Raters split
Ingredient safety
A 52-point gap between the two loudest voices.
42Greenlens Precautionary ScreenIndependent
vs94Greenlens Tolerance ScreenIndependent
050100
See why, ingredient by ingredientEvery 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 →
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: ECHA SVHC Candidate List · US NTP Report on Carcinogens · EU Harmonised Classification (CLP Annex VI) · California Proposition 65 · ANSES Endocrine Disruptors · IARC Monographs
Environmental
Also screened, nothing found: EU Microplastics Restriction
Labor
Run by a nonprofit. Auto-linked to this product, not yet human-reviewed. This rates Signal 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
6 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.
Ingredients, decoded
Data availability
Good11 of 16 characterized
Our sources have reference data on 11 of 16 listed ingredients; 5 are uncharacterized in our data — a gap, not a clean bill.
Worth a look (3)
Undisclosed fragrance blendflagged by 2 of 9 lists →
Transparency concernflagged by 1 of 9 lists →
EU-restricted (with limits)flagged by 3 of 9 lists →
No flags in our sources (8)
No data in our sources (5)
Not a verdict — our authorities simply have no reference for these.
What these ingredient tags mean (2)
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
- sodium lauryl sulfate: A strong cleansing agent used as the reference irritant in skin-irritation testing. OECD Test Guideline 439 (in vitro skin irritation, reconstructed human epidermis), paragraph 24: "The suggested PC is 5% aqueous SDS", sodium dodecyl sulphate, the same substance as sodium lauryl sulfate, CAS 151-21-3.
humectantglycerin
- glycerin: A humectant, and one of the two ingredients a comparison of moisturiser components found made a significant difference to skin hydration. FDA OTC skin protectant monograph, 21 CFR 347.10(h), lists glycerin as a skin protectant at 20 to 45%. On the humectant half: Jeong CB, Han JY, Cho JC, Suh KD, Nam GW, "Analysis of electrical property changes of skin by oil-in-water emulsion components", Int J Cosmet Sci 2013;35(4):402-410, DOI 10.1111/ics.12059, PMID 23621673, found that "glycerine and urea showed significant skin hydration effects compared with other humectants".