Raters split
Ingredient safety
A 20-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 →
A government authority. Auto-linked to this product, not yet human-reviewed. Checked this week. about this rater →
Also screened, nothing found: ECHA SVHC Candidate List · EU Harmonised Classification (CLP Annex VI) · US NTP Report on Carcinogens · California Proposition 65
Also screened, nothing found: EU Microplastics Restriction
Run by a nonprofit. Auto-linked to this product, not yet human-reviewed. This rates Fluocaril as a company and applies to everything they make, not this product alone. 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
5 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.
Data availability
Not enough to score3 of 27 characterized
Our sources have reference data on 3 of 27 listed ingredients; 24 are uncharacterized in our data — a gap, not a clean bill. That is not enough of the label for a safety score to be honest, so we do not publish one.
Worth a look (2)
ANSES CMR-listedflagged by 2 of 9 lists →
Health Canada Hotlist — restrictedflagged by 1 of 9 lists →
No flags in our sources (1)
No data in our sources (24)
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.
fragrance materialmenthol