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/Anko/Green Tea Deodorant Body Wipes
A
Anko

Green Tea Deodorant Body Wipes

Deodorant
Geranium Deodorant

Cleaner pick · Safest deodorant we have rated

Primally Pure

Geranium Deodorant

+41 on ingredient safety

$16

Ingredient safetyRaters agree
Find on Amazon ↗See all 626 cleaner options →

Ranked by safety only. We may earn a commission on the link; it never changes the order.

Your composite

53OUT OF 100Poor

range 48–65

59▲▼ split
Safety
—
Eco
85
Labor
16
Pkg

Why this score

52-point split

62

Scan

42

Precautionary

94

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

626 found

See better →

Flags

No ingredient flags.

Raters split

Ingredient safety

A 52-point gap between the two loudest voices.

42Greenlens Precautionary ScreenIndependent
vs
94Greenlens Tolerance ScreenIndependent
050100
See why, ingredient by ingredient→

All 626 cleaner options, safest first → We show the best 12, including the strongest on each axis.

Every rater, every axis

Ingredient safety

52 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 →

  • A government authority. 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 →

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

✓Also screened, nothing found: California Proposition 65 · US NTP Report on Carcinogens · ECHA SVHC Candidate List

Environmental

    ✓Also screened, nothing found: EU Microplastics Restriction

    Labor

    • Run by a nonprofit. 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×
    Environmentalno rating

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

    1.0×
    1.0×
    0 means ignored. Higher = more weight in your composite.

    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·12 of 12 characterized

    Our sources have reference data on all 12 listed ingredients.

    Worth a look (6)

    • LIMONENE7/10perfuming · deodorant · solventraters disagree

      ANSES endocrine candidate · flagged by 3 of 9 lists

    • FRAGRANCE6/10perfumingraters disagree

      Undisclosed fragrance blend · flagged by 2 of 9 lists

    • LINALOOL6/10perfuming · deodorantraters disagree

      EU harmonised skin sensitizer · flagged by 2 of 9 lists

    • PHENOXYETHANOL4/10preservative · antimicrobialraters disagree

      Mild sensitizer for some · flagged by 1 of 9 lists

    • BENZALKONIUM CHLORIDE4/10preservative · antimicrobial · antistaticraters disagree

      EU-restricted (with limits) · flagged by 3 of 9 lists

    • ALOE BARBADENSIS LEAF EXTRACT4/10humectant · emollient · oral careraters disagree

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

    ✓No flags in our sources (6)

    • AQUA
    • ALUMINUM CHLOROHYDRATE
    • ETHYLHEXYLGLYCERIN
    • DECYL GLUCOSIDE
    • CAMELLIA SINENSIS LEAF EXTRACT
    • TOCOPHERYL ACETATE

    Where this came from

    Cruelty-free status recorded from kmart.co.nz ↗

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