Our Verdict
Compare to Similar Products
![]() This Product
Pair of Thieves Tagless | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Awards | Outstanding Value for a Tight Budget | Best Bang for Your Buck | Best Performance Synthetic | ||
| Price | $26 List Check Price at Amazon | $36 List Check Price at Amazon | $33 List Check Price at Backcountry | $25 List Check Price at REI | $24 List Check Price at Amazon |
Overall Score ![]() |
|||||
| Star Rating | |||||
| Bottom Line | Don't skimp on a little style when buying these very affordable boxer briefs | The boxer briefs are a great pick, even without noticing their equally awesome price | These boxer briefs are silky smooth against your skin and tough enough to use for almost any task | A no-frills pair of boxers that are sure to last the test of time | These boxer briefs prove that you don't have to spend a fortune for a reasonable pair |
| Rating Categories | Pair of Thieves Tagless | Columbia Tri Blend | ExOfficio Give-N-Go 2.0 | REI Co-op Everyday B... | Hanes ComfortFlex |
| Comfort (40%) | |||||
| Breathability (25%) | |||||
| Construction Quality (20%) | |||||
| Odor Control (15%) | |||||
| Specifications | Pair of Thieves Tagless | Columbia Tri Blend | ExOfficio Give-N-Go 2.0 | REI Co-op Everyday B... | Hanes ComfortFlex |
| Material | 95% cotton, 5% spandex | 57% cotton, 38% polyester, 5% spandex | 89% nylon, 11% elastane | 94% polyester, 6% spandex | 100% cotton or Heathers: 75% cotton, 25% polyester) |
| Fly | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Measured Inseam | 4 in | 5 in | 5 in | 6 in | 4 in |
| Flatlock Seams | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Price Per Pair, if Multipack (Based on MSRP) | $6 | $12 | $33 | $25 | $4 |
| Dryer Safe | Yes | Yes | Tumble dry low | Yes | Yes |
| Alternate Fit Options | N/A | N/A | 3-in and 9-in inseam | Boxer | Boxer, brief |
Our Analysis and Test Results
Likes
We were delightfully surprised at how well-built the Pair of Thieves Tagless appeared to be sewn up.
The flatlock seam style is particularly stretchy both width-wise and length-wise, and works well with the lighter-weight fabric utilized.
The use of that lighter-weight cotton fabric also helps keep the Pair of Thieves Tagless quite breathable, scoring well in our air permeability tests both when dry and saturated with water. If you like the feel of cotton, but still need to feel dry and fresh on hotter days, the Tagless could be a great compromise for you.
We also enjoy the colorways of the Tagless, with seams made of colored thread that contrast well with the main fabric and show off that seam pattern we're raving about.
Dislikes
For the most part, we found the Pair of Thieves Tagless reasonably comfortable, save for the very short inseam that allows the pant leg to ride up more than we'd like. If you have larger thighs (like us), this could cause some chafing on hotter days. The ultra-minimal flatlock seams are still a big plus to the Tagless.
With cotton, odor accumulation can be an issue, and the Tagless are no exception. This becomes more of an issue the longer you have these awaiting washing day in your hamper. And though the lighter-weight cotton shows good breathability, the long-term durability of the Pair of Thieves is under threat, as they'll be more likely to become threadbare more quickly.
Should you Buy the Pair of Thieves Tagless?
If you're looking for some pairs of cotton boxer briefs at an outstanding value, the Pair of Thieves Tagless make an excellent choice, so long as you're okay with the shorter inseam. The price makes these a compelling buy, just as long as you understand they won't last forever with the lighter-weight fabric used.
What Other Boxer Briefs Should You Consider?
Although more expensive, the Under Armour UA Performance Cotton 6" Boxerjock strikes a good balance between performance and value, with a fabric that's a blend of cotton and synthetic. If funds are really tight, the Hanes ComfortFlex will get the job done. Coming with some fun patterns and a no-nonsense design, the Champion Every Day Comfort Stretch 3-Pack make an excellent cotton daily driver.














