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/Revolution/Aura Blush, Neo Pink
Revolution

Aura Blush, Neo Pink

Blush
maracuja juicy blush & bronzer multi-stick

Cleaner pick · Safest face we have rated

Tarte

maracuja juicy blush & bronzer multi-stick

+6 on ingredient safety, gives up 11 on labor practices

$38

Ingredient safetyRaters agree
Find on Amazon ↗See all 1224 cleaner options →

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

Your composite

76OUT OF 100Good

range 75–77

94
Safety
78
Eco
85
Labor
46
Pkg

Why this score

8-point split

90

Scan

98

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

1224 found

See better →

Flags

No ingredient flags.

All 1224 cleaner options, safest first → We show the best 12, including the strongest on each axis.

Every rater, every axis

Ingredient safety

raters agree
  • 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: California Proposition 65 · EU Harmonised Classification (CLP Annex VI) · US NTP Report on Carcinogens · Health Canada Ingredient Hotlist · IARC Monographs · ECHA SVHC Candidate List · ANSES Endocrine Disruptors

Environmental

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

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

6 ratings · 4 of 4 axes

  • Some ratings rest on an automatic match that has not been human-reviewed.

Weighted by what you care about

Tune your weights

composite recomputes live

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

What we know about the packaging

Unidentified·0 of 1 identified

Nobody recorded what this pack is actually made of beyond “plastic”, so the packaging score is a stand-in for the middle of that range — not a reading of this container.

  • 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·14 of 14 characterized

Our sources have reference data on all 14 listed ingredients.

Worth a look (3)

  • POLYETHYLENE4/10film forming · abrasive · viscosity controllingraters disagree

    EU microplastics-restricted · flagged by 1 of 9 lists

  • PHENOXYETHANOL4/10preservative · antimicrobialraters disagree

    Mild sensitizer for some · flagged by 1 of 9 lists

  • CI 454104/10colorant · hair dyeingraters disagree

    EU-restricted (with limits) · flagged by 2 of 9 lists

✓No flags in our sources (11)

  • MICA
  • SILICA
  • MAGNESIUM STEARATE
  • DIMETHICONE
  • HYDROGENATED POLYISOBUTENE
  • BORON NITRIDE
  • PENTAERYTHRITYL TETRAISOSTEARATE
  • TRIETHOXYCAPRYLYLSILANE
  • CAPRYLYL GLYCOL
  • DIETHYLHEXYL SYRINGYLIDENEMALONATE
  • CAPRYLIC/CAPRIC TRIGLYCERIDE

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.