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 →
A government authority. Auto-linked to this product, not yet human-reviewed. about this rater →
Also screened, nothing found: ANSES Endocrine Disruptors · ECHA SVHC Candidate List · Health Canada Ingredient Hotlist · US NTP Report on Carcinogens · EU Harmonised Classification (CLP Annex VI) · California Proposition 65
US EPA Safer Choice (SCIL) recognizes 70% of ingredients as safer choices — a marker, never a score.
Run by a nonprofit. Auto-linked to this product, not yet human-reviewed. about this rater →
Also screened, nothing found: EU Microplastics Restriction
Run by a nonprofit. Auto-linked to this product, not yet human-reviewed. about this rater →
Run by a nonprofit. 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 →
Coverage & match quality
8 ratings · 4 of 4 axes
Tune your weights
composite recomputes live
+Data availability
Robust9 of 10 characterized
Our sources have reference data on 9 of 10 listed ingredients; 1 is uncharacterized in our data — a gap, not a clean bill.
Worth a look (1)
IARC possible carcinogen (Group 2B)flagged by 1 of 9 lists →
No flags in our sources (8)
No data in our sources (1)
Not a verdict — our authorities simply have no reference for these.
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.