Hardwear Shine UV Topcoat vs Cosmetics Mac Nail Lacquer Polish Over-Accessorized (Pink Gold Glitter ) Boxed: which is safer?
Mac Cosmetics Mac Nail Lacquer Polish Over-Accessorized (Pink Gold Glitter ) Boxed is the clear pick. Butter London Hardwear Shine UV Topcoat carries a failing PFAS grade, and we never recommend buying a failing product.
Butter London
Hardwear Shine UV Topcoat
PFAS grade
Overall grade
Verdict
Hazard flags
Material
Confidence
PossibleUncured resin monomers (sensitization/irritation)
PossiblePhotoinitiators and UV sensitivity
PossibleFragrance allergens
Our pick
MAC
Cosmetics Mac Nail Lacquer Polish Over-Accessorized (Pink Gold Glitter ) Boxed
PFAS grade
Overall grade
Verdict
Hazard flags
Material
Confidence
LikelyVolatile organic compounds (VOCs) and solvent inhalation
PossiblePhthalate plasticizers
PossibleHeavy metals in synthetic pigments and mica
Where these two actually differ
- We flag Uncured resin monomers (sensitization/irritation), Photoinitiators and UV sensitivity, Fragrance allergens and Volatile organic compounds (VOC) off-gassing on the Butter London and not on the MAC.
- We flag Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and solvent inhalation, Phthalate plasticizers, Heavy metals in synthetic pigments and mica and Formaldehyde-releaser resins on the MAC and not on the Butter London.
- The Butter London is UV-curable gel topcoat, formula not publicly disclosed where the MAC is nitrocellulose, plasticizers, pigments, resins, which is most of the difference in these two grades.
- The gap is 35 points, wide enough that this is not a close call, and the MAC is the one to buy.
- We are less certain about the Butter London grade, at 35% confidence against 72%, because it discloses less.
Both products run through the same public rubric, which covers materials, coatings, brand disclosure, lab findings, and recalls, plus a beyond-PFAS hazard analysis. Grades are model-based estimates, not lab tests. How grades work →
More cosmetic color products, see the full ranking