Klorane
Poudre de toilette protectrice
poudres de toilette100gGTIN 3282779326988
Cleaner pick · Safest face we have rated
Tarte
maracuja juicy blush & bronzer multi-stick+44 on ingredient safety
$38
Ingredient safetyRaters agree
Ranked by safety only. We may earn a commission on the link; it never changes the order.
Raters split
Ingredient safety
A 52-point gap between the two loudest voices.
42Greenlens Precautionary ScreenIndependent
vs94Greenlens Tolerance ScreenIndependent
050100
See why, ingredient by ingredientAll 13213 cleaner options, safest first We show the best 12, including the strongest on each axis.
Every rater, every axis
Ingredient safety
52 pts apartA 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 →
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 →
Also screened, nothing found: California Proposition 65 · US NTP Report on Carcinogens · ECHA SVHC Candidate List · EU Harmonised Classification (CLP Annex VI) · ANSES Endocrine Disruptors
Environmental
Also screened, nothing found: EU Microplastics Restriction
Labor
Run by a nonprofit. Auto-linked to this product, not yet human-reviewed. This rates Klorane 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. about this rater →
Coverage & match quality
7 ratings · 3 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.
1.0×
1.0×
0 means ignored. Higher = more weight in your composite.
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.
- 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.
Ingredients, decoded
Data availability
Good8 of 11 characterized
Our sources have reference data on 8 of 11 listed ingredients; 3 are uncharacterized in our data — a gap, not a clean bill.
Worth a look (3)
IARC probable carcinogen (Group 2A)flagged by 5 of 9 lists →
Undisclosed fragrance blendflagged by 2 of 9 lists →
Undisclosed fragrance blendflagged by 2 of 9 lists →
No flags in our sources (5)
No data in our sources (3)
Not a verdict — our authorities simply have no reference for these.
Where this came from
Cruelty-free status recorded from ethicalelephant.com ↗
Researched facts on Greenlens always carry the page that stated them — nothing is inferred from a model's memory.