hover a pillar to set the scene →
Raters split
Ingredient safety
A 37-point gap between the two loudest voices.
Cleaner options
See 111 cleaner alternatives
Same category, all safer. We show the best 12, including the strongest on each axis.
A government authority. 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 →
A government authority. 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 →
Also screened, nothing found: ECHA SVHC Candidate List · EU Harmonised Classification (CLP Annex VI) · Health Canada Ingredient Hotlist
Also screened, nothing found: EU Microplastics Restriction
Coverage & match quality
4 ratings · 1 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.
No rater covers this axis for this product, so its weight can't move the score.
Data availability
Good5 of 6 characterized
Our sources have reference data on 5 of 6 listed ingredients; 1 is uncharacterized in our data — a gap, not a clean bill.
Worth a look (2)
Prop 65-listedflagged by 4 of 9 lists
ANSES endocrine candidateflagged by 1 of 9 lists
No flags in our sources (3)
No data in our sources (1)
Not a verdict — our authorities simply have no reference for these.