hover a pillar to set the scene →
Raters split
Ingredient safety
A 65-point gap between the two loudest voices.
Cleaner options
See 1821 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 →
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: California Proposition 65 · EU Harmonised Classification (CLP Annex VI) · Health Canada Ingredient Hotlist · US NTP Report on Carcinogens · IARC Monographs · ECHA SVHC Candidate List
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
Robust8 of 8 characterized
Our sources have reference data on all 8 listed ingredients.
Worth a look (4)
EU-prohibitedflagged by 2 of 9 lists
Endocrine-activeflagged by 3 of 9 lists
Undisclosed fragrance blendflagged by 2 of 9 lists
Mild sensitizer for someflagged by 1 of 9 lists
No flags in our sources (4)