SkinCarisma exists to help you understand what's in your skincare — not to scare you out of it. Every flag, badge and score on this site is a signal to investigate, never a verdict. This page explains exactly how each one is produced, where the data comes from, how strong the evidence is, and — just as importantly — what we can't tell you.
Our promise: evidence over fear, transparency over black boxes, and honesty about uncertainty. We'd rather say "we don't know" than invent false precision.
The Safety Score is a single 0–100 number summarising the EWG hazard profile of a product's ingredients. It's deliberately simple and fully transparent — here's the entire formula:
score = 100 − (moderate-risk % × 0.45) − (high-risk % × 1.0)
…then clamped to the 0–100 range.
In plain words: we start at 100 and subtract points for the share of a product's ingredients that EWG rates as moderate (3–6) or high (7–10) hazard. High-hazard ingredients weigh more than twice as much as moderate ones. A product made entirely of low-hazard ingredients scores 100.
What this is not: the score reflects hazard ratings of the ingredients on the label, not the real-world risk of using the finished product. It can't account for how much of each ingredient is present (see concentration below), how the formula is buffered, or how your individual skin responds. Use it to compare products and spot things worth researching — not as a safety guarantee or a reason to fear an ingredient.
We don't invent ratings. We aggregate established, citeable sources and show you which one each signal came from:
EWG is widely criticised as alarmist — its hazard scores are often stricter than the weight of scientific evidence warrants, and a high hazard rating does not mean an ingredient is unsafe at the concentrations actually used in cosmetics. We show EWG data because it's broad and consistent, but we treat it as a reference point, not a ruling, and we pair it with the caveats below. If you distrust EWG entirely, lean on the CIR column and the ingredient's own evidence instead.
The single biggest limitation of every ingredient-analysis tool — ours included — is this:
An ingredient list doesn't tell you how much of each ingredient is in the product. The same ingredient can be soothing at 1% and irritating at 20%; a beneficial active can be present in a token, ineffective amount. Hazard and benefit are dose-dependent, and the dose is almost never disclosed.
That's why you'll see a "Concentration unknown" note next to scores and flags. It's not a hedge — it's the honest truth that separates a responsible signal from false precision. Where we can, we use ingredient order (INCI lists are roughly descending by amount) as a weak hint, and we say when we're doing so.
To make that caveat useful rather than just a disclaimer, where a product contains a well-studied active we also show an "Effective levels — general guide" panel: the concentration range that active is typically effective at in research (e.g. niacinamide 2–5%, retinol 0.1–1%, vitamin C 5–20%). These are general norms, not a measurement of the product in front of you — they're there so you can judge whether a formula is plausibly doing real work, or just including a token amount of a heavily-marketed ingredient.
When we flag that a product contains actives for an effect — brightening, anti-aging, acne-fighting, UV protection — those effects don't all rest on equal science. So we grade them:
A product carrying a "notable effect" means it contains an ingredient associated with that effect — not that the product is guaranteed to deliver it. Quality, concentration and formulation decide that. Always cross-check with reviews from people with skin like yours.
Our data is never perfect and improves with the community. If an ingredient, rating or label looks off, email [email protected] and we'll review it. For more detail, see the FAQ.
Last reviewed: June 2026.