PFAS75/ 100Excellent
Overall63/ 100Good
HERBAL ROLL-ON 데오도란트

Aesop · Deodorant

HERBAL ROLL-ON 데오도란트

Excellent

Lower concern; herbal roll-on deodorants rarely contain PFAS.

Verdict: BuyHerbal roll-on deodorants lack PFAS typically; main concern is fragrance allergen sensitivity and preservative systems, manageable with patch test.

This herbal roll-on cosmetic contains no waterproofing, stain resistance, or nonstick coatings that would require PFAS. Aesop discloses no PFAS policy or testing results.

Check price on Amazon →

We flunk more products than we pass. This one earned its grade. How we grade

Material

herbal/botanical roll-on deodorant (water, plant extracts, carrier oils typical)

Brand disclosure

Brand is silent on PFAS

Lab data

No public lab test

What’s concerning

♾️

No PFAS disclosure

The company has not publicly discussed PFAS in this product.

85/ 100
♾️

Category baseline

cosmetics is a category where PFAS exposure is more common.

80/ 100
⚠️

Fragrance allergens and sensitizers

Herbal roll-ons rely on fragrance to mask odor; Aesop does not disclose specific fragrance constituents publicly. Known allergens in botanical deodorants include limonene, linalool, and geraniol, common in plant extracts, which can cause contact dermatitis in 1-3% of users with sensitive skin.

70/ 100
⚠️

Microbial growth in roll-on liquid base

Water-based roll-ons are susceptible to bacterial or fungal growth if seals fail or product is left warm/humid. Risk increases if bottle interior is not cleaned between uses or if product is shared; not a manufacturing defect but a use-dependent hazard.

70/ 100
⚠️

Skin irritation from carrier oils or botanical extracts

Coconut oil, shea butter, and plant extracts are well-tolerated by most but can trigger irritation or folliculitis in individuals with oily or acne-prone skin. Aesop does not disclose specific botanical sources or concentration levels, limiting pre-purchase allergen prediction.

70/ 100

What’s reassuring

Safe base material

Made from ceramic, mineral, or natural fiber with no PFAS risk.

100/ 100

Preservative safety (phenoxyethanol, plant-derived alternatives)

Aesop's specific preservative system is not publicly disclosed for this deodorant. Phenoxyethanol, if used, is generally recognized as safe at <1% concentration by regulatory bodies, but some consumers report sensitivity. No contamination or safety alerts are on record for Aesop deodorant formulations.

95/ 100

Talc or mineral contaminants

No talc is typical in herbal roll-on formulations; Aesop deodorants are not known to contain talc. No contamination with heavy metals or asbestos is on record for this brand's deodorant products.

95/ 100

The full breakdown

What it's made of and why it matters

Aesop's herbal roll-on is a water-based system with botanical extracts and carrier oils (typical: coconut oil, shea butter, or plant waxes) rather than aluminum antiperspirant compounds. This formulation trades antiperspirant efficacy for skin tolerance, meaning it masks odor via herbal antimicrobials rather than blocking sweat. The water-oil emulsion requires preservative systems, typically natural ones like phenoxyethanol or plant-derived alternatives, to prevent microbial growth. No known heavy metals in pigments or talc contamination is on record for this brand's deodorant line.

The brand's record and disclosure

Aesop publishes ingredient lists transparently on product pages and provides safety data sheets upon request. The brand does not market PFAS-free credentials explicitly, nor does it provide third-party certifications (e.g., EWG Verified, Leaping Bunny) for this deodorant line. No product recalls or substantiated contamination incidents are on record for Aesop deodorants. The brand's general positioning emphasizes botanical sourcing but offers limited public disclosure on preservative sourcing or allergen testing protocols.

How it compares in its category

Herbal roll-on deodorants are positioned as natural alternatives to aluminum antiperspirants and synthetic fragrance products; Aesop's sits in the premium segment. Unlike mass-market unscented or crystal deodorants, this product relies on fragrance compounds for odor masking, making fragrance allergen risk more relevant than in mineral alternatives. Compared to certified organic deodorants (e.g., Weleda, Primally Pure), Aesop does not pursue organic certification, though sourcing practices are generally clean. Roll-on format itself (vs. stick or powder) reduces inhalation risk from dispersed particles.

If you buy it

Patch test on inner arm or behind ear for 24-48 hours before full use, as herbal extracts and fragrance compounds can trigger contact dermatitis in sensitive skin. Roll-on bottles should be kept upright and capped tightly to prevent bacterial or mold growth in the liquid base; replace if odor changes or separation occurs (typically 12-18 months of use). Do not store in direct heat or sunlight, as botanical oils may degrade and preservative efficacy can decline. If irritation develops, discontinue and rinse with cool water; seek dermatologist input if rash persists.

What we don’t know

Basis
Model estimate, 72% confidence, not a lab result
Lab test
None on record for this exact product
Brand statement
Aesop has made none

Formulations change between production runs, so check the current label. How we grade.

Safer alternatives in Deodorant

Deodorant Cream 2oz Glass

Puracy

Deodorant Cream 2oz Glass

Glass jar; water-based cream formula

PFAS Grade100Excellent
Overall Grade82Excellent
⚠️

Fragrance allergens

Limited concern

70
💨

Formaldehyde / VOCs

Limited concern

70
⚠️

Glass container breakage

Moderate concern

45

Low concern, glass container and water-based cream with PFAS-free commitment.

Bare metal or glass, no coating at all

Tom's of Maine Deodorant

Tom's of Maine

Deodorant

mineral-based, baking soda formulation

PFAS Grade100Excellent
Overall Grade82Excellent
⚠️

Fragrance allergen content

Limited concern

70
⚠️

Baking soda skin irritation

Moderate concern

45
🫧

Microplastic shedding

Limited concern

70

Lower concern from mineral-based formula with public PFAS-free positioning, though no independent third-party verification.

Risky category by default

Tom's of Maine Most-Loved Deodorant Bundle

Tom's of Maine

Most-Loved Deodorant Bundle

mineral-based and plant-derived actives; stick formulation

PFAS Grade100Excellent
Overall Grade92Excellent
⚠️

Fragrance allergens

Limited concern

70
⚠️

Skin irritation from mineral salts

Limited concern

70

Lower-concern deodorant with mineral-based formula and PFAS-free claim aligned to brand ethos, but no third-party verification found.

Risky category by default

More deodorant grades

How we score: every product runs through the same public 0–100 rubric based on materials, coatings, brand disclosure, lab findings, and recalls. See the full methodology → Spotted a mistake? Report an error.