PFAS in Eyeliner, Which Brands Grade Best and Worst

Based on available materials and data, eyeliner formulas graded across our database split sharply into two tiers, with no middle ground reported among the products reviewed here. Four eyeliner pencils and gels earned an Excellent grade (75/100) in our model-based scoring, led by Ere Perez ERE PEREZ JOJOBA EYE PENCIL Natural Black, while eleven others, including several long-wear liquid and gel liners from Maybelline, MAC, and Urban Decay, landed in the Poor tier (30/100). This is a materials and disclosure based estimate, not a laboratory certification of any single tube.

The clearest pattern in the data is that pencil-format eyeliners with simpler, more transparent ingredient lists tend to score better than long-wear, waterproof, or "tattoo effect" liquid and gel formulas, which often rely on film-forming and glide agents that can fall into PFAS-adjacent chemical families. That does not mean every pencil is automatically lower risk or that every gel is automatically worse. It means the pattern in this dataset favors simpler formulas, and shoppers who want to compare options side by side can use our product finder or browse the broader makeup and cosmetics category roundups before choosing a specific tube.

Summary comparison

Product	PFAS grade (model estimate)	Verdict
Ere Perez Jojoba Eye Pencil, Natural Black	Excellent, 75/100	Lower concern based on reviewed materials
MAC Chromaline Gel, Hi-Def Cyan	Excellent, 75/100	Lower concern based on reviewed materials
Ere Perez Jojoba Eye Pencil, Gem (Lilac Haze)	Excellent, 75/100	Lower concern based on reviewed materials
Maybelline Line Express Sharpenable Wood Pencil Eyeliner	Excellent, 75/100	Lower concern based on reviewed materials
Ere Perez Eye Pencil (standard line)	Excellent, 75/100	Higher concern, avoid if minimizing PFAS exposure
Maybelline Master Precise All Day Liquid Eyeliner	Poor, 30/100	Higher concern, avoid if minimizing PFAS exposure
Maybelline Hyper Easy Liquid Eyeliner	Poor, 30/100	Higher concern, avoid if minimizing PFAS exposure
Maybelline Eye Lasting Drama Gel Eyeliner	Poor, 30/100	Higher concern, avoid if minimizing PFAS exposure
Maybelline Tattoo Eyeliner	Poor, 30/100	Higher concern, avoid if minimizing PFAS exposure
Maybelline Unstoppable Eyeliner	Poor, 30/100	Higher concern, avoid if minimizing PFAS exposure
MAC Colour Excess Gel Pencil Eye Liner	Poor, 30/100	Higher concern, avoid if minimizing PFAS exposure
Urban Decay 24/7 Glide-On Waterproof Eyeliner Pencil, Zero	Poor, 30/100	Higher concern, avoid if minimizing PFAS exposure
MAC Eye Kohl	Poor, 30/100	Higher concern, avoid if minimizing PFAS exposure
Urban Decay 24/7 Glide On Waterproof Eye Pencil	Poor, 30/100	Higher concern, avoid if minimizing PFAS exposure
Urban Decay 24/7 Waterline Eye Pencil	Poor, 30/100	Higher concern, avoid if minimizing PFAS exposure

How we grade, in plain terms

Every grade in this guide is a model-based estimate built from formula materials, published ingredient disclosures, and category-level patterns, not a lab test performed on the specific tube in your bathroom drawer. A high score reflects lower concern based on what is publicly disclosed and reviewed, and a low score flags formulas where PFAS-related ingredients or waterproof, long-wear chemistries are more commonly found in this category. Brand marketing claims of being "PFAS-free" are noted separately from anything third-party verified, because in most of these listings we found no independent lab certificate attached to the product.

The Excellent-grade eyeliners

Ere Perez Jojoba Eye Pencil, Natural Black

Materials, this is a pencil-format liner built around a jojoba oil base rather than the silicone and film-forming polymer blends common in waterproof liquid liners. Brand claims, Ere Perez markets its line broadly around natural and plant-derived ingredients, though this is a brand statement, not an independent lab audit found in our review. Based on available materials and data, this product scores Excellent (75/100), our model-based estimate from materials and public disclosure, not a lab test.

Pros, simple pencil format, ingredient profile with fewer waterproof-chemistry markers, sharpenable design that limits reliance on synthetic film formers. Cons, pencil liners generally smudge more than gel or liquid tattoo formulas, and a high grade here should be read as lower concern, not as a guarantee of zero PFAS content.

MAC Chromaline Gel, Hi-Def Cyan

Materials, a gel-based color liner marketed for high-definition pigment payoff. Brand claims, MAC's own marketing emphasizes pigment intensity and blendability rather than a PFAS-free claim, and we found no third-party lab certification specific to this shade in our review. Based on available materials and data, this shade grades Excellent (75/100), a model-based estimate rather than a laboratory determination.

Pros, strong pigment payoff typical of gel liner chemistry, graded lower concern relative to other MAC liners in this dataset. Cons, gel formulas as a category can vary shade to shade, and this grade applies to the Hi-Def Cyan shade specifically, not the entire Chromaline Gel range.

Ere Perez Jojoba Eye Pencil, Gem (Lilac Haze)

Materials, same jojoba-oil pencil base as the Natural Black shade, in a lilac colorway. Brand claims, consistent with Ere Perez's broader plant-based positioning, a brand statement not independently verified in our sources. Based on available materials and data, this shade also grades Excellent (75/100), our model-based estimate.

Pros, consistent formula base across the Ere Perez pencil line appears to support the repeated Excellent grade. Cons, color pencils in this softer, oil-based format can require more frequent sharpening and may transfer more than a waterproof gel.

Maybelline Line Express Sharpenable Wood Pencil Eyeliner

Materials, a traditional wood pencil eyeliner, sharpenable, without the waterproof polymer systems found in Maybelline's liquid and gel lines. Brand claims, Maybelline markets this as an easy, precise pencil liner, without a specific PFAS-free claim identified in our review. Based on available materials and data, it grades Excellent (75/100), a model-based estimate from materials and disclosure, not a certified lab result.

Pros, notably, this is the only Maybelline product in our dataset to score Excellent, while every other Maybelline liner reviewed graded Poor, suggesting format matters more than brand name alone. Cons, as a basic wood pencil, it lacks the extreme wear time of Maybelline's liquid tattoo formulas.

The Poor-grade eyeliners

Ere Perez Eye Pencil, standard line

Materials and brand notes, distinct from the Jojoba pencil line above, this standard Ere Perez Eye Pencil graded Poor (30/100) in our model-based review, despite sharing a brand identity with two Excellent-graded products. This underscores that grades apply to specific formulas, not entire brand catalogs. Pros, pencil format still generally avoids some liquid-liner chemistries. Cons, graded higher concern in our dataset, and shoppers should not assume brand reputation carries across every SKU.

Maybelline liquid and gel liners

Materials, the Master Precise All Day Liquid Eyeliner Hyper Easy Liquid Eyeliner Eye Lasting Drama Gel Eyeliner Tattoo Eyeliner, and Unstoppable Eyeliner all lean on long-wear, transfer-resistant, or waterproof formulations, chemistries that as a category more frequently include PFAS-related ingredients. Brand claims, Maybelline markets these on wear time, precision, and smudge resistance, with no PFAS-free claim found attached to these specific products in our review. Based on available materials and data, all five grade Poor (30/100), a model-based estimate, not a lab certificate.

Pros, strong wear-time performance is the reason these formulas exist, and that functional benefit is well documented in brand marketing. Cons, five out of six Maybelline eyeliners reviewed here score Poor, with only the basic wood pencil scoring Excellent, a pattern that should inform format choice within the brand.

MAC Colour Excess Gel Pencil and MAC Eye Kohl

Materials, MAC Colour Excess Gel Pencil Eye Liner and MAC Eye Kohl both use gel or kohl bases distinct from the Chromaline Gel formula above, and both graded Poor (30/100). Brand claims, MAC markets these on smoothness and pigment intensity, with no third-party PFAS-free verification identified in our sources. Pros, kohl and gel-pencil formats give a soft, smudgeable line favored for certain eye looks. Cons, graded higher concern in our model, and paired with the Chromaline Gel's Excellent grade, this shows MAC's catalog is mixed rather than uniformly better or worse.

Urban Decay 24/7 line

Materials, the 24/7 Glide-On Waterproof Eyeliner Pencil 24/7 Glide On Waterproof Eye Pencil, and 24/7 Waterline Eye Pencil are all built around waterproof, long-wear pencil chemistry, and every one of them graded Poor (30/100) in our review. Brand claims, Urban Decay markets the 24/7 line specifically on all-day waterproof wear, a functional claim, not a PFAS-free claim, and we found no independent lab certificate in our sources confirming the absence of PFAS-related compounds. Pros, this is one of the most consistent product lines in the dataset, waterproof performance as advertised. Cons, that same waterproofing chemistry is also the most consistent reason the entire line scores Poor, with all three variants reviewed landing in the same tier.

What to avoid

• Liquid "tattoo effect" or 24-hour wear liners, which in this dataset scored Poor more often than any other format.
• Waterproof pencils marketed for extreme wear or waterline use, since the waterproof chemistry itself is the recurring flag across every Poor-graded product here.
• Assuming brand reputation alone tells you anything. Ere Perez, MAC, and Maybelline each have at least one Excellent-graded and at least one Poor-graded product in this exact dataset.
• Treating any brand's "clean" or "natural" marketing language as a substitute for checking the specific SKU, since none of the claims reviewed here came with an independent lab certificate attached to the product page.
• Ignoring adjacent categories. If you are auditing a full makeup bag, check foundation and primer blush, and lip balm and long-wear lipstick too, since long-wear chemistry shows up across categories, not just eyeliner.

Our pick

Based on available materials and data Ere Perez ERE PEREZ JOJOBA EYE PENCIL Natural Black is our pick among the products reviewed, reflecting the Excellent grade (75/100) our model assigned from its materials and disclosed ingredients. This is a model-based estimate of lower concern, not a certification that the product contains no PFAS-related compounds, and not a claim that it is "safe" in any absolute sense. Shoppers who prefer a plant-oil pencil base with a documented lower-concern grade have three options at the same tier, the Natural Black and Gem (Lilac Haze) shades from Ere Perez, plus the budget-friendly Maybelline Line Express Sharpenable Wood Pencil Eyeliner, which shows that a lower-concern grade is achievable outside of a niche natural-beauty brand too. For gel-liner fans MAC Chromaline Gel in Hi-Def Cyan is the only gel format in this dataset to score Excellent. Anyone prioritizing minimal PFAS exposure across their routine should also browse the wider makeup and cosmetics roundups, or run specific tubes through the finder tool before restocking.

Frequently asked questions

Does a Poor grade mean an eyeliner definitely contains PFAS?

No. A Poor grade reflects our model-based estimate, built from formula type, disclosed ingredients, and category patterns, not a confirmed lab detection of PFAS in that exact tube. Waterproof and long-wear liquid or gel liners tend to score lower because those chemistries more frequently include PFAS-related ingredients as a category, but this is an estimate from available materials and public disclosure, not a lab test.

Is there a proven health risk from PFAS in eyeliner?

Research on PFAS exposure has raised associations with various health concerns, but association is not causation, and eyeliner is only one small potential contributor to total PFAS exposure alongside water, food packaging, and other everyday products. If you want to reduce exposure broadly, it is worth reviewing other categories too, including waterproof boots carpets and rugs, and whole-house filters, since PFAS exposure is cumulative across a household, not limited to cosmetics.

Can I trust a brand's "PFAS-free" claim on the label?

Treat it as a brand-stated claim rather than an independently verified fact unless the product page or packaging cites a specific third-party lab report. In the products reviewed for this guide, we found no independent lab certificate attached confirming a PFAS-free result, so grades here reflect our own model-based review of materials and disclosure, not brand marketing language.