Greenlens

Navigate

  • Browse
  • In your home
  • Ask Sonion
  • Methodology
  • Criteria
  • Extension
  • How scoring works
  • Account
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/eos/Lip Balm
Lip Balm
eos

Lip Balm

cosmetic productstypically under $12GTIN 0832992012644
Grapefruit & Currant Thinkdaily Lip Balm

Cleaner pick · Safest lip care we have rated

Thinkbaby

Grapefruit & Currant Thinkdaily Lip Balm

+45 on ingredient safety

$3.49

Ingredient safetyRaters agree
Find on Amazon ↗See all 1902 cleaner options →3 in this price band or under

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

Your composite

64OUT OF 100Fair

range 61–75

55▲▼ split
Safety
70
Eco
85
Labor
46
Pkg

Why this score

58-point split

62

Scan

42

Precautionary

100

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

1902 found

See better →

Flagged

2 ingredients

What's flagged →

Raters split

Ingredient safety

A 58-point gap between the two loudest voices.

42Greenlens Precautionary ScreenIndependent
vs
100Greenlens Tolerance ScreenIndependent
050100
See why, ingredient by ingredient→

All 1902 cleaner options, safest first → We show the best 12, including the strongest on each axis.

Every rater, every axis

Ingredient safety

58 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 →

  • 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 · ANSES Endocrine Disruptors · Health Canada Ingredient Hotlist · California Proposition 65 · US NTP Report on Carcinogens · EU Harmonised Classification (CLP Annex VI) · IARC Monographs

✓Recognized on a safer-ingredients list: US EPA Safer Choice recognizes 53% of ingredients as safer choices — a marker, never a score.

Environmental

  • Run by a nonprofit. Auto-linked to this product, not yet human-reviewed. Checked this week. about this rater →

✓Also screened, nothing found: EU Microplastics Restriction

Labor

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

Packaging

  • Independent — not funded by the brands it rates. Auto-linked to this product, not yet human-reviewed. Checked this week. We started showing this score on Sep 11, 2026. 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

Read from the product photo, not declared by the maker — treat this score as weaker.

The container looks like this, rather than the maker saying so. 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

Fair·11 of 17 characterized

Our sources have reference data on 11 of 17 listed ingredients; 6 are uncharacterized in our data — a gap, not a clean bill.

Worth a look (2)

  • flavor6/10flavouring agent · fragrance ingredientraters disagree

    Undisclosed fragrance blend · flagged by 2 of 9 lists →

  • mentha piperita leaf extract4/10skin conditioningraters disagree

    EU-regulated fragrance allergen · flagged by 1 of 9 lists →

✓No flags in our sources (9)

  • shea butter
  • beeswax
  • cera alba
  • cocos nucifera oil
  • butyrospermum parkii butter
  • copernicia cerifera wax
  • Copernicia Cerifera Cera
  • olea europaea fruit oil
  • tocopherol

No data in our sources (6)

  • the natural choice for beautifully soft lips
  • natural and enriched with nourishing oils
  • fruit extracts
  • y ingredients
  • simmondsia chinensis jojoba) seed oil
  • stevia rebaudiana leaf

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

Where this came from

Cruelty-free status recorded from prnewswire.com ↗

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