Everpure H-1200 vs Everpure H-300
Side-by-side NSF certification claims from NSF's public listings (2026-10-17). We have not tested either product.
| Everpure H-1200 | Everpure H-300 | |
|---|---|---|
| NSF/ANSI 42 | ✓ | ✓ |
| NSF/ANSI 53 | ✓ | ✓ |
| NSF/ANSI 58 | — | — |
| NSF/ANSI 401 | ✓ | ✓ |
| Lead | ✓ | ✓ |
| PFAS (PFOA & PFOS) | — | — |
| Chlorine | ✓ | ✓ |
| Chloramine | ✓ | — |
| VOCs | ✓ | ✓ |
| Cysts (Cryptosporidium, Giardia) | ✓ | ✓ |
| Fluoride | — | — |
| Arsenic (pentavalent) | — | — |
| Total dissolved solids (TDS) | — | — |
| Nitrate / nitrite | — | — |
| Hexavalent chromium (chromium-6) | — | — |
| Microplastics | ✓ | ✓ |
| Mercury | — | — |
| MTBE | ✓ | — |
| Rated capacity | 1000 gal | 300 gal |
| Filter price | Not verified from the manufacturer's own store (data gap) | Not verified from the manufacturer's own store (data gap) |
Claims only the Everpure H-1200 carries (of our hub contaminants): Chloramine, MTBE. Only the Everpure H-300: none.
View Everpure H-1200 on the manufacturer's site (plain link, not an affiliate link)
View Everpure H-300 on the manufacturer's site (plain link, not an affiliate link)