
Cleaner pick · Safest moisturizers we have rated
Anua US
Barrier Reboot Daily Moisturizer+43 on ingredient safety
$24
Ranked by safety only. Greenlens earns from qualifying purchases. Payout never affects a rating, a ranking, or the cleaner pick.
Raters split
Ingredient safety
A 58-point gap between the two loudest voices.
All 3062 cleaner options, safest first We show the best 12, including the strongest on each axis.
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 →
Also screened, nothing found: ECHA SVHC Candidate List · California Proposition 65 · EU Harmonised Classification (CLP Annex VI) · US NTP Report on Carcinogens · ANSES Endocrine Disruptors · Health Canada Ingredient Hotlist
US EPA Safer Choice (SCIL) recognizes 58% of ingredients as safer choices — a marker, never a score.
A government authority. Auto-linked to this product, not yet human-reviewed. Checked this week. about this rater →
Run by a nonprofit. Auto-linked to this product, not yet human-reviewed. This rates Fruit of the Earth as a company and applies to everything they make, not this product alone. 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 →
Coverage & match quality
7 ratings · 4 of 4 axes
Tune your weights
composite recomputes live
+What we know about the packaging
Unidentified0 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.
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.
Data availability
Good21 of 26 characterized
Our sources have reference data on 21 of 26 listed ingredients; 5 are uncharacterized in our data — a gap, not a clean bill.
Worth a look (5)
Undisclosed fragrance blendflagged by 2 of 9 lists →
Undisclosed fragrance blendflagged by 2 of 9 lists →
IARC possible carcinogen (Group 2B)flagged by 1 of 9 lists
Mild sensitizer for someflagged by 1 of 9 lists →
EU microplastics-restrictedflagged by 1 of 9 lists →
No flags in our sources (16)
No data in our sources (5)
Not a verdict — our authorities simply have no reference for these.
Where this came from
Product identity (name, brand, category) verified against ebay.com ↗
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.