Coverage & match quality
4 ratings · 3 of 4 axes
no black box
We don't rate products ourselves. We collect what each public rater already says, put every scale on common ground, and keep the disagreements visible instead of averaging them away.
Collect each rater's own score
Every source keeps its native verdict for this product. We never invent a score for an axis a source didn't measure.
Normalize to 0–100, higher = better
Raters can use different scales and directions: some where a low number means safe, some where a high one does. We map them all onto one 0–100 axis and flip the ones that run backwards so the numbers are finally comparable.
Average per axis, but keep the spread
Scores on the same axis become one representative number (their mean). When raters split by 20+ points we flag it and keep every rater's number. A disagreement is never blended into silence.
Your weights make the overall
The ring is the weighted average of the four pillars using your weights. It's computed fresh every time and never stored, so there's no hidden “objective” default.
worked example · Ingredient safety
Greenlens Ingredient Scan
Independent · EU regulatory reference
Flagged 2 of 12 ingredients: 2 regulated allergens.
Starts at 100; 10 other ingredients carried no recognized regulated hazard. Absence of a flag means no regulated hazard was recognized — not proof of safety. This is one lens; see where raters disagree above.
Why this score
Every ingredient, under all three lenses
The Scan is one opinion. The strict and lenient lenses read the same list and land 6 points apart. See what each one flags, and what it costs.
Tune your weights
composite recomputes live
+No rater covers this axis for this product, so its weight can't move the score.
Data availability
Good9 of 12 characterized
Our sources have reference data on 9 of 12 listed ingredients; 3 are uncharacterized in our data — a gap, not a clean bill.
| Ingredient | What it does | Safety | Data |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aquasolvent | solvent | No flags in our sources | Well-characterized |
| Citrus Medica Limonum Peel Extract | Not in our sources | No data | |
| Cymbopogon Schoenanthus Extractsoothingskin conditioning | soothingskin conditioning | EU-regulated fragrance allergen· flagged by 1 of 9raters disagree | Referenced |
| Zea Mays Silk Extractskin conditioning | skin conditioning | No flags in our sources | CosIng-catalogued |
| Linum Usitatissimum Seed Extractperfumingskin conditioning | perfumingskin conditioning | No flags in our sources | Well-characterized |
| Saccharum Officinarum | Not in our sources | No data | |
| Lavandula Angustifolia Oilfragrancetonic | fragrancetonic | No flags in our sources | CosIng-catalogued |
| Eucalyptus Globulus Leaf Oilperfumingskin conditioning | perfumingskin conditioning | EU-regulated fragrance allergen· flagged by 1 of 9raters disagree | Referenced |
| Tabebuia Impetiginosa Bark Extractskin conditioning | skin conditioning | No flags in our sources | CosIng-catalogued |
| Citric Acidfragrancechelatingbuffering | fragrancechelatingbuffering | Health Canada Hotlist — restricted· flagged by 1 of 9raters disagree | Referenced |
| Sodium Chloridefragranceoral carebulking | fragranceoral carebulking | No flags in our sources | Well-characterized |
| Pyrus Malus Pectin | Not in our sources | No data |