hover a pillar to set the scene →
Raters split
Ingredient safety
A 55-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 →
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: California Proposition 65 · US NTP Report on Carcinogens · IARC Monographs · ECHA SVHC Candidate List
Also screened, nothing found: EU Microplastics Restriction
Coverage & match quality
6 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
Robust28 of 28 characterized
Our sources have reference data on all 28 listed ingredients.
Worth a look (9)
EU-prohibitedflagged by 2 of 9 lists
ANSES endocrine candidateflagged by 3 of 9 lists
Undisclosed fragrance blendflagged by 2 of 9 lists
EU harmonised skin sensitizerflagged by 2 of 9 lists
EU harmonised skin sensitizerflagged by 2 of 9 lists
ANSES endocrine candidateflagged by 2 of 9 lists
Mild sensitizer for someflagged by 1 of 9 lists
Health Canada Hotlist — restrictedflagged by 1 of 9 lists
Health Canada Hotlist — restrictedflagged by 1 of 9 lists
No flags in our sources (19)