Review methodology

Method last reviewed 7 November 2026.

Research, not hands-on testing

Our product pages and buying guides are research-led. Unless a page says otherwise, we have not used the product. We assess what can be checked: the declared formula, the brand's own claims, published evidence for the key ingredients, pack size and UK availability. We do not rank products on how they felt, performed or lasted, because we have not measured that.

Review types

• Editorial research review — built from manufacturer data, ingredient analysis and published evidence. No hands-on use. Every product page currently uses this type.
• Aggregated user feedback — patterns across named, attributed sources, presented as reported experience rather than fact.
• Independently tested — used only when we have genuinely tested the product and can describe how. No page currently carries this label.

Where each fact comes from

Each product record says how far its details have been confirmed:

• Ingredient list checked — compared with the manufacturer's own listing on the date shown. Formulas change, so check the pack before buying.
• Ingredient information not verified — taken from a retailer or brand listing that may be partial. The page says so beside the list.
• Manufacturer-reported — claims such as concentrations or clinical percentages are attributed to the brand and are not independent results.
• Not recorded — where we could not confirm a detail, we leave it blank rather than estimate it.

Each product page shows the date it was last researched. Prices and stock are never written into our pages: retailer links open the retailer's own current listing.

How we grade evidence

We do not treat all evidence as equally convincing. From strongest to weakest for a skincare question:

1. Systematic reviews of human randomised controlled trials.
2. Individual human randomised controlled trials.
3. Observational human data.
4. Studies on donated or model skin outside the body.
5. Laboratory and animal studies.
6. Ingredient-supplier data.
7. Manufacturer marketing claims.
8. Individual anecdotes and social media.

A result from one formulation, dose or route is not transferred to another. Evidence from PDRN or polynucleotide injections, wound care or medical preparations does not show what a retail serum or cream will do on intact skin, and we say so where it matters.

The 100-point score

• formula suitability — up to 20 points.
• evidence support — up to 15 points.
• barrier profile — up to 15 points.
• uk value — up to 15 points.
• transparency — up to 10 points.
• packaging stability — up to 10 points.
• routine compatibility — up to 10 points.
• availability — up to 5 points.

Where a component cannot be assessed from verified information, it scores zero and the page states that the score is provisional.

Why a score may be missing

Most products show no score. We only publish one once every component has been assessed against stored evidence. Showing a placeholder or estimated number would suggest more certainty than we have, so an unscored product simply has no score.

Commercial independence

Some retailer links earn us a commission. That never decides which products appear, how they are described or whether one is preferred. See how we make money.

Publication gate

A standard product profile records the brand, product type, size, ingredient status and at least one source. We sometimes publish source notes for a specific product while its pack, formula or market is still being confirmed. These pages identify the source and the gaps in the record and stay out of the sitemap.