Material comparison
PVC vs PET (APET)
Rigid PVC brings inherent flame retardance and chemical resistance; APET brings glass clarity and food-contact performance with easier recycling. The application usually decides.
PVC vs PET (APET) — side by side
| PVC | PET (APET) | |
|---|---|---|
| Flame retardance | Inherent UL 94 V-0 | None (standard) |
| Chemical resistance | Excellent | Good |
| Clarity | Moderate | Excellent (>92%) |
| Food contact | Limited | Yes (FDA/EU grades) |
| Typical use | Electrical, chemical, construction | Food trays, blisters, clear packaging |
Choose PVC when…
- Inherent flame retardance without additives
- Chemical, electrical and construction parts
Choose PET (APET) when…
- Glass-clear food and retail packaging
- Recyclable clear trays and blisters
The verdict: Choose rigid PVC for inherent FR, chemical and electrical duty; choose APET for glass-clear, food-contact, recyclable packaging.
Frequently asked
Is PVC flame retardant?
Yes — rigid PVC is inherently flame-retardant (UL 94 V-0) without additives, thanks to its chlorine content.
Not sure which fits?
Tell us about your part
Send a drawing, sample or your requirements — our engineers will recommend the right process and material for your part, volume and budget, usually within 24 hours.
ISO 9001:2015 certified · Most quotes back within 24 hours