Greenlens

Every public rating on one cosmetic, the places they disagree kept visible, and a single score whose weighting you control.

Navigate

  • Browse
  • In your home
  • Ask Sonion
  • Methodology
  • Criteria
  • Extension
  • How scoring works
  • Account

The one rule

We never blend a score that hides who disagrees. Funding model travels with every rating. Weights are computed at read time and never stored.

Cosmetics only · lead with safetyOpen data via Open Beauty Facts · no EWG/Yuka scraping
As an Amazon Associate, Greenlens earns from qualifying purchases. Affiliate income never changes a rating or ranking.PrivacyTerms
Catalog/Coral Sun/Chill Skin Soothing After-Sun Skin Cooling Aloe Mist (2020 formulation)
Chill Skin Soothing After-Sun Skin Cooling Aloe Mist (2020 formulation)
Coral Sun

Chill Skin Soothing After-Sun Skin Cooling Aloe Mist (2020 formulation)

After Sun

Coral Sun

Chill Skin Soothing After-Sun Skin Cooling Aloe Mist (2020 formulation)

After Sun

hover a pillar to set the scene →

Your composite

61OUT OF 100Fair

range 55–74

—
Labor

Why this score

58-point split

62

Scan

42

Precautionary

100

Tolerance

See why →
Find on Amazon↗

Affiliate link. We may earn a commission. It never changes a rating.

In your home

Sort this into a room

Cleaner options

102 found

See better →

Flags

No ingredient flags.

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→

Cleaner options

See 102 cleaner alternatives

Same category, all safer. We show the best 12, including the strongest on each axis.

See better →

Every rater, every axis

Ingredient safety

58 pts apart
  • 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 →

  • 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: ECHA SVHC Candidate List · EU Harmonised Classification (CLP Annex VI) · ANSES Endocrine Disruptors · California Proposition 65 · Health Canada Ingredient Hotlist · 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.

What we know about the packaging

Partly identified·1 of 2 identified

1 of 2 packaging components is a named material; Plastic (unspecified) is recorded only in general terms, so that part of the score is a stand-in.

  • Recorded only as “plastic” — no resin code. It could be PET (#1) (widely recyclable) or PVC (#3) (hard to recycle); nothing on record says which, so it counts as 46 out of 100, the middle of that range.

This says how precisely the packaging is described, not how good it is — a fully identified material can still be a bad one.

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

Robust·19 of 19 characterized

Our sources have reference data on all 19 listed ingredients.

Worth a look (4)

  • Fragrance6/10perfumingraters disagree

    Undisclosed fragrance blend · flagged by 2 of 9 lists

  • Aloe Barbadensis Leaf Juice4/10skin conditioningraters disagree

    IARC possible carcinogen (Group 2B) · flagged by 1 of 9 lists

  • Phenoxyethanol4/10preservative · antimicrobialraters disagree

    Mild sensitizer for some · flagged by 1 of 9 lists

  • Carbomer4/10emulsion stabilising · gel forming · viscosity controllingraters disagree

    EU microplastics-restricted · flagged by 1 of 9 lists

✓No flags in our sources (15)

  • Aqua/ Water
  • Glycerin
  • Polysorbate 80
  • Propanediol
  • Aminomethyl Propanol
  • Lycium Barbarum Fruit Extract
  • Coffea Arabica Seed Extract
  • Euterpe Oleracea Fruit Extract
  • Morinda Citrifolia Fruit Extract
  • Punica Granatum Fruit Juice
  • Camellia Sinensis Leaf Extract
  • Garcinia Mangostana Fruit Extract
  • Cannabis Sativa Seed Oil
  • Citrus Limon Fruit Extract
  • Disodium EDTA