No fair cohort on file, so no comparison.
Raters split
Ingredient safety
A 30-point gap between the two loudest voices.
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 →
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: California Proposition 65 · ECHA SVHC Candidate List · US NTP Report on Carcinogens · EU Harmonised Classification (CLP Annex VI)
Recognized on a safer-ingredients list: US EPA Safer Choice recognizes 52% 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 →
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
8 ratings · 3 of 4 axes
Tune your weights
composite recomputes live
+No rater covers this axis for this product, so its weight can't move the score.
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.
Data availability
Robust30 of 31 characterized
Our sources have reference data on 30 of 31 listed ingredients; 1 is uncharacterized in our data — a gap, not a clean bill.
Worth a look (3)
ANSES CMR-listedflagged by 5 of 9 lists →
Where this came from
Product identity (name, brand, category) verified against skinsort.com ↗
Researched facts on Greenlens always carry the page that stated them — nothing is inferred from a model's memory.
EU microplastics-restrictedflagged by 1 of 9 lists →
Health Canada Hotlist — restrictedflagged by 1 of 9 lists →
No flags in our sources (27)
No data in our sources (1)
Not a verdict — our authorities simply have no reference for these.
These describe what an ingredient is, not whether it is a problem. The stance marks above are the ratings; these are not.
rich occlusiveDIMETHICONE
humectantGLYCERIN
soothingZINC OXIDE