Too Faced
Sweet Peach Eyeshadow, (Peach Pit, Caramel) (2018 formulation)
Eye Shadow
hover a pillar to set the scene →
Raters split
Ingredient safety
A 63-point gap between the two loudest voices.
25ANSES Endocrine DisruptorsGovernment
vs88Greenlens Tolerance ScreenIndependent
050100
See why, ingredient by ingredientCleaner options
See 3109 cleaner alternatives
Same category, all safer. We show the best 12, including the strongest on each axis.
Every rater, every axis
Ingredient safety
63 pts apartIndependent — 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 →
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 →
A government authority. Auto-linked to this product, not yet human-reviewed. about this rater →
Also screened, nothing found: ECHA SVHC Candidate List · California Proposition 65 · US NTP Report on Carcinogens
Environmental
A government authority. Auto-linked to this product, not yet human-reviewed. about this rater →
Packaging
Independent — not funded by the brands it rates. Auto-linked to this product, not yet human-reviewed. about this rater →
Coverage & match quality
9 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×
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.
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
Robust19 of 20 characterized
Our sources have reference data on 19 of 20 listed ingredients; 1 is uncharacterized in our data — a gap, not a clean bill.
Worth a look (8)
ANSES CMR-listedflagged by 5 of 9 lists
ANSES endocrine candidateflagged by 3 of 9 lists
IARC probable carcinogen (Group 2A)flagged by 5 of 9 lists
EU harmonised skin sensitizerflagged by 2 of 9 lists
ANSES endocrine candidateflagged by 2 of 9 lists
Undisclosed fragrance blendflagged by 2 of 9 lists
Persistent / bioaccumulativeflagged by 2 of 9 lists
Mild sensitizer for someflagged by 1 of 9 lists
No flags in our sources (11)
No data in our sources (1)
Not a verdict — our authorities simply have no reference for these.
Where this came from
Cruelty-free status recorded from crueltyfree.peta.org ↗
Researched facts on Greenlens always carry the page that stated them — nothing is inferred from a model's memory.