Greenlens

Every public rating on one cosmetic, the places they disagree kept visible, and a single score whose weighting you control.

Navigate

  • Browse
  • In your home
  • Ask Sonion
  • Methodology
  • Criteria
  • Extension
  • How scoring works
  • Account

The one rule

We never blend a score that hides who disagrees. Funding model travels with every rating. Weights are computed at read time and never stored.

Cosmetics only · lead with safetyOpen data via Open Beauty Facts · no EWG/Yuka scraping
As an Amazon Associate, Greenlens earns from qualifying purchases. Affiliate income never changes a rating or ranking.PrivacyTerms
Catalog/NOW® Solutions/Aloe Soothing Gel
Aloe Soothing Gel
NOW® Solutions

Aloe Soothing Gel

After Sun

NOW® Solutions

Aloe Soothing Gel

After Sun

hover a pillar to set the scene →

Your composite

67OUT OF 100Fair

range 62–79

Why this score

69-point split

87

Scan

25

Precautionary

94

Tolerance

See why →
Find on Amazon↗

Affiliate link. We may earn a commission. It never changes a rating.

In your home

Sort this into a room

Cleaner options

197 found

See better →

Flags

No ingredient flags.

Raters split

Ingredient safety

A 69-point gap between the two loudest voices.

25Greenlens Precautionary ScreenIndependent
vs
94Greenlens Tolerance ScreenIndependent
050100
See why, ingredient by ingredient→

Cleaner options

See 197 cleaner alternatives

Same category, all safer. We show the best 12, including the strongest on each axis.

See better →

Every rater, every axis

Ingredient safety

69 pts apart
  • A government authority. 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 →

  • 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 →

  • 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 →

✓Also screened, nothing found: ECHA SVHC Candidate List · Health Canada Ingredient Hotlist · California Proposition 65 · ANSES Endocrine Disruptors · US NTP Report on Carcinogens

✓US EPA Safer Choice (SCIL) recognizes 54% of ingredients as safer choices — a marker, never a score.

✓US EPA Safer Choice (SCIL) recognizes 54% of ingredients as safer choices — a marker, never a score.

Environmental

  • A government authority. Auto-linked to this product, not yet human-reviewed. about this rater →

Labor

raters agree
  • Run by a nonprofit. 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 →

Packaging

  • Independent — not funded by the brands it rates. Auto-linked to this product, not yet human-reviewed. about this rater →

Coverage & match quality

12 ratings · 4 of 4 axes

  • Some ratings rest on an automatic match that has not been human-reviewed.

Weighted by what you care about

Tune your weights

composite recomputes live

+
1.0×
1.0×
1.0×
1.0×
0 means ignored. Higher = more weight in your composite.

What we know about the packaging

Unidentified·0 of 1 identified

Nobody recorded what this pack is actually made of beyond “plastic”, so the packaging score is a stand-in for the middle of that range — not a reading of this container.

  • Recorded only as “plastic” — no resin code. It could be PET (#1) (widely recyclable) or PVC (#3) (hard to recycle); nothing on record says which, so it counts as 46 out of 100, the middle of that range.

This says how precisely the packaging is described, not how good it is — a fully identified material can still be a bad one.

How we know the packaging

Nobody published the material for this product, so it was read from the product photo — the container looks like this, rather than the maker saying so. Treat the packaging score as weaker here than on a product with a declared material.

A photo also cannot show the resin code moulded into the base, so every plastic container reads as “plastic, unspecified” — the cautious end of the plastics range, not a finding about this particular pack.

Ingredients, decoded

Data availability

Robust·13 of 13 characterized

Our sources have reference data on all 13 listed ingredients.

Worth a look (6)

  • SODIUM HYDROXYMETHYL-GLYCINATE9/10preservative · hair conditioningraters disagree

    Carcinogen-linked · flagged by 2 of 9 lists

  • ALOE BARBADENSIS LEAF JUICE4/10skin conditioningraters disagree

    IARC possible carcinogen (Group 2B) · flagged by 1 of 9 lists

  • CARBOMER4/10emulsion stabilising · gel forming · viscosity controllingraters disagree

    EU microplastics-restricted · flagged by 1 of 9 lists

  • POTASSIUM HYDROXIDE4/10bufferingraters disagree

    EU-restricted (with limits) · flagged by 2 of 9 lists

  • PHENOXYETHANOL4/10preservative · antimicrobialraters disagree

    Mild sensitizer for some · flagged by 1 of 9 lists

  • MENTHA PIPERITA OIL4/10perfuming · fragrance · refreshingraters disagree

    EU-regulated fragrance allergen · flagged by 1 of 9 lists

✓No flags in our sources (7)

  • WATER
  • CUCUMIS SATIVUS FRUIT EXTRACT
  • ALLANTOIN
  • GLYCERIN
  • PANTHENOL
  • TOCOPHEROL
  • ARGININE

Where this came from

Cruelty-free status recorded from crueltyfree.peta.org ↗

Researched facts on Greenlens always carry the page that stated them — nothing is inferred from a model's memory.