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 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/Becca/Shimmering Skin Perfector Pressed Highlighter, Prosecco Pop (2019 formulation)
Shimmering Skin Perfector Pressed Highlighter, Prosecco Pop (2019 formulation)
Becca

Shimmering Skin Perfector Pressed Highlighter, Prosecco Pop (2019 formulation)

Bronzer Highlighter
maracuja juicy blush & bronzer multi-stick

Cleaner pick · Safest face we have rated

Tarte

maracuja juicy blush & bronzer multi-stick

+39 on ingredient safety

$38

Ingredient safetyRaters agree
Find on Amazon ↗See all 10572 cleaner options →

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

Your composite

55OUT OF 100Fair

range 51–65

61▲▼ split
Safety
20
Eco
85
Labor
—
Pkg

Why this score

10-point split

80

Scan

90

Precautionary

88

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

Cleaner options

10572 found

See better →

Flags

No ingredient flags.

Raters split

Ingredient safety

A 43-point gap between the two loudest voices.

47IARC MonographsGovernment
vs
90Greenlens Precautionary ScreenIndependent
050100
See why, ingredient by ingredient→

All 10572 cleaner options, safest first → We show the best 12, including the strongest on each axis.

Every rater, every axis

Ingredient safety

43 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 →

  • A government authority. 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 →

  • A government authority. Auto-linked to this product, not yet human-reviewed. Checked this week. about this rater →

  • A government authority. Auto-linked to this product, not yet human-reviewed. Checked this week. about this rater →

✓Also screened, nothing found: EU Harmonised Classification (CLP Annex VI) · California Proposition 65 · US NTP Report on Carcinogens · ECHA SVHC Candidate List

Environmental

  • A government authority. Auto-linked to this product, not yet human-reviewed. Checked this week. about this rater →

Labor

  • Run by a nonprofit. Auto-linked to this product, not yet human-reviewed. This rates Becca as a company and applies to everything they make, not this product alone. Checked this week. about this rater →

Coverage & match quality

8 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×
1.0×
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·28 of 29 characterized

Our sources have reference data on 28 of 29 listed ingredients; 1 is uncharacterized in our data — a gap, not a clean bill.

Worth a look (6)

  • May Contain: CI 778918/10raters disagree

    ANSES CMR-listed · flagged by 5 of 9 lists

  • Talc6/10abrasive · absorbent · anticakingraters disagree

    IARC probable carcinogen (Group 2A) · flagged by 5 of 9 lists

  • Nylon-124/10opacifying · bulking · viscosity controllingraters disagree

    EU microplastics-restricted · flagged by 1 of 9 lists

  • Polyethylene4/10film forming · abrasive · viscosity controllingraters disagree

    EU microplastics-restricted · flagged by 1 of 9 lists

  • Polyethylene Terephthalate4/10film formingraters disagree

    EU microplastics-restricted · flagged by 1 of 9 lists

  • Acrylates Copolymer4/10film forming · antistatic · bindingraters disagree

    EU microplastics-restricted · flagged by 1 of 9 lists

✓No flags in our sources (22)

  • Mica
  • Caprylic/Capric Triglyceride
  • Isostearyl Alcohol
  • Petrolatum
  • Silica
  • Boron Nitride
  • HDI/Trimethylol Hexyllactone Crosspolymer
  • Dimethicone
  • Magnesium Stearate
  • Sorbitan Sesquioleate
  • Paraffin
  • Cera Microcristallina
  • Calcium Sodium Borosilicate
  • Synthetic Fluorphlogopite
  • Calcium Aluminum Borosilicate
  • Triethoxycaprylylsilane
  • Potassium Sorbate
  • Tetrasodium EDTA
  • Chlorphenesin
  • Tin Oxide
  • CI 77742
  • CI 75470

No data in our sources (1)

  • CI 77491/77492/77499

Not a verdict — our authorities simply have no reference for these.

Where this came from

Cruelty-free status recorded from blog.beautybridge.com ↗

Researched facts on Greenlens always carry the page that stated them — nothing is inferred from a model's memory.