Fructis Sleek & Shine Fortifying Conditioner vs Pro-V Daily Moisture Renewal Conditioner: which is safer?
These two grade almost identically. Pick on price and preference; neither has a PFAS edge.
Garnier Fructis
Fructis Sleek & Shine Fortifying Conditioner
PFAS grade
Excellent 75/100
Overall grade
Good 67/100
Verdict
Buy
Hazard flags
⚑ 2
Material
aqueous liquid conditioner; no water-repellent coating or nonstick coating
Confidence
78%
Possible1,4-dioxane (secondary contamination)
PossibleFragrance allergens
Pantene
Pro-V Daily Moisture Renewal Conditioner
PFAS grade
Excellent 75/100
Overall grade
Good 67/100
Verdict
Buy
Hazard flags
⚑ 2
Material
aqueous conditioning cream; typical surfactants, silicones, emollients
Confidence
72%
PossibleFragrance allergens
PossibleSilicone buildup (cosmetic, not toxicological)
Where these two actually differ
- We flag 1,4-dioxane (secondary contamination) on the Garnier Fructis and not on the Pantene.
- We flag Silicone buildup (cosmetic, not toxicological) on the Pantene and not on the Garnier Fructis.
- Both carry a flag for Fragrance allergens, so neither choice avoids it.
- The Garnier Fructis is aqueous liquid conditioner; no DWR or nonstick coating where the Pantene is aqueous conditioning cream; typical surfactants, silicones, emollients, which is most of the difference in these two grades.
- These two are level, close enough that price and fit should decide it rather than our grade.
Both products run through the same public rubric: 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 conditioner: see the full ranking