One of Cetaphil's best sellers, read on five public ingredient databases: every one got different verdicts from different databases.
SlipperSkin finding
Read on 21 and 23 October 2026, 1 of 1 Cetaphil products got different clean-or-flagged verdicts from EWG Skin Deep, INCIdecoder, SkinSAFE and Skincarisma; their mean EWG hazard score was 3 and mean Skincarisma score 100.
They do not agree on any of them. EWG Skin Deep scores hazard from 1 to 10 (1 to 2 is its low band); INCIdecoder names the ingredients it rates "icky"; SkinSAFE rates freedom from common allergens (100 is its top); Skincarisma scores from EWG's ingredient ratings out of 100. 0 of 1 get SkinSAFE's top rating.
Split verdict: 2 of 4 databases flag it. Fragrance-free on 4 of 5 databases. Read 21 October 2026.
| EWG Skin Deep | 3 of 10 (its listings range 1 to 3)Good data, updated March 2025 | source |
|---|---|---|
| INCIdecoder | rates no ingredient "icky" | source |
| SkinSAFE | 91ingredients updated May 30, 2025 | source |
| Skincarisma | 100 of 100, "Excellent" | source |
| SkinSort | tags it fragrance-free | source |
Formulas change and databases keep the list they were given. Where one database's ingredient list differs from the others on a clear marker (parabens or fragrance), or EWG labels its listing with a formulation year, we show it here as a question, not a finding: a majority of published lists is evidence, not proof of the current formula.
As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
Where the law stands: FDA says cosmetic ingredients, other than colour additives, need no approval before sale (FDA's ingredient page); California bans a named list of intentionally added chemicals (Health and Safety Code section 108980); and the EU keeps its own prohibited and restricted annexes (Regulation 1223/2009 on EUR-Lex). Check any ingredient in our ingredient files.
More: the full study · which ingredient app answers which question · all 48 brand files
Other brand files: Vaseline · Clinique · Kiehl's · Huda Beauty