Profusion
Cosmetics 35 Shade Palette, Euphoric Glam
Eye Shadowtypically under $12
hover a pillar to set the scene →
Raters split
Ingredient safety
A 63-point gap between the two loudest voices.
30Greenlens Ingredient ScanIndependent
vs93Greenlens Precautionary ScreenIndependent
050100
See why, ingredient by ingredientCleaner options
See 4680 cleaner alternatives
Same category, all safer. We show the best 12, including the strongest on each axis.
1 is in this product's price band or under
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 →
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: California Proposition 65 · EU Harmonised Classification (CLP Annex VI) · Health Canada Ingredient Hotlist · US NTP Report on Carcinogens · ECHA SVHC Candidate List
Environmental
A government authority. Auto-linked to this product, not yet human-reviewed. about this rater →
Coverage & match quality
6 ratings · 2 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.
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
Robust31 of 33 characterized
Our sources have reference data on 31 of 33 listed ingredients; 2 are uncharacterized in our data — a gap, not a clean bill.
Worth a look (10)
ANSES CMR-listedflagged by 5 of 9 lists
EU microplastics-restrictedflagged by 1 of 9 lists
Mild sensitizer for someflagged by 1 of 9 lists
EU-restricted (with limits)flagged by 2 of 9 lists
EU-restricted (with limits)flagged by 2 of 9 lists
EU-restricted (with limits)flagged by 2 of 9 lists
IARC possible carcinogen (Group 2B)flagged by 1 of 9 lists
EU-restricted (with limits)flagged by 2 of 9 lists
EU-restricted (with limits)flagged by 2 of 9 lists
EU-restricted (with limits)flagged by 2 of 9 lists
No flags in our sources (21)
- MICA
- MAGNESIUM STEARATE
- MINERAL OIL
- ETHYLHEXYL PALMITATE
- SILICA
- DIMETHICONE
- HYDROGENATED POLYISOBUTENE
- DIISOSTEARYL MALATE
- MICROCRYSTALLINE WAX
- TRIDECYL TRIMELLITATE
- OCTYLDODECANOL
- BORON NITRIDE
- SYNTHETIC FLUORPHLOGOPITE
- CALCIUM ALUMINUM BOROSILICATE
- ALUMINUM STARCH OCTENYLSUCCINATE
- ETHYLHEXYLGLYCERIN
- MAY CONTAIN: MICA
- ULTRAMARINE BLUE
- MANGANESE VIOLET
- FERRIC AMMONIUM FERROCYANIDE
- CARMINE
No data in our sources (2)
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.