Raters split
Ingredient safety
A 90-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 →
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 →
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 →
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 · California Proposition 65 · US NTP Report on Carcinogens
Recognized on a safer-ingredients list: US EPA Safer Choice recognizes 55% of ingredients as safer choices — a marker, never a score.
Also screened, nothing found: EU Microplastics Restriction
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
8 ratings · 2 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.
No rater covers this axis for this product, so its weight can't move the score.
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.
This says how precisely the packaging is described, not how good it is — a fully identified material can still be a bad one.
Data availability
Robust19 of 20 characterized
Our sources have reference data on 19 of 20 listed ingredients; 1 is uncharacterized in our data — a gap, not a clean bill.
Worth a look (8)
ANSES CMR-listedflagged by 5 of 9 lists →
ANSES CMR-listedflagged by 5 of 9 lists →
EU-prohibitedflagged by 2 of 9 lists →
Undisclosed fragrance blendflagged by 2 of 9 lists →
EU harmonised skin sensitizerflagged by 2 of 9 lists →
Transparency concernflagged by 1 of 9 lists →
EU-restricted (with limits)flagged by 3 of 9 lists →
EU-restricted (with limits)flagged by 2 of 9 lists →
No flags in our sources (11)
No data in our sources (1)
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.
common irritantSodium Lauryl Sulfate
fragrance materialBenzyl Alcohol
undeclared fragrance blendAroma
humectantGlycerin
soothingZinc Oxide⁶