hover a pillar to set the scene →
Cleaner options
See 56 cleaner alternatives
Same category, all safer. We show the best 12, including the strongest on each axis.
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: IARC Monographs · ECHA SVHC Candidate List · EU Harmonised Classification (CLP Annex VI) · California Proposition 65 · ANSES Endocrine Disruptors · Health Canada Ingredient Hotlist · US NTP Report on Carcinogens
US EPA Safer Choice (SCIL) recognizes 54% of ingredients as safer choices — a marker, never a score.
Also screened, nothing found: EU Microplastics Restriction
Coverage & match quality
3 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
Good10 of 13 characterized
Our sources have reference data on 10 of 13 listed ingredients; 3 are uncharacterized in our data — a gap, not a clean bill.
Worth a look (1)
Mild sensitizer for someflagged by 1 of 9 lists
No flags in our sources (9)
No data in our sources (3)
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.