Silicone vs. acrylic coatings

By Jesse Sanchez. 

Industry experts discuss how chemistry, climate and roof conditions influence coating selection. 

In this CoatingsTalk, a representative from MuleHide addressed a practical question contractors and building owners face on recover projects: When does silicone make sense and when is acrylic the better fit? Led by Megan Ellsworth, the conversation stayed focused on jobsite variables that influence performance, labor planning and long-term expectations, including ponding water, substrate type, climate and warranty goals. Cameron Webb, a territory manager for MuleHide, began the discussion with explaining the importance of selection discipline. “There’s no magic bullet to a roofing material,” he said, noting that the right answer depends on what is happening on the roof and what the owner expects the system to deliver. 

Cameron made the comparison with chemistry, noting that material composition influences nearly every downstream performance decision. He explained that silicone coatings are built around siloxane polymers and are inorganic, giving it a structure that helps in resisting ultraviolet exposure and long-term weathering. He also pointed to water interaction as a defining factor, explaining that silicones repel water and cure by reacting with moisture in the air. Acrylic coatings, by contrast, are based on acrylate polymers and are organic in composition, which makes them more susceptible to UV degradation over time. He added that acrylics tend to absorb moisture, causing them to soften or swell when exposed to water. 

Those distinctions matter most when drainage is imperfect. “If we’re dealing with situations where there may be low spots in the deck and ponding water may occur, then silicone definitely is going to be a better choice than acrylic,” Cameron said. Application practices follow the same logic. Because acrylics are water-based, applying too heavy in one coat can cause the surface to skin over, trapping moisture and leading to blisters or premature failure. Silicone systems can often be built faster in the field. “We can get up to 40 mils in a single pass,” Cameron said, pointing to a potential labor advantage. 

In some cases, cost can complicate the decision. Cameron explained that silicone materials generally carry a higher price point than acrylic systems, often in the range of 20% to 30% more, though that difference can be offset when a project avoids multiple mobilizations and repeat site visits. 

He also pointed to a key limitation on recoat projects, noting that roofs already coated with silicone must be recoated with silicone to ensure proper adhesion. To reduce risk, Cameron emphasized the importance of verification steps, encouraging contractors to perform adhesion testing before moving forward, a process he noted is typically supported by manufacturers at no cost. 

Listen to the podcast or Watch the webinar to learn more about MuleHide’s coating systems, training opportunities and how to connect with a territory manager!