retained more than 90 percent of its strength in mildly corrosive environments such as alcohols and weak acids28. PLA lost more than 70 percent of its tensile strength in acetone and its impact resistance fell below 20 percent.

The study is finer grained than the blanket sentence, and it lands kinder on PETG and harder on PLA. Neither side is wrong. One describes a polymer family, the other describes seven days in a named liquid. PLA also hydrolyses in water and does it faster when warm, which is why it is the wrong choice for anything that stays wet.

Which plastic is stronger

The manufacturer, against itself

Bambu Lab's wiki material guide ranks tensile strength PLA three stars out of five and PETG two out of five29.

The same manufacturer's data

Its own data sheets give PETG Basic 51 MPa and PLA Basic 35 MPa in the X-Y plane, which is the reverse ordering by a wide margin.

This one is not a vendor against the literature. It is a vendor against its own laboratory, and the laboratory wins. We publish neither ranking. A star rating is not a measurement.

One product, two datasets

The product page

Anycubic's PLA Matte page gives a tensile strength of 38 MPa, with no standard named, alongside eleven other fields that disagree with the sheet.

The data sheet

Anycubic's PLA Matte technical data sheet gives 23 MPa to ISO 527 for the same product. The page figure is 65 percent higher.

Only one of those two numbers names a standard, and it is the smaller one. That is why a headline strength figure never gets lifted off a product page here, ours or anybody else's.

The dishwasher

The manufacturers

Creality: do not assume dishwasher compatibility, and repeated hot washing can damage printed surfaces30. Bambu Lab does not use the word anywhere in its PLA or PETG range. Anycubic never raises the question.

The one study of the actual question

Printed PETG and a compostable PLA blend, hand wash against dishwasher. Dishwashing reduced bacterial load significantly better than hand washing, and the dishwasher cycles caused a significant impact on the mechanical properties and the heat deflection temperature of both materials31.

The finding has two halves and only one of them gets quoted. The wash that cleans the part is the wash that wrecks it. Hand wash in cool water with mild detergent, rinse, do not soak.

The thing that decides your part

Orientation beats material.

A printed object is stacked lines of molten plastic. It is strong across a layer and weaker between layers, and when it fails it splits along a layer line, like a log along the grain. Two manufacturers publish the Z axis figures that prove it, on their own coupons.

Source and productTensile, in layer Tensile, between layersImpact, in layer Impact, between layers
Bambu Lab PLA Basic 35 MPa31 MPa 26.6 kJ/m213.8 kJ/m2
Bambu Lab PETG Basic 51 MPa35 MPa 34.2 kJ/m210.5 kJ/m2
Anycubic PLA Basic 48 MPa28 MPa 22 kJ/m2Not measured on any Anycubic product
Anycubic PETG 52 MPa31 MPa 45 kJ/m2Not measured
Creality any product Nothing published in any orientation, for any product

Look at the last two columns. Between layers, impact resistance is roughly half the in layer figure for Bambu Lab's PLA and roughly a third of it for its PETG, measured on the manufacturer's own coupons. That is the entire case for choosing orientation on purpose, and it is why we tell you which way your part went through the machine. These are also 100 percent infill specimens, and your part is not solid. Inside the walls there is a lattice, which is what keeps it light, and it is also why a crack that reaches the inside lets liquid into a space nobody can drain or clean. Bambu Lab is the only one of the three publishing comparable Z axis data, which is the other half of the story and the reason the last two columns carry blanks.

Reading the three brands against themselves

Forty-nine contradictions, inside their own documents.

One tidy column per material was the obvious thing to publish, and it would have been a fiction. The three brands do not agree with each other, and in more places they do not agree with themselves. Across their published material there are eight internal contradictions at Creality, sixteen at Bambu Lab and twenty-five at Anycubic.

Even where they are careful the numbers are not comparable. Anycubic labels its impact row Izod while citing ISO 179, which is the Charpy standard, on all twelve of its data sheets. Bambu Lab tests solid annealed blocks, which no real print is. Creality's most quotable figures live in a blog article and belong to no product at all. A figure is comparable to another figure only when both name the same standard, the same specimen orientation and the same specimen preparation, and across these three that is almost never true.

One property sits outside all three data sets: creep and fatigue under long term load. If your part has to hold a weight for a year, tell us that is what it is for and we build the margin in.

So you get numbers about your part instead: dimensions in mm, mass in grams, material, wall count, infill percentage, layer height, orientation, nozzle material and lead time. Those decide how it behaves. A brand's headline figure does not.

What happens to it at the end

Keep it, rather than compost it.

PLA starts life as plant sugar rather than petroleum, and it is industrially compostable under EN 13432 conditions, which means a heated commercial composter at around 58 C with controlled humidity and aeration, not a garden heap, and only at a facility that takes it. On any useful timescale it stays intact in a garden heap, in soil and in water, so treat a printed object as a durable thing to keep.

PETG is sold as a durable plastic and behaves like one. It belongs in general waste rather than a household plastics bin: the glycol modification that makes it print so well makes it a contaminant in the PET stream rather than a part of it.

The most surprising line on this page

A printed PLA object left in a garden or a river makes microplastic faster than a printed PETG one would. That is the exact opposite of what the word on the spool suggests, and it is the reason we talk about keeping things rather than about composting them.

The question that carries the risk

Food contact has its own page.

A polymer can be food grade as a raw material while the object printed from it is still not food safe. Two claims, two different answers, and running them together is the central error in this whole subject. The regulation, the layer line question, the nozzle metal question and the open questions all live on their own page.

Read the food safety page

  1. Bambu Lab technical data sheets, per product. Manufacturer document. Density to ISO 1183, glass transition and melting by DSC at 10 C per minute, Vicat to ISO 306 and GB/T 1633, heat deflection to ISO 75 at 1.8 and 0.45 MPa, tensile to ISO 527 and GB/T 1040, bending to ISO 178 and GB/T 9341, Charpy impact to ISO 179 and GB/T 1043, X-Y and Z separately, with specimen printing conditions. Sixteen PLA and four PETG sheets read. Also the chemical resistance block and the disclaimer, identical across the range. PLA Basic sheet, PETG Basic sheet
  2. Anycubic technical data sheets V3.0, and the product pages that disagree with them. Manufacturer document. ISO 527, ISO 178, ISO 179, ISO 75-2, ISO 306, ISO 11357-1 and ISO 1183 cited on the rows. Twelve sheets and nineteen product pages read. Source for the Anycubic values, the ISO 179 and Izod labelling error, the PLA Matte page against sheet discrepancy, the absent Z axis fields, the absent weathering and creep data, and the comparison purposes only disclaimer on page three. PLA V3.0, PETG V3.0, PLA Matte V3.0
  3. Creality, the absence of a data sheet, and the one table it calls a specification. Manufacturer document. The marketing site, the storefront, the wiki and all their sitemaps were searched on 8 September 2026 for a technical or safety data sheet for any PLA or PETG filament. None exists. The only document Creality labels a specification is a blog table that does not cover the line it currently sells. Creality Filament Specification
  4. Approximate polymer figures for PLA and PETG, and the outdoor material question. The widely reproduced glass transition and heat deflection bands, stated as approximate because they vary by grade and crystallinity, and the position that ASA rather than PETG is the recognised outdoor extrusion material. Compiled from the peer reviewed sources listed here and stated as approximate throughout.
  5. Creality, 3D Printing Filament Heat Resistance Comparison, and the PETG temperature resistance guide. Manufacturer document. Source for approximately 60 C and approximately 80 C as glass transition figures, and for the statement that PETG holds shape up to around 80 C. A blog table of generic polymer values with no test method and no product named. store.creality.com
  6. Rynio, P. and others (2022). Steam sterilization in an autoclave at 121 C caused significant deformation of the aortic templates made of PLA, PETG and PP. International Journal of Molecular Sciences 23(7): 3539. DOI 10.3390/ijms23073539
  7. Bambu Lab, PETG Basic store page. Manufacturer document. Source for the UL GREENGUARD, UL 2904 certification claim and the comparison with an average kitchen, living room or office. us.store.bambulab.com
  8. Bambu Lab, X1E air filtration guide. Manufacturer document. Source for PETG being placed in the high volatile organic compound and particulate bucket, with about one month of cartridge life against about three months for PLA at eight hours of printing a day. wiki.bambulab.com
  9. Wojnowski, W., Marc, M., Kalinowska, K., Kosmela, P. and Zabiegala, B. (2022). Emission profiles of volatiles during 3D printing with ABS, ASA, nylon and PETG polymer filaments. Molecules 27(12): 3814. DOI 10.3390/molecules27123814
  10. Bernatikova, S., Dudacek, A., Prichystalova, R., Klecka, V. and Kocurkova, L. (2021). Characterization of ultrafine particles and VOCs emitted from a 3D printer. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 18(3): 929. The PETG particle count, and the identification of styrene in PETG emissions. DOI 10.3390/ijerph18030929
  11. Anycubic PLA and PETG product pages. Manufacturer document. Source for the biodegradable and eco-friendly wording, the user-safe and zero irritating emissions wording, the outdoor and weather resistance wording, the PLA Matte page figures, and the recorded absence of any food, dishwasher or weathering statement across nineteen pages. PETG, PLA
  12. Solano, G., Rojas-Gatjens, D., Rojas-Jimenez, K., Chavarria, M. and Romero, R.M. (2022). Biodegradation of plastics at home composting conditions. Environmental Challenges 7: 100500. None of the materials was biodegraded after 31 weeks. DOI 10.1016/j.envc.2022.100500
  13. Purkiss, D., Allison, A.L., Lorencatto, F., Michie, S. and Miodownik, M. (2022). The Big Compost Experiment. Frontiers in Sustainability 3: 942724. 1,648 UK home compost trials; the majority did not fully disintegrate, including 60 percent of those certified home compostable. DOI 10.3389/frsus.2022.942724
  14. Royer, S.-J., Greco, F., Kogler, M. and Deheyn, D.D. (2023). Not so biodegradable: polylactic acid and cellulose/plastic blend textiles lack fast biodegradation in marine waters. PLoS ONE 18(5): e0284681. No degradation over 428 days. DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0284681
  15. Ali, W., Ali, H., Gillani, S., Zinck, P. and Souissi, S. (2023). Polylactic acid synthesis, biodegradability, conversion to microplastics and toxicity: a review. Environmental Chemistry Letters 21: 1761 to 1786. PLA disintegrates into microplastics faster than petroleum based plastics. DOI 10.1007/s10311-023-01564-8
  16. European Commission (2022). EU policy framework on biobased, biodegradable and compostable plastics. COM(2022) 682 final, 30 November 2022. There is a European standard for industrially compostable packaging but not for home composting; generic claims such as bioplastics and biobased should not be made; a biodegradable claim must specify the receiving open environment and the timeframe. eur-lex.europa.eu
  17. Directive (EU) 2024/825 on empowering consumers for the green transition. Bans generic environmental claims without demonstrated excellent performance. Applies from 27 September 2026. eur-lex.europa.eu
  18. Creality, PETG filament guide and PETG versus PLA. Manufacturer document. Source for the three different Creality positions on ultraviolet resistance, and for the instruction to check a data sheet for weathering performance. PETG guide, PETG vs PLA
  19. Temporal evolution of structure property relationship for UV and RH artificially weathered material extrusion additive manufactured PLA (2026). Scientific Reports. Up to 2000 hours of accelerated ultraviolet B weathering with controlled humidity; degradation by chain scission confirmed by infrared spectroscopy. DOI 10.1038/s41598-026-41192-0
  20. Creality, 3D printer ventilation guide, and the odour guide. Manufacturer document. Source for the statement that a printer can release ultrafine particles and volatile organic compounds, for containment is not the same as removal, and for the odour table that contradicts it. Ventilation guide
  21. Bambu Lab, PLA Pure wiki page and store page. Manufacturer document. Source for the default filtration off position, the ventilation wording, and the recorded absence of any dishwasher claim across the range. wiki.bambulab.com
  22. Azimi, P., Zhao, D., Pouzet, C., Crain, N.E. and Stephens, B. (2016). Emissions of ultrafine particles and volatile organic compounds from commercially available desktop three-dimensional printers with multiple filaments. Environmental Science and Technology 50(3): 1260 to 1268. DOI 10.1021/acs.est.5b04983
  23. Byrley, P., George, B.J., Boyes, W.K. and Rogers, K. (2019). US Environmental Protection Agency authors. Particle emissions from fused deposition modeling 3D printers: evaluation and meta-analysis. Science of the Total Environment 655: 395 to 407. Sixteen studies; overall means of 300,980 particles per cm3 for ABS and 65,482 for PLA. DOI 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.11.070
  24. Davis, A.Y., Zhang, Q., Wong, J.P.S., Weber, R.J. and Black, M.S. (2019). Georgia Institute of Technology and UL Chemical Insights. Characterization of volatile organic compound emissions from consumer level material extrusion 3D printers. Building and Environment 160: 106209. 216 individual VOCs; filament colour among the variables affecting emissions. DOI 10.1016/j.buildenv.2019.106209
  25. NIOSH (2020). 3D printing with filaments: health and safety questions to ask. DHHS (NIOSH) Publication No. 2020-115. DOI 10.26616/NIOSHPUB2020115, cdc.gov
  26. Romanowski, H., Bierkandt, F.S., Luch, A. and Laux, P. (2022). Authors at the German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment. Summary and derived risk assessment of 3D printing emission studies. Atmospheric Environment 294: 119501. Fifty studies reviewed. DOI 10.1016/j.atmosenv.2022.119501
  27. Stefaniak, A.B. and others (2018). NIOSH field study. Evaluation of emissions and exposures at workplaces using desktop 3-dimensional printers. ACS Chemical Health and Safety. A custom built ventilated enclosure reduced particle number and total organic chemical concentrations by 99.7 percent and 53.2 percent respectively. DOI 10.1016/j.jchas.2018.11.001
  28. Kaptan, A. (2025). Investigation of the effect of exposure to liquid chemicals on the strength performance of 3D-printed parts from different filament types. Polymers 17(12): 1637. Eight filaments, ASTM D638 and ASTM D256 after seven days of immersion. DOI 10.3390/polym17121637
  29. Bambu Lab, filament guide material table. Manufacturer document. Source for the five star tensile ranking that contradicts the manufacturer's own data sheets. wiki.bambulab.com
  30. Creality, food safe 3D printer filament materials. Manufacturer document. Source for do not assume dishwasher compatibility and for the statement that repeated hot washing can damage printed surfaces. store.creality.com
  31. Kailo, G., Gaspar, I., Krisztina, A., Kisko, G. and Koris, A. (2025). Investigating the effect of dishwasher on 3D printed food-contact material. Progress in Agricultural Engineering Sciences. Printed PETG and a PLA and PHB blend, hand wash against dishwasher. DOI 10.1556/446.2025.00174
  32. World Health Organization (2021). WHO global air quality guidelines. Section 4.3 on ultrafine particles. WHO declined to set a guideline level and instead issued good practice statements, of which the third gives low as under 1000 particles per cm3 and high as over 10,000 per cm3 as a 24 hour mean. iris.who.int