Greenlens

Navigate

  • Browse
  • In your home
  • Ask Sonion
  • Methodology
  • Criteria
  • Extension
  • How scoring works
  • Account
Cosmetics only · lead with safetyProduct data from public sources incl. Open Beauty Facts & EWG Skin Deep · their ratings never scraped or shown
As an Amazon Associate, Greenlens earns from qualifying purchases. Affiliate income never changes a rating or ranking.PrivacyTerms
Catalog/Kim Kimble/Curly Butter Creme, Shea Butter, Mango Butter & Castor Seed Oil
Curly Butter Creme, Shea Butter, Mango Butter & Castor Seed Oil
Kim Kimble

Curly Butter Creme, Shea Butter, Mango Butter & Castor Seed Oil

uncategorized

Your composite

55OUT OF 100Fair

Ingredient safety only

range 42–100

55▲▼ split
Safety
—
Eco
—
Labor
—
Pkg

Why this score

58-point split

62

Scan

42

Precautionary

100

Tolerance

See why →
Find on Amazon↗

Greenlens earns from qualifying purchases. Payout never affects a rating, a ranking, or the cleaner pick.

In your home

Sort this into a room

Alternatives

No fair cohort on file, so no comparison.

Flagged

2 ingredients

What's flagged →

Raters split

Ingredient safety

A 58-point gap between the two loudest voices.

42Greenlens Precautionary ScreenIndependent
vs
100Greenlens Tolerance ScreenIndependent
050100
See why, ingredient by ingredient→

Every rater, every axis

Ingredient safety

58 pts apart
  • Independent — not funded by the brands it rates. Auto-linked to this product, not yet human-reviewed. Checked this week. about this rater →

  • Independent — not funded by the brands it rates. Auto-linked to this product, not yet human-reviewed. Checked this week. about this rater →

  • Independent — not funded by the brands it rates. Auto-linked to this product, not yet human-reviewed. Checked this week. about this rater →

✓Also screened, nothing found: US NTP Report on Carcinogens · ANSES Endocrine Disruptors · Health Canada Ingredient Hotlist · California Proposition 65 · EU Harmonised Classification (CLP Annex VI) · IARC Monographs · ECHA SVHC Candidate List

✓Recognized on a safer-ingredients list: US EPA Safer Choice recognizes 55% of ingredients as safer choices — a marker, never a score.

Environmental

    ✓Also screened, nothing found: EU Microplastics Restriction

    Coverage & match quality

    3 ratings · 1 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×
    Environmentalno rating

    No rater covers this axis for this product, so its weight can't move the score.

    Laborno rating

    No rater covers this axis for this product, so its weight can't move the score.

    Packagingno rating

    No rater covers this axis for this product, so its weight can't move the score.

    0 means ignored. Higher = more weight in your composite.

    Ingredients, decoded

    Data availability

    Robust·11 of 11 characterized

    Our sources have reference data on all 11 listed ingredients.

    Worth a look (2)

    • Fragrance6/10undeclared fragrance blendperfumingraters disagree

      Undisclosed fragrance blend · flagged by 2 of 9 lists →

    • Phenoxyethanol4/10preservative · antimicrobialraters disagree

      Mild sensitizer for some · flagged by 1 of 9 lists →

    ✓No flags in our sources (9)

    • Water
    • Cetearyl Alcohol
    • Ricinus Communis Seed Oil
    • Butyrospermum Parkii Oil
    • Stearic Acid
    • Linum Usitatissimum Seed Oilfragrance material
    • Mangifera Indica Seed Butter
    • PEG-150 Distearate
    • Ethylhexylglycerin
    What these ingredient tags mean (1)

    These describe what an ingredient is, not whether it is a problem. The stance marks above are the ratings; these are not.

    • undeclared fragrance blendFragrance

      • Fragrance: A blend the label does not itemize, so what is in it cannot be read from the ingredient list. EU Regulation (EC) 1223/2009 permits the collective term "parfum"; the SCCS Opinion on Fragrance Allergens (SCCS/1459/11) reviews the contact-allergy evidence for the substances it can contain.