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/Extreme/Polvo Fijador Compacto Extreme Perfect Ending
Polvo Fijador Compacto Extreme Perfect Ending
Extreme

Polvo Fijador Compacto Extreme Perfect Ending

face makeup10gGTIN 7799054023693
maracuja juicy blush & bronzer multi-stick

Cleaner pick · Safest face we have rated

Tarte

maracuja juicy blush & bronzer multi-stick

+25 on ingredient safety

$38

Ingredient safetyRaters agree
Find on Amazon ↗See all 2467 cleaner options →

Ranked by safety only. Greenlens earns from qualifying purchases. Payout never affects a rating, a ranking, or the cleaner pick.

Your composite

66OUT OF 100Fair

range 63–73

75▲▼ split
Safety
78
Eco
—
Labor
46
Pkg

Why this score

4-point split

90

Scan

93

Precautionary

94

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

2467 found

See better →

Flagged

3 ingredients

What's flagged →

Raters split

Ingredient safety

A 29-point gap between the two loudest voices.

65IARC MonographsGovernment
vs
94Greenlens Tolerance ScreenIndependent
050100
See why, ingredient by ingredient→

All 2467 cleaner options, safest first → We show the best 12, including the strongest on each axis.

Every rater, every axis

Ingredient safety

29 pts apart
  • 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 →

  • 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 →

✓Also screened, nothing found: ECHA SVHC Candidate List · EU Harmonised Classification (CLP Annex VI) · US NTP Report on Carcinogens · California Proposition 65 · ANSES Endocrine Disruptors

Environmental

  • A government authority. Auto-linked to this product, not yet human-reviewed. 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×
1.0×
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.

Ingredients, decoded

Data availability

Robust·10 of 11 characterized

Our sources have reference data on 10 of 11 listed ingredients; 1 is uncharacterized in our data — a gap, not a clean bill.

Worth a look (3)

  • Talc6/10abrasive · absorbent · anticakingraters disagree

    IARC probable carcinogen (Group 2A) · flagged by 5 of 9 lists →

  • Polyethylene4/10film forming · abrasive · viscosity controllingraters disagree

    EU microplastics-restricted · flagged by 1 of 9 lists →

  • Phenoxyethanol4/10preservative · antimicrobialraters disagree

    Mild sensitizer for some · flagged by 1 of 9 lists →

✓No flags in our sources (7)

  • Mica
  • Zinc Stearate
  • Zea Mays
  • Starch
  • Dimethiconerich occlusive
  • Silica
  • Potassium Sorbate

No data in our sources (1)

  • Corn

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.

  • rich occlusiveDimethicone

    • Dimethicone: A silicone that forms a film on the surface of the skin without an oily feel. FDA OTC skin protectant monograph, 21 CFR 347.10(g), lists dimethicone as a skin protectant at 1 to 30%.