e.l.f.
Sun Kissed Booster Drops
uncategorized
Every rater, every axis
Ingredient safety
raters agreeIndependent — not funded by the brands it rates. Auto-linked to this product, not yet human-reviewed. Checked this week. about this rater →
Independent — not funded by the brands it rates. Auto-linked to this product, not yet human-reviewed. Checked this week. about this rater →
Independent — not funded by the brands it rates. Auto-linked to this product, not yet human-reviewed. Checked this week. about this rater →
Also screened, nothing found: ANSES Endocrine Disruptors · Health Canada Ingredient Hotlist · California Proposition 65 · EU Harmonised Classification (CLP Annex VI) · US NTP Report on Carcinogens · IARC Monographs · ECHA SVHC Candidate List
Recognized on a safer-ingredients list: US EPA Safer Choice recognizes 52% of ingredients as safer choices — a marker, never a score.
Environmental
A government authority. Auto-linked to this product, not yet human-reviewed. Checked this week. about this rater →
Labor
raters agreeRun by a nonprofit. Auto-linked to this product, not yet human-reviewed. This rates e.l.f. as a company and applies to everything they make, not this product alone. Checked this week. about this rater →
Run by a nonprofit. Auto-linked to this product, not yet human-reviewed. Checked this week. about this rater →
Coverage & match quality
6 ratings · 3 of 4 axes
- Some ratings rest on an automatic match that has not been human-reviewed.
- Fewer raters reach smaller-brand products, so a missing rating is not a clean bill of health, only a gap.
Weighted by what you care about
Tune your weights
composite recomputes live
+
1.0×
1.0×
1.0×
Packagingno rating
No rater covers this axis for this product, so its weight can't move the score.
0 means ignored. Higher = more weight in your composite.
Ingredients, decoded
Data availability
Robust20 of 21 characterized
Our sources have reference data on 20 of 21 listed ingredients; 1 is uncharacterized in our data — a gap, not a clean bill.
Worth a look (2)
Mild sensitizer for someflagged by 1 of 9 lists →
EU microplastics-restrictedflagged by 1 of 9 lists →
No flags in our sources (18)
- WATER
- GLYCERINhumectant
- PROPYLENE GLYCOLcommon irritant
- ERYTHRITOL
- PPG-10 METHYL GLUCOSE ETHER
- TOCOPHERYL ACETATE
- ARGANIA SPINOSA KERNEL OIL
- HELIANTHUS ANNUUS SEED OIL
- TREMELLA FUCIFORMIS SPOROCARP EXTRACT
- PEG-32
- PEG-180
- XANTHAN GUM
- TROMETHAMINEfragrance material
- ETHYLHEXYLGLYCERIN
- COCETH-7
- PPG-1-PEG-9 LAURYL GLYCOL ETHER
- CAPRYLYL GLYCOL
- DISODIUM EDTA
No data in our sources (1)
Not a verdict — our authorities simply have no reference for these.
What these ingredient tags mean (2)
These describe what an ingredient is, not whether it is a problem. The stance marks above are the ratings; these are not.
common irritantPROPYLENE GLYCOL
- PROPYLENE GLYCOL: A solvent that shows up in patch-test clinics, more often as irritation than as allergy. American Contact Dermatitis Society, Allergen of the Year 2018 (Jacob SE, Scheman A, McGowan MA, Dermatitis 2018;29(1):3-5).
humectantGLYCERIN
- GLYCERIN: A humectant, and one of the two ingredients a comparison of moisturiser components found made a significant difference to skin hydration. FDA OTC skin protectant monograph, 21 CFR 347.10(h), lists glycerin as a skin protectant at 20 to 45%. On the humectant half: Jeong CB, Han JY, Cho JC, Suh KD, Nam GW, "Analysis of electrical property changes of skin by oil-in-water emulsion components", Int J Cosmet Sci 2013;35(4):402-410, DOI 10.1111/ics.12059, PMID 23621673, found that "glycerine and urea showed significant skin hydration effects compared with other humectants".