Formulation — 30%
The largest share of the score, because it is the part a consumer cannot easily check. We read the complete INCI list and note where the hero ingredient sits relative to the preservative system — an active listed after phenoxyethanol is almost certainly present below one percent, whatever the front label implies.
Where a brand publishes a concentration, we check it is plausible at the product's stated pH and delivery system. Where it does not, we say so and mark accordingly. Pleasant texture is worth something; it is not worth as much as a formula that does what it claims.
Transparency — 25%
Does the brand publish percentages? Does it name its actual manufacturer or hide behind a holding company? When an independent lab or a regulator contradicts a claim, does the brand correct the claim or the critic?
We also weigh what happens at the margins: whether 'clean' or 'non-toxic' language is defined anywhere on the site, whether sourcing claims can be traced, and whether the brand quietly changes a formula while keeping the old claims on the page.
Range and fit — 20%
For colour, this is shade depth and undertone spread — a forty-shade range with three deep options is not a forty-shade range in any useful sense. For skincare, it is whether the catalogue serves oily, dry, sensitive and mature skin or only the one it photographs best.
Sizes count here too. A brand that sells a €90 serum in exactly one size is asking for a commitment before you know whether it suits you.
Value per use — 15%
Not the sticker price. We calculate cost per millilitre, per wear or per wash and compare it with what the same money buys from a directly comparable formula. A cheap product you need three pumps of is not cheap.
Frequent, deep, permanent discounting also lands here: a brand whose 'full price' nobody ever pays is telling you what it thinks the product is worth.
Ownership and ethics — 10%
Who owns the house, where it manufactures, and whether its cruelty-free, refill and sustainability claims survive contact with the supply chain. We record parent-company ownership plainly — it is not automatically a negative, but readers are entitled to know when an 'indie' brand is a conglomerate subsidiary.
Sources and evidence
We prefer primary evidence: the brand's own ingredient lists and published data, regulatory filings, peer-reviewed literature on an ingredient class, and independent laboratory results where they exist. Influencer content and press releases are treated as claims, never as findings.
- Product pages, INCI lists and technical dossiers from the brand.
- Regulatory databases and recall notices in the relevant market.
- Published research on an ingredient at the relevant concentration.
- Screenshots we capture ourselves, dated at the time of review.
Independence
No brand pays for coverage, sees a review before publication, or has any right of approval. We do not run sponsored reviews. Where a link to a brand is included it is for verification, and it does not change a score.
When a score changes
Scores are re-examined when a brand reformulates a flagship product, changes ownership, alters its published claims, faces a substantiated regulatory action, or moves its prices materially. A changed score carries a dated note explaining what moved and why.