75/ 100
C
OverallF57/100
Neutrogena Radiant Tinted Face Moisturizer Sheer

Neutrogena · Moisturizer

Neutrogena Radiant Tinted Face Moisturizer Sheer

C · Moderate

Lower concern; typical cosmetic without known PFAS drivers, but no brand commitment to transparency.

Verdict: BuyWater-based gel with standard cosmetic colorants; no established safety issues, typical brand transparency for mass-market moisturizer.

This is a water-based tinted moisturizer with no known aqueous film-forming foam (AFFF) or grease-resistant treatment that would typically introduce PFAS. Neutrogena has not publicly disclosed PFAS testing or commitments for this product.

Shop Neutrogena on Amazon →

Material

Water-based gel moisturizer with mica, iron oxides, silicones

Brand disclosure

Brand is silent on PFAS

Lab data

No public lab test

Why this grade

Safe base material

Made from a material with no inherent PFAS use (ceramic, mineral, or natural fiber).

Helps the grade

Category baseline

cosmetics is a category where PFAS exposure is more common.

Hurts the grade

No PFAS disclosure

No public statement about PFAS in this product.

Hurts the grade

The full breakdown

What it's made of and why it matters

This is a water-based gel moisturizer formulated with mica (for shimmer and light diffusion) and iron oxides (red, yellow, black pigments for the tint). Silicones act as emollients and texture enhancers. This material profile is among the safest in color cosmetics: iron oxides are inert mineral pigments with no systemic absorption risk, mica is inert, and silicones do not bioaccumulate. The gel base minimizes the need for preservative complexity.

The brand's record and disclosure

Neutrogena (Johnson & Johnson) maintains standard cosmetic labeling compliance and does not highlight PFAS avoidance or independent certifications (e.g., EWG Verified, Dermatologist-Verified is marketing, not third-party). The brand has no major recalls tied to heavy metals or formaldehyde releasers in recent moisturizers. Johnson & Johnson faced talc litigation unrelated to this product line; this moisturizer contains no talc.

How it compares in its category

Tinted moisturizers in this price tier typically use iron oxides and mica identically. This product's silicone base is mainstream and not a differentiator in safety terms. Compared to premium brands (e.g., Glossier, Drunk Elephant), Neutrogena offers no additional safety assurance; compared to budget alternatives, no elevated risk either. Formulation complexity is standard for the segment.

If you buy it

Apply to clean, damp skin for best blending; silicone-based products layer well with sunscreen. No heat exposure risk with topical use. Replace every 12 months after opening to prevent microbial overgrowth in the jar (water-based gels lack the shelf-life extension of oil-based products). Discontinue if rash or irritation develops; fragrance is minimal, so reactions are rare.

Beyond PFAS: other things we checked

Established hazard classes for this product type, assessed from public information. These never change the PFAS grade; a Likely flag caps the Verdict at “Buy with care.”

None known

Heavy metals in iron oxide pigments (lead, cadmium, arsenic)

Iron oxides used in cosmetics are subject to FDA synthetic color listing and impurity limits. No recalls or warnings for Neutrogena tinted moisturizers on this basis. Dermal absorption of iron oxides is negligible.

None known

Formaldehyde or formaldehyde releasers (preservatives)

Water-based gel moisturizers typically rely on phenoxyethanol or paraben blends rather than formaldehyde donors. Neutrogena's formulations do not list known formaldehyde releasers (imidazolidinyl urea, dmdm hydantoin) on accessible ingredient databases for this SKU.

Possible

1,4-dioxane contamination (rinse-off vs. leave-on)

Silicone polymers and emulsifiers can carry trace 1,4-dioxane if not vacuum-stripped during manufacture. This is a leave-on product, so exposure is prolonged but dermal penetration is low. No specific testing on this product is publicly available.

Possible

Fragrance allergens and undisclosed constituents

Ingredient labels do not specify fragrance components (may be listed as 'fragrance' or 'parfum'). Mica and iron oxides are non-allergenic; silicones rarely trigger reactions. Risk is tied to undisclosed fragrance chemicals, typical for mass-market cosmetics without fragrance transparency.

Reported

Microbial growth in jar (water-based formulation)

Water-based moisturizers in jars face higher contamination risk than airless pumps if fingers are inserted repeatedly. Neutrogena does not use preservative-free or airless packaging for this product. Risk is user-behavior-dependent, not formulation-dependent.

What we don’t know

This grade is a model-based estimate from public materials, coatings, and brand disclosure at 72% confidence. It is not a lab result.

No independent PFAS lab test is on record for this exact product. A lab test could move the score in either direction.

The brand has not made a specific, verifiable PFAS-free statement, so part of this score reflects that missing disclosure rather than a confirmed material.

Formulations and coatings change between production runs. Always check the current label before buying.

Safer alternatives in Moisturizer

Tatcha Starter The Ritual Set Ultra Hydrating For Dry Skin

Tatcha

Starter The Ritual Set Ultra Hydrating For Dry Skin

Water-based cosmetic creams and serums; glass/plastic packaging

B
C
PFASAll
B · Low PFAS3 flags

Lower PFAS concern for a cosmetic moisturizer set, but Tatcha makes no public PFAS commitment.

Risky category by default

Herbivore Botanicals Orchid Facial Oil

Herbivore Botanicals

Orchid Facial Oil

plant oils, botanical extracts, glass bottle

B
C
PFASAll
B · Low PFAS3 flags

Lower concern; facial oil with no known PFAS triggers, but brand offers no transparency.

Risky category by default

Herbivore Lapis Balancing Facial Oil

Herbivore Botanicals

Herbivore Lapis Balancing Facial Oil

plant oils, mineral pigments, glass bottle

B
D
PFASAll
B · Low PFAS4 flags

Lower concern for PFAS; facial oil in glass, typical formulation poses minimal risk.

Risky category by default

More moisturizer grades

How we score: every product runs through the same public 0–100 rubric based on materials, coatings, brand disclosure, lab findings, and recalls. See the full methodology → Spotted a mistake? Report an error.