MascaraGTIN 9344329280462
Cleaner pick · Safest eyes we have rated
Revolution
Just Chillin' Cooling Shadow Stick+55 on labor practices
Ingredient safetyRaters agree
Ranked by safety only. Greenlens earns from qualifying purchases. Payout never affects a rating, a ranking, or the cleaner pick.
All 531 cleaner options, safest first We show the best 12, including the strongest on each axis.
Every rater, every axis
Ingredient safety
raters agreeIndependent — 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: California Proposition 65 · EU Harmonised Classification (CLP Annex VI) · IARC Monographs · US NTP Report on Carcinogens · ANSES Endocrine Disruptors · ECHA SVHC Candidate List · Health Canada Ingredient Hotlist
US EPA Safer Choice (SCIL) recognizes 53% of ingredients as safer choices — a marker, never a score.
Environmental
A government authority. Auto-linked to this product, not yet human-reviewed. Checked this week. about this rater →
Labor
Run by a nonprofit. Auto-linked to this product, not yet human-reviewed. This rates Maybelline 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 · 4 of 4 axes
- Some ratings rest on an automatic match that has not been human-reviewed.
Weighted by what you care about
Tune your weights
composite recomputes live
+
1.0×
1.0×
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.
How we know the packaging
Nobody published the material for this product, so it was read from the product photo — the container looks like this, rather than the maker saying so. Treat the packaging score as weaker here than on a product with a declared material.
A photo also cannot show the resin code moulded into the base, so every plastic container reads as “plastic, unspecified” — the cautious end of the plastics range, not a finding about this particular pack.
Ingredients, decoded
Data availability
Robust17 of 19 characterized
Our sources have reference data on 17 of 19 listed ingredients; 2 are uncharacterized in our data — a gap, not a clean bill.
Worth a look (2)
EU microplastics-restrictedflagged by 1 of 9 lists →
Mild sensitizer for someflagged by 1 of 9 lists →
No flags in our sources (15)
No data in our sources (2)
Not a verdict — our authorities simply have no reference for these.