hover a pillar to set the scene →
Raters split
Ingredient safety
A 20-point gap between the two loudest voices.
Cleaner options
See 638 cleaner alternatives
Same category, all safer. We show the best 12, including the strongest on each axis.
8 are in this product's price band or under
Independent — not funded by the brands it rates. Auto-linked to this product, not yet human-reviewed. about this rater →
Independent — not funded by the brands it rates. Auto-linked to this product, not yet human-reviewed. about this rater →
Independent — not funded by the brands it rates. Auto-linked to this product, not yet human-reviewed. about this rater →
A government authority. Auto-linked to this product, not yet human-reviewed. about this rater →
A government authority. Auto-linked to this product, not yet human-reviewed. about this rater →
Also screened, nothing found: California Proposition 65 · Health Canada Ingredient Hotlist · US NTP Report on Carcinogens · IARC Monographs · ECHA SVHC Candidate List
US EPA Safer Choice (SCIL) recognizes 52% of ingredients as safer choices — a marker, never a score.
A government authority. Auto-linked to this product, not yet human-reviewed. about this rater →
Run by a nonprofit. Auto-linked to this product, not yet human-reviewed. about this rater →
Coverage & match quality
7 ratings · 3 of 4 axes
Tune your weights
composite recomputes live
+No rater covers this axis for this product, so its weight can't move the score.
Data availability
Robust25 of 25 characterized
Our sources have reference data on all 25 listed ingredients.
Worth a look (4)
ANSES endocrine candidateflagged by 1 of 9 lists
EU harmonised skin sensitizerflagged by 2 of 9 lists
EU-restricted (with limits)flagged by 2 of 9 lists
EU microplastics-restrictedflagged by 1 of 9 lists
No flags in our sources (21)