ProOne Pitcher Review: Lab Analysis & Hands-On Testing

Full Analysis of the ProOne

Please note: We tested the ProOne water filter pitcher using the G2.0 M filter element which has since been replaced by the G3.0 M.

Filtration: 0.39/5.00

The ProOne water filter pitcher achieved 0.39/5.00 for filtration. How? Most importantly, it performed very poorly in our lab testing, and it has no NSF/ANSI certifications for contaminant reduction. (While it does have extensive third-party testing, at least some was not done over the full claimed filter life). Nevertheless, the filtered water was odorless and tasted clean.

1. Lab Results: 0.67/5.00

In our lab test comparing an unfiltered and a filtered tap water sample, the ProOne pitcher could remove 6 undesirable impurities and contaminants to below the minimum detection level (so essentially to 100%): chlorine, bromodichloromethane, bromoform, dibromochloromethane, copper, and uranium.

6 substances remained in our water:

• Barium wasn’t reduced at all. In fact, it increased by 200%, which seems unlikely to be natural fluctuations, so not ideal. However, barium was at the lowest detectable level (0.01 ppm) in the unfiltered water and at 0.03 ppm in the filtered water. In other words, this 200% increase represents a relatively small jump in the actual barium content. Plus, 0.03 ppm is still 23x lower than the strictest health guideline at 0.7 ppm. What’s more, our lab findings initially may seem to contradict ProOne’s third-party test data which claims the reduction of barium by 99.00%. However, this apparent discrepancy may be explained by very different test conditions: ProOne feed water had a 25x greater concentration of barium (~0.25 ppm) compared to our feed water (0.01 ppm), where it was just above the limits of detection; therefore, the barium we observed post-filtration is more consistent with trace leaching rather than incomplete removal. The same rationale may also apply to other contaminants for which our observed reduction rates differ substantially from those reported by the manufacturer, including cases of potential leaching.
• Boron was reduced by 75%, which is solid.
• Lithium was reduced by 0%. Although this seems like a particularly bad result at first glance, lithium was already at the lowest detectable level (0.01 ppm) in the unfiltered sample. Due to a limitation of the 2024 analytical method (the lab reported lithium only in 0.01 ppm increments), reduction could only be calculated as either 0% or 100%.
• Strontium was reduced by a moderate 56%.
• Nitrate was reduced by 13%, which is very poor. As with barium, our lab findings conflict with ProOne’s third-party test data which claims the reduction of nitrate by 98.20%. Differing test conditions may again be the culprit – the ProOne feed water had a ~16x greater concentration of nitrate (27.2 ppm) compared to our feed water (1.65 ppm).
• Fluoride was reduced by 76%, which again is quite solid but somewhat contradicts ProOne’s test data which lists 97.5% reduction.

Finally, limescale was only reduced by 13%, so the ProOne pitcher may not be suited to help protect your kettle and/or coffee maker from buildup.

Aside from contaminant reduction, we found 3 substances in our filtered water that were not present in the unfiltered water, suggesting potential leaching:

• Benzene was 0.59 ppb, above the strictest health guidelines of 0.15 ppb, which is concerning.
• Vanadium was 0.01 ppm, which is slightly below the notification level (not a health guideline) of 0.015 ppm.
• Radon was 471 pCi/L, which is way above the strictest health guidelines of 1.5 pCi/L.
• As with barium and nitrate, the detection of benzene and vanadium in the filtered water contradicts ProOne’s third-party reduction data, which reports >99.90% reduction for both substances; it may be subject to the same test-condition and leaching considerations discussed above.

Side note: We also tested another ProOne filter element, the G2.0 5″, in the ProOne Traveler+, which we discuss in more detail in our best gravity water filter guide. Interestingly, we had potential leaching of barium and benzene in this model as well.

Lab Results Charts

2. NSF/ANSI Certifications and Other Test Data

The ProOne pitcher has no NSF/ANSI certifications for contaminant reduction. However, it does have extensive third-party testing to NSF/ANSI Standards 42, 53, 401, and P231 and other non-NSF/ANSI standards, demonstrating the removal of over 250+ contaminants – most to 99.00% reduction or higher. Tested substances include:

• Dozens of VOCs (95.70-99.90%+)
• Dozens of semi-volatiles (97.40-99.60%)
• Lead (>90%)
• Arsenic 3 and 5 combined (70%)
• Aluminum (00%)
• Antimony (>99.90%)
• Beryllium (>99.90%)
• Chromium 3 and 6 combined (70%)
• Pesticides (00-100.00%)
• Herbicides (20-99.90%)
• Nitrates (20%)
• Fluoride (97.50%)
• Trace pharmaceuticals (10-98.10%)
• Radiologicals (81.60-84.10%)
• Bacteria and other germs (>99.999%)
• PFAS (>90%)
• Microplastic (>99.999%)

However, at least some of this testing was not done over the full claimed filter life of 225 gallons.

3. Filtration Process

ProOne’s G2.0 M filter element uses activated carbon as its primary filter media. Activated carbon removes things like bad tastes and odors, chlorine/chloramine, disinfection byproducts and other organics, as well as certain metals like mercury and lead. It may also use other media like ion exchange, but we couldn’t find any details to confirm this.

What’s more, the G2.0 M has an outer ceramic shell which acts like a sieve to block particulate contaminants (mechanical filtration) – anything larger than the small pores cannot pass through.

4. Taste and Odor Tests

In our test, the freshly filtered water was odorless and had a clean taste.

Usability: 1.00/5.00

The ProOne pitcher achieved a usability score of 1.00/5.00, based on its performance in the following categories:

1. Initial system assembly including filter priming (0.40/1.00)
2. Day-to-day use (0.00/3.10)
3. Filter replacements (0.60/0.90)

1. Initial Setup: 0.40/1.00

Assembling the ProOne pitcher is easy and straightforward but filter priming is extremely slow. There is also a tutorial video on YouTube.

Here’s a quick breakdown of the setup process:

1. Clean the lid, upper blue container and pitcher with a mild detergent. Do not put in dishwasher. Dry with a soft cloth.
2. Remove filter from packaging. Remove wing nut from filter stem. Leave washer on stem. While holding plastic base of filter with one hand, place under running cool tap water, rinse and scrub for 2 minutes. Do not place stem of filter up to the faucet.
3. Insert stem through hole in upper blue container. Attach wing nut to filter stem on bottom side of upper blue container. Tighten wing nut. Do not over tighten.
4. Insert upper blue container into pitcher.
5. Fill upper blue container with cool tap water and replace the lid. Note: first cycle of water will take longer as filter conditioning process takes place.
6. Discard the first two cycles of filtered water.
7. You are now ready to use!

2. Day-to-Day Use: 0.00/3.10

2.1 Speed & Water Capacity: 0.00/1.20

We cannot recommend the ProOne pitcher for daily use. To start, while we have fairly limited information regarding some of its technical specifications – the pitcher has been discontinued and our 2024 test unit is no longer available – we do know the filtered reservoir is on the smaller side (~6.75-cup capacity).

But most importantly, the pitcher does not filter fast enough to meet the daily water needs of the average-sized US and US family households, nor can it handle thirst bursts. In our filtration speed test for 4 cups, the pitcher only filtered approximately 90% of the water at 12 hours. This makes the ProOne extremely impractical for daily use.

On the upside, the pitcher fits both on the shelves and in the door of a standard fridge (dimensions: 5″x10.5″x10.5″). Unfortunately, as we lack information on the feed capacity, we don’t know if you’ll be able to fill a large 40-oz bottle with a single refill.

2.2 Handling & Pouring: 0.00/1.15

The ProOne pitcher pours smoothly, but if you hold it too steeply to get the last bit of water, the lid and upper reservoir will fall out. In addition, pouring while there is still unfiltered water in the reservoir will cause the lid and reservoir to fall out.

2.3 Refilling: 0.00/0.75

The ProOne pitcher is relatively easy to refill, though the lid must be removed first (not as convenient as models with a flip-top lid or pour-through tab).

3. Filter Replacements: 0.60/0.90

Filter replacements are very easy, though there is no filter change indicator to alert you when it is time to do so.

Rated filter life is 225 gallons. Assuming 300 gallons of yearly water consumption for the average household, we estimate that you will have to change the filter 1-2x annually.

225 gallons filter life may be unrealistic, though (more info below). Using a lifespan of 100 gallons, filter replacement frequency would increase to 3x annually.

Costs: 3.77/5.00

Based on value for money, the ProOne pitcher achieved a cost score of 3.77 out of 5.00, indicating it is relatively expensive for what it offers compared to competing pitchers (a score of 4.00 represents average value). Notably, its upfront price is well above average compared to the other water filter pitchers we tested, though its annual filter replacement cost is around average.

1. Upfront Price

While it was still in stock, the ProOne pitcher was priced at $73.95, which is well above the $58.53 average across all the water filter pitchers we tested.

2. Long-Term Expenses for Filter Replacements

While replacement filters were still in stock and based on 300 gallons of consumption and a 225-gallon filter life, we estimated $55 in annual filter replacement costs, which is well below the $120.13 average across all the water filter pitchers we tested.

That said, a 225-gallon filter life seems far-fetched when compared with the filter life claims of other pitchers. There are no NSF/ANSI certifications, either, and at least some of the available third-party testing was not conducted through the full claimed filter life. So adjusting to what we consider a more realistic filter life of 100 gallons, annual replacement costs would increase to $123.75, which is around average.

3. Product Warranty

The system is covered by a short 120-day warranty.

4. Other Cost Factors

• Comes with a removable fruit infuser.

Additional

1. Cleanable Filters

The filter elements are cleanable which can help remove surface buildup and restore flow.

2. Frequent Customer Complaints

We read about issues with clogged or leaking filters.

Like other users, we also experienced serious issues with filter clogging and slow filtration. In fact, in our 2024 filtration speed test, the ProOne still hadn’t finished filtering 4 cups of water at the 12 hour mark. The other pitchers we tested typically could handle this volume in a few minutes. We fortunately did not encounter leaking filters.

Bottom Line: Impractical With Poor Filtration (1.19/5.00)

Filtration weighted at 60%, and usability and cost at 20% each, the ProOne water filter pitcher scored a final rating of 1.19/5.00 out of 5.00.

Combined with the G2.0 M filter element, it struggled across the board in our analysis.

First, it performed poorly in our lab testing: while it fully removed 6 contaminants from our water, it also showed potential leaching of benzene and radon above the strictest health guidelines. Testing of ProOne’s G2.0 5” filter element in the Traveler+ gravity system also showed potential benzene leaching above the strictest health guideline. To make matters worse, the ProOne pitcher has no NSF/ANSI certifications for contaminant reduction. And while it does have extensive third-party testing, at least some was not done over the full claimed filter life.

What’s more, slow filtration speed makes the pitcher unsuitable for daily use – it took 12 hours to filter less than 4 cups of water. That said, what little water we could filter tasted and smelled clean.

Finally, upfront price is relatively high, and we suspect greater-than-advertised ongoing maintenance costs given the bold 225-gallon rated filter life. Given its overall poor performance and short 120-day warranty, we cannot recommend the ProOne pitcher.