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/Cocokind/Oil to Milk Cleanser
Oil to Milk Cleanser
Cocokind

Oil to Milk Cleanser

Cleansertypically $12–30GTIN 0857334005788
CLAY CLEANSER WITH LAVENDER Travel Size

Cleaner pick · Safest cleansers & exfoliants we have rated

Sodashi

CLAY CLEANSER WITH LAVENDER Travel Size

16 AUD

Ingredient safetyRaters agree
Find on Amazon ↗See all 385 cleaner options →7 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

73OUT OF 100Good

range 72–73

99
Safety
—
Eco
—
Labor
46
Pkg

Why this score

3-point split

97

Scan

100

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

385 found

See better →

Flagged

1 ingredient

What's flagged →

All 385 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. 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: Health Canada Ingredient Hotlist · ECHA SVHC Candidate List · EU Harmonised Classification (CLP Annex VI) · US NTP Report on Carcinogens · California Proposition 65 · ANSES Endocrine Disruptors · IARC Monographs

Environmental

    ✓Also screened, nothing found: EU Microplastics Restriction

    Packaging

    • 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

    4 ratings · 2 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.

    Laborno rating

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

    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

    Good·13 of 18 characterized

    Our sources have reference data on 13 of 18 listed ingredients; 5 are uncharacterized in our data — a gap, not a clean bill.

    Worth a look (1)

    • Pelargonium Graveolens Flower Oil4/10fragrance materialfragranceraters disagree

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

    ✓No flags in our sources (12)

    • Helianthus Annuus Seed
    • Glycerinhumectant
    • Vitis Vinifera Seed Oil
    • Water
    • Sucrose Laurate
    • Adansonia Digitata Seed Oil
    • Sucrose Palmitate
    • Sucrose Stearate
    • Tocopherol
    • Anthemis Nobilis Flower Oil
    • Lactobacillus Ferment
    • sunflower

    No data in our sources (5)

    • Avena Saliva Kernel Oil
    • Avena Saliva
    • Kernel Extract
    • grape
    • oat

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

    What these ingredient tags mean (1)

    These describe what an ingredient is, not whether it is a problem. The stance marks above are the ratings; these are not.

    • humectantGlycerin

      • Glycerin: A humectant, and one of the two ingredients a comparison of moisturiser components found made a significant difference to skin hydration. FDA OTC skin protectant monograph, 21 CFR 347.10(h), lists glycerin as a skin protectant at 20 to 45%. On the humectant half: Jeong CB, Han JY, Cho JC, Suh KD, Nam GW, "Analysis of electrical property changes of skin by oil-in-water emulsion components", Int J Cosmet Sci 2013;35(4):402-410, DOI 10.1111/ics.12059, PMID 23621673, found that "glycerine and urea showed significant skin hydration effects compared with other humectants".