Wool is the right answer in most rooms and genuinely the wrong one in a few. Here is the comparison without the marketing.
The summary table
| Resilience | Soil resistance | Water | Sun | Repairable | Cost | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wool | Excellent | Excellent | Tolerant, not waterproof | Fades | Yes | High |
| Nylon | Good | Moderate | Good | Good | No | Moderate |
| Polypropylene | Poor | Excellent | Waterproof | Excellent* | No | Low |
| Polyester | Poor | Poor (oils) | Good | Moderate | No | Lowest |
| Silk | Poor | Moderate | Weak wet | Fades fast | Specialist | Very high |
| Cotton | Poor | Poor | Washable | Fades | No | Low |
| Jute | Poor | Poor | Fails | Moderate | No | Lowest |
| Sisal | Moderate | Poor | Fails | Moderate | No | Low |
| Viscose | Very poor | Very poor | Fails | Poor | No | Moderate |
* when solution-dyed — see synthetic rugs.
Wool against nylon
The closest contest, and the one where wool does not simply win.
Nylon has better abrasion resistance and, when treated, better stain resistance. It is what contract and commercial broadloom is made of, and for good reason.
Wool wins on resilience — the crimp described in wool rug properties means it recovers from compression where nylon crushes and stays crushed. It wins on flame behaviour, self-extinguishing without treatment where nylon melts. It wins on repairability. And it wins on ageing: wool develops a patina, nylon simply degrades.
Wool against polypropylene
Not really a contest — they are for different jobs.
Polypropylene is hydrophobic, so it is waterproof, cannot mildew, and can be hosed down. That makes it correct for outdoor rugs, kitchens and bathrooms, where wool is wrong.
It has poor resilience and reads as synthetic in daylight. In a living room that matters; on a patio it does not.
Wool against polyester
Wool wins comprehensively. Polyester is soft and cheap, crushes permanently, and is oleophilic — it attracts and holds oily soil, which is why polyester rugs develop grey traffic paths that cleaning does not lift.
Its only genuine argument is price.
Wool against the plant fibres
Jute and sisal offer a texture wool does not, at a lower price. Both fail comprehensively on water: a spill leaves a permanent brown watermark, and cleaning with water produces a mark larger than the original.
Sisal beats wool on pure abrasion resistance, which makes it a real option for stairs and entryways. Wool beats it everywhere someone might put a glass down.
Where wool is genuinely wrong
Three rooms and one horizon
Wet areas — bathrooms, poolside, anywhere with standing water. Direct sustained sun, where solution-dyed synthetics fade dramatically less. Kitchens, where oil is the stain wool handles worst. And any room you will reconfigure within a few years, where you would be paying for longevity you never use.
The honest summary
Buy wool when the room is dry and you expect to keep the rug more than about seven years. Buy a good synthetic when there is water, sun, or a short horizon — and without feeling that you have compromised.
The trade-offs in full are in wool rugs: pros and cons; the lifespan figures behind the table in durability; the money in what wool rugs cost.
Common questions
Is nylon better than wool for a rug?
On pure abrasion and stain resistance, yes — which is why commercial broadloom is nylon. On resilience, flame behaviour, repairability and how it ages, wool wins. Nylon does not develop a patina; it simply looks progressively worse.
What is the single biggest advantage of wool?
Repairability. A wool rug can be rewoven, repiled and reselvedged back into service. No synthetic can, which is why wool is the only common fibre where a hundred-year life is realistic.