Kind E-3000 Review: A Data-Driven Analysis

🤝 Our content is written by humans, not AI robots. Learn More

📊 Scoring Data

We personally tested the Kind E-3000 ourselves, measuring its performance across 6 different performance categories. We combined and averaged this data into an overall score for the system. You can see the key scoring data we used when reviewing the E-3000 in the next table.

Overall Score8.51
Health Related Contaminants8.40
Aesthetic Related Contaminants9.90
Performance CertificationNot certified
Filtration Rate15 GPM
Component QualityExceptional
Component CertificationNot certified
SetupBelow Average
Servicing RequirementsExcellent
Costs$0.0018/ gal
Warranty LengthLimited Lifetime
ShippingFree on orders over $99
Returns120 days

🎬 Video Review

🚰 Contaminant Reduction

Score: 8.23

As a whole-house water filter and conditioner, the primary purpose of the Kind E-3000 is to remove contaminants and reduce hardness deposits. So our first port of call was to test our water quality before and after filtering it through the system, so we could analyze how it performed with our own water. 

We also wanted to know whether or not the Kind E-3000 had an official performance certification for its contaminant reduction abilities – this was the other key data that affected its score in this category.

ContaminantMeasurementUntreated WaterTest 1% ChangeTest 2% Change
Total THMsPPB35.72.31-93.53%0-100.00%

Our Performance Testing

Score: 8.48

Before installing the Kind E-3000, we tested our water to find out exactly what contaminants were present.  

We used a service called Tap Score for all our testing in this project. 

water testing with tap score

Our initial results were unexpected, which led us to repeat the test again. We’ve discussed this in more detail later, but you can also see our two sets of results in the table below. 

Health-Related Contaminants

Score: 8.40

Our top priority was to remove the 12 contaminants with health effects that were detected in our water, including fluoride, disinfection byproducts, and lead. 

Total THMsPPB35.70.32
ChloridePPM6.4No HGL Exists

Long-term exposure to these contaminants has been linked to health effects including liver and kidney issues, developmental problems, blood effects, and gastrointestinal issues. 

We analyzed our test data using the lab’s Health Guideline Level benchmark, which prioritizes human health and is much more strict than the federal MCL standard.

Chloroform, total THMs, and lead were all detected above the Tap Score HGL, so we were particularly keen to reduce these contaminants with the E-3000. 

As we mentioned, we tested our water twice, for reasons we’ll explain shortly. Below, we’ve discussed our results for each test individually. 

Our Test 1 Results

In test 1, our post-filtration results showed that the Kind E-3000 reduced chloroform by 93.5%, but it only reduced lead by 58%. This outcome was surprising to us because the filter uses solid catalytic carbon block media, which should be able to remove 100% chloroform and do a much better job at reducing lead. 

However, there was always a chance that lead was leaching from our plumbing downstream of the filter, making it appear to reduce less lead than it actually did. 

But we decided to re-test our water after replacing the filters, and that’s when we realized that we’d made a mistake during installation.

Before we talk about what we found, let’s discuss which other contaminants were addressed by the filter in test 1.

Fluoride levels decreased by 40%, barium dropped by 73%, strontium was eliminated entirely, and nickel and zinc were reduced by 6% and 9%. Sulfate increased by 4%, and chloride by 9%, suggesting potential fluctuations in the water coming from the distribution system. 

But we got some strange outcomes, too: 0.134 PPM of aluminum appeared in our filtered water, and copper levels increased by more than 100%. 

Needless to say, we wanted to repeat the test to see if we obtained these unusual results the second time around. 

Our Test 2 Results

When we went to replace the filters, we found that we’d installed them back-to-front. So, the sediment filter, which is intended to trap large particles first, was actually last in the sequence. We wondered whether this could have caused sediment in our water supply to damage the carbon filter cartridge, affecting its performance. 

So we installed a new set of filters, the right way around this time, and tested our water again. 

This time, chloroform and lead were both reduced by 100%, to below detectable levels. 

We can’t be certain whether the incorrect filter configuration was to blame, one of our initial filters was faulty, or perhaps the contaminants in our source water had fluctuated. 

Regardless, our tip is to triple-check your filter configuration if you’re using a multi-stage system with similar-sized cartridges. The mistake was easy for us to make, even when we thought we’d followed the instructions carefully. We test water filters all the time, but we’re still only human, and we do make mistakes occasionally. 

As for the other contaminants, fluoride levels only decreased by 20% this time. Nickel and zinc weren’t detected in our second test, but barium, which was reduced by 73% in test 1, was only reduced by 20% the second time. 

Sulfate increased slightly more, by 7%, but this time, chloride was reduced by 7% instead of increasing by this amount. 0.1 PPM of nitrates appeared, but aluminum wasn’t detected at all.

Manganese, which wasn’t reduced in test 1, became undetectable in the second. Strontium actually increased by 18%, And copper, which had spiked dramatically in the first test, was significantly decreased by 97% in the second. 

So our test 2 results were still a bit random, but better on the whole. 

Aesthetic Contaminants

Score: 9.90

We used the Hach chlorine test strip, included in our Tap Score test, to get a reading of the chlorine levels in our unfiltered water. 

Around 1 PPM of chlorine was detected, which makes sense given that we’re on a municipal water supply, which gets disinfected at the treatment plant. 

We tested our filtered water using another test strip, and this time, no chlorine was detected. The E-3000’s catalytic carbon block media had obviously done its job in eliminating chlorine and its associated tastes and odors. 

Minerals & Scale Reduction

What makes the Kind E-3000 unique is that it combines two filtration cartridges with a water conditioning cartridge, so it’s also capable of reducing hard water scale formation. 

The third-stage eSoft Salt-Free Softening Cartridge uses a process known as template-assisted crystallization (TAC), which crystallizes hardness minerals and stops them from adhering to surfaces as scale deposits. 

The advantage of conditioning units like the E-3000 is that they help tackle the effects of hard water without the expense, maintenance, and salt usage of a conventional ion exchange water softener. 

But the E-3000 doesn’t actually soften water, so we wanted to test how effectively it reduced scale compared to a water softener. 

Before installing the system, we used a commercial descaler to clean the surfaces that come into contact with water, including our showerhead, faucets, and sinks. We then installed the E-3000 and monitored these surfaces every day. 

What was clear from the get-go is that the E-3000 is no water softener. We’ve tested conventional softeners that prevent scale formation entirely, which makes sense, given that they actually remove hardness minerals. With the E-3000, limescale still formed on our surfaces. That said, it was much easier to clean away with a quick wipe, and didn’t have the tough, abrasive feel of limescale with no water conditioning.

Interestingly, although the E-3000 isn’t intended for hardness reduction, our initial test results showed that hardness did decrease by 10%, followed by a 20% increase in the second test. Calcium and magnesium levels decreased by 14% and 40% in test 1, but these increased by 44% and 55% in the second. 

These mineral fluctuations are another random outcome of our testing that we can’t offer a certain explanation for – but we think it’s most likely due to the design of the eSoft cartridge. This media collects hardness minerals, where they remain until they form micro-crystals and grow to a bigger size, at which point they’re released back into the water. 

Performance Certifications

Score: 6.00

Performance certifications are a useful metric for us because they allow us to evaluate a water filter’s performance beyond our own limited testing. 

We could only test the Kind E-3000’s ability to remove the contaminants in our own water, so we’d value an official NSF, WQA, or IAPMO certification for the reduction of additional contaminants. 

However, the E-3000 currently isn’t certified, so it got the poorer score in this category. 

ContaminantManufacturer Claims Reduction?Our Test 1Our Test 2
Total THMsYes-93.53%-100.00%

Kind doesn’t even provide a third-party testing performance data sheet for the E-3000. Instead, it shares a list of “chemicals addressed by carbon”, and another of “organics addressed by carbon”, which doesn’t tell us whether or not the E-3000’s carbon filter has been tested specifically to reduce these contaminants. 

We still wanted to compare the contaminants reduced in our own water with those that Kind mentions in these lists. 

We found that the filtration system did do a good job of reducing chloroform and lead, which were both included on the manufacturer’s “contaminants addressed” lists. 

The fact that the E-3000 also reduced fluoride, barium, nickel, zinc, manganese (in test 2), and copper (in test 2) was a bonus because these aren’t contaminants that Kind claims to address.

🚦Filtration Rate

Score: 10.00

The Kind E-3000 is a point-of-entry (POE) water filtration system, and we measured its flow rate in gallons per minute (GPM). 

A fast flow rate is particularly important in a POE system because any interruptions in flow or water pressure could affect the operation of the fixtures and appliances around your home. 

The Kind E-3000 did great in this category because it has a high maximum flow rate of 15 GPM – higher than many of the other whole-house systems we tested. It’s suitable for homes with up to 6 bathrooms, and we appreciated that we didn’t have to pay to upgrade to a configuration with a higher flow rate – the E-3000 is sold in one size only. 

After we’d installed the system, we noticed no difference in the flow of water from our faucets and showers, and our water pressure was unchanged. 

📐 Design

Score: 8.40

Design is another vitally important element of a whole-house water filtration system. 

If the system breaks due to a design flaw or poor-quality components, there’s a risk of a major leak, so a high-quality design is a non-negotiable for us in our testing. 

The Kind E-3000 is a cartridge-based system, and it has three separate filter cartridges: a sediment filter, a carbon filter, and the E-Soft cartridge – connected to a metal mount. 

It’s smaller and shorter than a tank-based unit, with a height of 29 inches, a width of 23.25 inches, and a depth of 8 inches. This makes it a good choice for installing in homes with limited available space. 

Kind Water E-2000 whole home water filter and conditioner system

Component Quality

Score: 10.00

We were very pleased with the Kind E-3000’s component quality overall. 

The filter housings are made from plastic, but the mounting hardware is made from stainless steel, and has a durable, sturdy feel. We reached out to Kind’s customer service team to see exactly what materials are used in the E-3000’s design, and here’s what they said: 

“The system is made from a heavy-duty polymer composite and is backed by a limited lifetime warranty.”

We did some research and found that polymer composites are polymer materials with a reinforcement, and they’re known for their durability – they’re typically used in automotive and aerospace applications. 

Polymers are versatile materials that are easily molded. Not all polymers are plastics (plastics are simply a kind of semi-synthetic polymer) but the look and feel of the Kind E 3-000 filter cartridges makes us pretty certain that they are. 

We were initially a little apprehensive about how the E-3000 would match up quality-wise to tank-based systems, which are usually made from tougher materials, like polypropylene. But we saw no signs of wear, such as cracks or breaks, throughout our test period, and all the most important parts (like the connections) feel solid and quality. 

Of course, because this system does use plastics in its design, it may not be the best solution for folks who are concerned about microplastics leaching and want to limit their water’s contact with plastic as much as possible. 


Score: 6.00

Design certifications offer a great way for manufacturers to reassure customers about their filter quality and durability. 

We love to see materials safety certifications because we know that our own experience with a product doesn’t always tell the whole story. When a filter is certified, we know that the filter design quality has been approved by a trusted testing organization. 

Unfortunately, the Kind E-3000 doesn’t have any certifications for its design, so it got the poorer score here. 

Filter Materials & Media

As we mentioned, the E-3000 combines three separate filter stages, and different media are used in each stage. 

The main stage is the solid catalytic carbon block filter, which uses a process known as adsorption to pull contaminants out of the water. Catalytic carbon is a special, modified version of activated carbon that has additional contaminant-reduction abilities – it’s much more effective at adsorbing chloramine, for example. Carbon media is typically made from natural materials, like coconut shell and charcoal.  

The sediment filter is a 5-micron pleated filter and can be washed and reused several times before it needs to be replaced. 

The eSoft cartridge uses tiny polymer beads called “carbonate crystal structures”. 

All filters are housed in plastic housing. 

Kind E-1000 filter cartridges

⚙️ Setup

Score: 7.50

Our setup score for the Kind E-3000 was based on the complexity of the install process, and how long the system took us to install. 

It didn’t get the top score here simply because it’s a POE system, and filters in this category require the most complicated install. A lot more plumbing knowledge and skill is required in installing a whole-home system compared to a point-of-use system, and there’s a greater risk of things going wrong. 

But the E-3000 was, at least, one of the easiest whole-house filters to install. 

We some handy skills and DIY knowledge for the install, but it took us only about 45 minutes, which included shutting off the water and draining our plumbing system, cutting into our existing main water pipe, and installing the unit, which we mounted to our wall. 

The unit only requires 2 connections, which meant it was very difficult to get the process wrong (although we still managed to get the filter cartridges the wrong way around, as we mentioned earlier!). It can be installed at any type of pipe, including PVC, CPVC, copper, and PEX pipes. 

We decided to install the unit ourselves, which definitely says something about the ease of the process. Many other whole-house systems are too complex for us to DIY-install, and we had to spend extra on a plumber – but not with the E-3000. 

The filters didn’t need to be primed, which also saved us a lot of time and hassle. We just had to flush them by opening a cold water faucet and leaving it to run for 10 minutes, sending water through the system. 

🔧 Maintenance

Score: 9.50

We also had a good experience with the Kind E-3000 when it came to maintenance ease, frequency, and costs. 

Servicing Requirements


There were a few features of the system that made maintenance particularly easy and affordable:

  • We could flush and reuse the sediment filter multiple times before replacing it (every 12 months or so). 
  • The eSoft cartridge never needs to be replaced, as it lasts the system’s entire lifespan. 

That meant our primary maintenance task was replacing the catalytic carbon cartridge and sediment filter, which last up to 1 year on average.  

So, the system is more maintenance-heavy than a POE tank-based system, which is easier to maintain because it backwashes the filter media, extending its lifespan for years. 

But we still found the process of replacing the filters very easy, using the included spanner wrench to unscrew the filter housing and replace the filter cartridge inside. 

There’s no filter countdown timer, so we had to make our own calendar reminders for when to replace the filters. Or, we could sign up to the manufacturer’s AutoShip program, so our filters got delivered once a year on schedule.


Score: 10.00

The Kind E-3000 has one of the lowest ongoing costs of all the whole-house water filtration systems we’ve tested – which is especially impressive given that it combines contaminant reduction with water filtration. 

We calculated that it has a maintenance cost of $0.0018 per gallon, based on the carbon and sediment filters’ 80,000-gallon capacity.  

Of course, this is assuming that the filters actually last this long – depending on your water quality and daily water usage, you might need to replace them more frequently. 

🏢 Company

Score: 8.80

Finally, we wanted to know how Kind’s company offerings compared to similar companies selling POE water treatment systems. 

We evaluated the manufacturer’s warranty, shipping, and returns policies, and we were generally pleased with Kind as a company overall.


Score: 10.00

Kind’s products are sold with a limited lifetime warranty, which is pretty much as good as it gets for a whole-house water filter company. 

There are a few terms – the system must be maintained in normal working condition, and the warranty doesn’t cover damage due to improper use, installation mistakes, freezing, and natural disasters. 

One thing we appreciate about Kind’s product warranty is that it doesn’t get voided if you DIY-install your filter. Many other manufacturers say that their products can be DIY installed, but require installation by a licensed plumber to maintain the warranty. Kind gets extra brownie points from us for not requiring this. 


Score: 9.00

Kind’s shipping policy is great, too: all orders of new, whole house water systems priced over $99.00 are entitled to free shipping within the Continental United States. 

However, Kind doesn’t currently ship to Hawaii or Alaska at this time, and customers in Canada may have to pay a shipping fee.

View Kind’s shipping policy here. 


Score: 7.00

Kind offers a 120-day money-back satisfaction guarantee for its products, which sounds great on the surface. 

But there are a few stipulations to be aware of: customers have to pay the returns shipping fee, and they need to secure authorization before returning the product. 

Found this review helpful?

Comment below or share this article!

  • Brian Campbell
    President & CEO, CWS, CWR

    Brian Campbell, a WQA Certified Water Specialist (CWS) and Certified Water Treatment Representative (CWR) with 5+ years of experience, helps homeowners navigate the world of water treatment. After honing his skills at Hach Company, he founded his business to empower homeowners with the knowledge and tools to achieve safe, healthy water. Brian's tested countless devices, from simple pitchers to complex systems, helping his readers find the perfect fit for their unique needs.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top