Editor’s note: Wildfire Partners works to support community wildfire resilience in Boulder County, Colorado and is a member of FAC Net. This post was originally published on October 14, 2025 on the Wildfire Partners website. See original post here.
Fire-retardant coatings are often marketed as an easy answer for protecting homes from wildfire, but do they live up to the hype? We’re breaking down what’s really known about these coatings, why they may fall short and what steps actually make homes safer from wildfire.
The Big Question: Do They Work?
The short answer: not for long.
The Insurance Institute for Business & Home Safety (IBHS) carried out a comprehensive study, testing several leading brands of exterior fire-retardant coatings. They applied the coatings to siding and left them outside for up to a year to see how they would hold up.
Here’s what they found:
- Most coatings lost their fire resistance in just a few months. Sun, rain, and temperature swings broke them down quickly.
- Some didn’t work at all — even before weather exposure.
- By the three-month mark, none of the tested coatings offered meaningful protection compared to untreated wood.
In other words, these coatings might sound durable, but in real-world outdoor conditions, they provide little to no long-term benefit.
What About Gels and Special Paints?
Some products, like gels, are meant to be applied right before a wildfire arrives. These can offer a few hours of protection, but only while they’re wet. The protection disappears as soon as they dry, evaporate or wash off with rain or sprinklers.
They may offer small, short-term benefit in an emergency, but they’re not a suitable replacement for making lasting mitigation improvements to your home.
Why Performance Falls Short
The failure of fire-retardant coatings comes down to three main elements:
- Outdoor weather is tough. Sun, wind, rain, snow and temperature swings quickly break down coatings.
- Coatings peel, flake or erode. Once that happens, they’re no longer effective.
- No standardized testing exists. Manufacturers can claim their coatings last for years, but there’s no independent proof to verify these claims.
Because of this, wildfire experts and building codes do not recommend coatings as a main line of defense at this time.
What Does Work?
So, what should Boulder County homeowners do to keep their homes safer? The good news is that there are proven, effective ways to effectively mitigate your home. Check out our home mitigation basics webpage to start your mitigation journey. Some of the steps could include:
- Protect your home’s base. If building a new home, choose fiber-cement, stucco or metal siding. Consider ignition-resistant decking. For homes already built, add six inches of metal flashing to the base of your structures.
- Install ember-resistant vents. 1/8” metal screening block embers from getting inside your home.
- Maintain defensible space. Keep the first five feet around your home free of flammable plants, wood piles or debris. Clear under decks and porches, too.
- Landscape wisely. Choose low-flammability plants and space them strategically.
The Bottom Line
While the idea of a quick, spray or paint solution is tempting, peer-reviewed research and field tests show that fire-retardant coatings don’t provide reliable, long-term protection for home exteriors.
For real peace of mind, focus on hardening your structure and defensible space around your home. These proven strategies are the foundation of wildfire resilience for Boulder County homes.
****
I agree with this comment from a recent AZ report on wildfire risk: Newman expressed IBHS’s concern with fire retardants, noting that they are an “active” mitigation measure that are taken in the event of a wildfire and that they can lead to complacency if homeowners believe that the retardant is sufficient to save their home from a loss rather than also taking “passive” mitigation measures, such as creating a defensible space around the home. He emphasized to the Council that both active and passive mitigation actions have a place, but active mitigation cannot replace passive mitigation.
Up to this point, I’ve been recommending fire resistant paint to homeowners for their fences, if only to get them to think about and take some action on mitigating their vulnerability rather than none. I even point out how much more expensive the paint is than regular paint, so now I’ll have to add these caveats as well, and keep expanding the conversation! I think many homeowners who have never experienced a wildfire or are on fixed incomes and budgets would just blanch at the cost of any kind of major retro-mitigation and hide their heads. Small businesses might just do the same. We need to find more ways to make retrofitting more achievable. Thanks for the study and the article.
Which products did you test? List them!
Did you try the Komodo products? I’ve used them and tested them
With a 3700deg F torch. They work
.
Do they work in 40-50mph winds when my neighbor’s house is burning with 50ft flames? I’m replacing the wood fence on my north side with 6ft high sheet metal. Probably won’t do much good when my back fence is wood with 8ft high shrubs and 9, 40ft high Italian junipers. Even the 6ft high concrete fence I had installed won’t due much help if the winds are from the south and my neighbor house catches, after the fire chute hillside that is his backyard finds it’s way up. Don’t have the money for the neat Japanese vertical sprinklers.
The quick facts and the body of the article give contradicting info on how to interpret the flammability rating.