hover a pillar to set the scene →
Raters split
Ingredient safety
A 98-point gap between the two loudest voices.
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 →
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 →
Also screened, nothing found: US NTP Report on Carcinogens · Health Canada Ingredient Hotlist · IARC Monographs · EU Harmonised Classification (CLP Annex VI) · California Proposition 65
A government authority. Auto-linked to this product, not yet human-reviewed. about this rater →
Coverage & match quality
6 ratings · 2 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.
No rater covers this axis for this product, so its weight can't move the score.
Data availability
Robust30 of 31 characterized
Our sources have reference data on 30 of 31 listed ingredients; 1 is uncharacterized in our data — a gap, not a clean bill.
Worth a look (8)
Endocrine-activeflagged by 3 of 9 lists
Endocrine-activeflagged by 3 of 9 lists
Endocrine-activeflagged by 3 of 9 lists
Undisclosed fragrance blendflagged by 2 of 9 lists
ANSES endocrine candidateflagged by 2 of 9 lists
Persistent / bioaccumulativeflagged by 1 of 9 lists
EU microplastics-restrictedflagged by 1 of 9 lists
Mild sensitizer for someflagged by 1 of 9 lists
No flags in our sources (22)
No data in our sources (1)
Not a verdict — our authorities simply have no reference for these.