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 safetyProduct data from public sources incl. Open Beauty Facts & EWG Skin Deep · their ratings never scraped or shown
As an Amazon Associate, Greenlens earns from qualifying purchases. Affiliate income never changes a rating or ranking.PrivacyTerms
Catalog/Fluide/Biodegradable Glitter, Pink
Biodegradable Glitter, Pink
Fluide

Biodegradable Glitter, Pink

Glitter
Pressed Glitter, Hungry Ghost

Cleaner pick · Safest glitter we have rated

Colourpop

Pressed Glitter, Hungry Ghost

+15 on ingredient safety

under $12

Ingredient safetyRaters agree
Find on Amazon ↗See all 43 cleaner options →

Ranked by safety only. We may earn a commission on the link; it never changes the order.

Your composite

85OUT OF 100Excellent

Ingredient safety only

range 80–100

85▲▼ split
Safety
—
Eco
—
Labor
—
Pkg

Why this score

20-point split

80

Scan

100

Precautionary

88

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

43 found

See better →

Flags

No ingredient flags.

Raters split

Ingredient safety

A 20-point gap between the two loudest voices.

80Greenlens Ingredient ScanIndependent
vs
100Greenlens Precautionary ScreenIndependent
050100
See why, ingredient by ingredient→

All 43 cleaner options, safest first → We show the best 12, including the strongest on each axis.

Every rater, every axis

Ingredient safety

20 pts apart
  • 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 →

✓Also screened, nothing found: ANSES Endocrine Disruptors · US NTP Report on Carcinogens · Health Canada Ingredient Hotlist · IARC Monographs · ECHA SVHC Candidate List · EU Harmonised Classification (CLP Annex VI) · California Proposition 65

Environmental

    ✓Also screened, nothing found: EU Microplastics Restriction

    Coverage & match quality

    3 ratings · 1 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×
    Environmentalno rating

    No rater covers this axis for this product, so its weight can't move the score.

    Laborno rating

    No rater covers this axis for this product, so its weight can't move the score.

    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

    Good·5 of 7 characterized

    Our sources have reference data on 5 of 7 listed ingredients; 2 are uncharacterized in our data — a gap, not a clean bill.

    Worth a look (2)

    • FD&C Yellow #54/10raters disagree

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

    • D&C Red #74/10raters disagree

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

    ✓No flags in our sources (3)

    • Microcrystalline cellulose
    • glycerin
    • Polyurethane-33

    No data in our sources (2)

    • H2O
    • May Contain: Aluminum

    Not a verdict — our authorities simply have no reference for these.