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/e.l.f. Cosmetics, Inc./e.l.f. Cosmetics Camo Liquid Blush, Gorge Orange
e.l.f. Cosmetics Camo Liquid Blush, Gorge Orange
e.l.f. Cosmetics, Inc.

e.l.f. Cosmetics Camo Liquid Blush, Gorge Orange

Blush

e.l.f. Cosmetics, Inc.

e.l.f. Cosmetics Camo Liquid Blush, Gorge Orange

Blush

hover a pillar to set the scene →

Your composite

59OUT OF 100Fair

range 56–71

—
Eco
—
Labor

Why this score

28-point split

67

Scan

95

Precautionary

82

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

1352 found

See better →

Flags

No ingredient flags.

Raters split

Ingredient safety

A 30-point gap between the two loudest voices.

65ANSES Endocrine DisruptorsGovernment
vs
95Greenlens Precautionary ScreenIndependent
050100
See why, ingredient by ingredient→

Cleaner options

See 1352 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

30 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 →

  • 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 · EU Harmonised Classification (CLP Annex VI) · US NTP Report on Carcinogens

Environmental

    ✓Also screened, nothing found: EU Microplastics Restriction

    Packaging

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

    Coverage & match quality

    6 ratings · 2 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.

    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·31 of 33 characterized

    Our sources have reference data on 31 of 33 listed ingredients; 2 are uncharacterized in our data — a gap, not a clean bill.

    Worth a look (4)

    • Titanium Dioxide8/10uv filter · uv absorber · colorantraters disagree

      ANSES CMR-listed · flagged by 5 of 9 lists

    • Rosa Damascena Flower Water4/10fragrance · skin conditioning · skin protectingraters disagree

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

    • Yellow 5 Lake4/10cosmetic colorant · hair dyeingraters disagree

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

    • Red 6 Lake4/10colorantraters disagree

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

    ✓No flags in our sources (27)

    • Hydrogenated Polyisobutene
    • Octyldodecanol
    • Illite
    • Trimethylolpropane Triisostearate
    • Boron Nitride
    • Trimethylsiloxysilicate
    • C9-12 Alkane
    • Hydrogenated Styrene/Methyl Styrene/Indene Copolymer
    • Alumina
    • Disteardimonium Hectorite
    • Phenyl Trimethicone
    • Sorbitan Sesquioleate
    • Propylene Carbonate
    • Ethylene/Propylene/Styrene Copolymer
    • Ethylhexylglycerin
    • Triethoxycaprylylsilane
    • Tin Oxide
    • Butylene/Ethylene/Styrene Copolymer
    • Pentaerythrityl Tetra-Di-T-Butyl Hydroxyhydrocinnamate
    • Aminopropyl Triethoxysilane
    • Tocopherol
    • Water
    • Ricinus Communis Seed Oil
    • Sodium Hyaluronate
    • Hydrogenated Castor Oil
    • Hibiscus Mutabilis Flower Extract
    • Red Iron Oxide

    No data in our sources (2)

    • Hydrogenated Poly
    • Phenoxyethanol MAY CONTAIN: Yellow 6 Lake

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