Metallised film vs EVOH: barrier performance and PPWR recyclability
Metallised film and EVOH are the two routes to oxygen barrier in flexible packaging, and for decades the choice between them was a question of cost and shelf life. Regulation (EU) 2025/40, the PPWR, turned it into a question of market access. A metallised film delivers excellent barrier at low cost, but the aluminium layer makes the structure non-recyclable under every European assessment scheme, and non-recyclable packaging cannot be placed on the EU market from 1 January 2030. EVOH delivers comparable oxygen barrier and, below a design threshold, keeps a mono-material structure recyclable.
This page compares the two on barrier performance, sorting behaviour and compliance with Regulation (EU) 2025/40, sets out which recyclable route fits which product category, and gives the dates that actually bind.
Why the metallised film decision is now a compliance decision
Article 6 of the PPWR makes recyclability a condition of placing packaging on the EU market. From 1 January 2030, packaging must reach a design-for-recycling grade, and packaging that scores below 70% recyclability by weight is not graded at all. It cannot be sold in the EU.
There are three grades: A at 95% or above, B at 80% or above, C at 70% or above. From 1 January 2038 the bar rises again and grade C is no longer sufficient. A structure carrying a continuous aluminium metallisation does not reach any of them.
The Commission must adopt the delegated acts that define the grades and the assessment methodology by 1 January 2028. Until then, the operative design-for-recycling criteria are the industry guidelines, not the delegated acts. The direction is fixed; the exact scoring is not yet law.
What a metallised film does well
A metallised film is produced by vacuum-depositing an aluminium layer, typically 30 to 50 nanometres thick, onto a PET or OPP substrate. It is not aluminium foil; it uses a fraction of the metal. That thin layer nonetheless delivers a combination no single polymer matches.
Barrier and cost
Metallisation provides high oxygen barrier and high water vapour barrier at once, on a cheap substrate, with wide converter availability across Europe. For coffee, crisps and pet food this was the default specification for thirty years, and there was no commercial reason to look elsewhere.
The light barrier no transparent polymer replaces
The metal layer blocks light completely. EVOH and ceramic coatings are transparent and provide none. For products that oxidise under light, roasted coffee, high-fat snacks, some vitamins and pigmented supplements, this is a functional gap, not a cosmetic one. It is solved separately, with a pigmented white or black polyolefin layer or with high-opacity printing, and that solution has to be designed in rather than assumed.
Why a metallised film fails recyclability assessment
Sorting in a European materials recovery facility relies on near-infrared spectroscopy to read the polymer. A continuous metal layer reflects the signal, the polymer cannot be identified, and the item is routed to residue rather than to the PE or PP stream. Packaging that never reaches a recycling stream is not recycled, regardless of what the polymer underneath would have allowed.
Where metallised material does enter a stream, the aluminium contaminates the recyclate and degrades the mechanical properties of the regranulate. Both effects are why continuous metallisation is classified as non-recyclable under RecyClass v3.1 and treated the same way in the CEFLEX D4ACE guidelines.
EVOH: barrier performance and the 5% design threshold
EVOH is an ethylene vinyl alcohol copolymer used as a thin coextruded barrier layer. It is never used alone. It sits inside the structure, encapsulated on both faces by polyolefin layers and bonded with maleic-anhydride-grafted tie layers.
Where EVOH outperforms metallised film
In dry conditions EVOH gives one of the highest oxygen barriers available from any polymer, at or above what metallisation achieves. It is also transparent, which lets the product be seen, and it carries no metal, which keeps the structure inside a single polymer stream.
The humidity limitation
EVOH is hygroscopic. Its oxygen barrier degrades as relative humidity rises, which is why it is always encapsulated between polyolefin layers. For high-moisture products, or for packaging stored in humid conditions, the structure has to be designed so the barrier layer stays protected, and the barrier has to be verified on the finished pack rather than on the film specification.
Where the 5% rule comes from
Under the RecyClass Design for Recycling guidelines v3.1 (Plastics Recyclers Europe, August 2025), a PE or PP mono-material structure stays compatible with recycling when EVOH accounts for no more than 5% of total packaging weight and compatible tie layers are used. Below that share the dominant polymer is read correctly at sorting and the EVOH does not disrupt the recycling stream.
This threshold comes from voluntary design guidelines. It is not a numeric limit written into the PPWR, and anyone quoting it as regulation is quoting it wrong.
Metallised film, EVOH and ceramic coating side by side
| Criterion | Metallised film | EVOH below 5% by weight | Ceramic coating SiOx, AlOx |
| Oxygen barrier | high | very high when dry, falls at high humidity | high |
| Water vapour barrier | high | from the polyolefin layers, not from the EVOH | high |
| Light barrier | total, opaque | none, transparent | none, transparent |
| NIR sorting | blocked, routed to residue | compatible below the 5% threshold | compatible, transparent layer |
| RecyClass v3.1 status | non-recyclable | compatible with compliant tie layers | compatible for very thin layers |
| PPWR Article 6 outlook | ungraded, off the EU market from 1 January 2030 | can reach grade A, B or C | can reach grade A, B or C |
| Availability and cost | wide, moderate cost | wide, moderate cost | narrower, higher cost |
Qualitative comparison. Actual barrier depends on the full structure, layer thicknesses and storage humidity, and is assessed on the finished pack, not on the film in isolation.
Choosing a replacement for metallised film by product type
There is no single substitute. The right route depends on what the product is actually sensitive to, and the most common mistake is replacing a barrier the product never needed while dropping one it did.
| Product | Critical requirement | Recyclable route | What to watch |
| Roasted coffee | oxygen, light, aroma retention | mono-PE or mono-PP with EVOH below 5%, or ceramic-coated substrate | light barrier must be rebuilt with a pigmented layer; degassing valve must stay stream-compatible |
| Dry pet food | grease resistance, puncture, moderate oxygen | MDO-PE mono structure with EVOH below 5% | seal strength and stiffness on high-speed filling lines |
| Crisps and savoury snacks | oxygen, light, low moisture pickup | ceramic-coated OPP or mono-PP with EVOH below 5% | flex-crack resistance of the ceramic layer on stiff webs |
| Supplements and powders | water vapour above all | mono-PE with EVOH below 5%, ceramic coating where transparency is wanted | EVOH barrier falls at high humidity; encapsulation must be complete |
| High-moisture and chilled | oxygen barrier under humidity | ceramic coating generally preferred to EVOH | barrier has to be measured at the real storage humidity, not at 0% RH |
| Retort and hot fill | oxygen barrier after thermal process | retortable EVOH grades in a PP structure | barrier must be verified after sterilisation, not before |
Indicative routes for structural planning. Every replacement is validated on the finished pack, against the required shelf life and the filling line, before it is specified.
What changes on which date
| Date | What applies |
| 12 August 2026 | Regulation (EU) 2025/40 applies across the EU, directly, without national transposition |
| 1 January 2028 | deadline for the Commission to adopt the delegated acts defining recyclability grades and assessment methodology |
| 1 January 2030 | packaging must be design-for-recycling graded; below 70% recyclability it cannot be placed on the EU market |
| 1 January 2035 | recyclability is also assessed on whether the format is recycled at scale, not only on how it is designed |
| 1 January 2038 | grade C is no longer sufficient for market access |
A structure change of this size is a two to three year programme once qualification, filling line trials and artwork are counted. The sequence and the practical checkpoints are set out on the page about the transition to mono-material packaging, and the grade thresholds themselves on the page about PPWR recyclability grades.
Frequently asked questions
Is metallised film banned under the PPWR?
The PPWR does not name metallised film. It sets a recyclability threshold that a structure with continuous aluminium metallisation cannot meet, so from 1 January 2030 such packaging cannot be placed on the EU market. The effect is a ban; the mechanism is a performance requirement.
Is metallised film not recycled for its aluminium content?
That is a different operation. Recovering aluminium from segregated production scrap is an industrial materials-recovery question, with a known input and a dedicated process. Recyclability under the PPWR is assessed on what happens to the packaging after consumer use, in the sorting infrastructure that actually exists, where the metal layer prevents NIR identification and the pack goes to residue. Answers that quote a percentage of aluminium content are describing scrap recovery, not packaging recyclability.
Is metallised BOPP recyclable?
No, and for the same reason as metallised PET. The substrate is not what fails; the continuous aluminium layer is. Metalized BOPP blocks NIR identification exactly as met-PET does, so the pack is routed to residue instead of the PP stream. For a PP structure the recyclable routes are a ceramic-coated OPP or a mono-PP with EVOH below 5% and compatible tie layers.
Does EVOH match the barrier of a metallised film?
On oxygen, yes, and in dry conditions EVOH usually exceeds it. On water vapour the barrier comes from the polyolefin layers rather than the EVOH. On light there is no match at all, because EVOH is transparent, so a light barrier has to be rebuilt with pigment or opaque printing.
Is 5% EVOH a legal limit?
No. It comes from the RecyClass Design for Recycling guidelines v3.1, which are voluntary industry criteria published by Plastics Recyclers Europe. The PPWR contains no numeric EVOH limit. The delegated acts due by 1 January 2028 will define the official methodology.
Does the rule apply to non-EU brands exporting into the EU?
Yes. The PPWR applies to packaging placed on the EU market regardless of where it was produced or filled. A brand importing into the EU carries the same design and documentation obligations as one manufacturing inside it.
Is a PE structure with EVOH under 5% automatically recyclable?
No. The final classification depends on the whole structure: the dominant polymer, the exact EVOH share, the tie layer chemistry, inks, adhesives, labels and any coating. The 5% threshold is a necessary condition, not a sufficient one, and the assessment is made on the finished pack.
Related resources
Barrier film
Barrier structures for flexible packaging and what each one protects against.
Mono-material PE
Single-polymer PE structures and how they behave in the recycling stream.
Design for recycling
Design rules and NIR sorting criteria for the PE and PP streams.
PPWR recyclability grades
Grades A, B and C under Article 6, with the thresholds and the deadlines.
Transition to mono-material
The four phases of moving a portfolio to recyclable structures before 2030.
The question is no longer whether metallised film goes, but what replaces it
EVOH below 5%, a ceramic coating or an oriented mono-material substrate: the choice is made against the product’s real barrier requirement, the shelf life you have to hold and the filling line you already run. If the structure is produced at VLM Poliplast, the documentation arrives with the delivery: technical data sheets, material declarations and a recyclability assessment against current industry references, per structure. This is the compliance information suppliers are required to pass down the chain under Article 16 of the PPWR, not a consultancy service.
+40 744 624 924 office@vlmpoliplast.ro