PFAS30/ 100Poor
Overall8/ 100Bad
MAC Stack Mascara

MAC · Waterproof Mascara

MAC Stack Mascara

Poor

Skip until MAC discloses waterproofing chemistry.

Verdict: SkipMAC Stack Mascara carries undisclosed waterproofing chemistry (poor PFAS grade) and typical mascara hazards; safe if used correctly, but brand opacity on water-resistance agents warrants caution.

MAC doesn't publicly reveal the waterproofing chemistry in this mascara. Waterproof products commonly use Teflon-family coating to achieve water resistance.

The safe swap

Burt's Bees 100% Natural Nourishing Mascara, Black Brown

Burt's Bees

Burt's Bees 100% Natural Nourishing Mascara, Black Brown

75/100 safety

75Excellent

Same rubric that flunked this product. The swap earned Excellent.

Still want this one anyway? Check the price on Amazon. We’d swap it.

Material

wax, film-forming polymers, waterproofing agents (unspecified)

Brand disclosure

Brand is silent on PFAS

Lab data

No public lab test

What’s concerning

♾️

Waterproof / stain-resistant treatment

Water-repellent treatments have historically contained PFAS chemicals.

65/ 100
♾️

Category baseline

PFAS exposure happens more often with clothing products.

80/ 100
♾️

No PFAS disclosure

The company has not publicly discussed PFAS in this product.

85/ 100
♾️

PFAS

MAC Stack's waterproofing chemistry is not disclosed. Industry data shows waterproof mascaras frequently contain fluorinated compounds or PFAS-adjacent polymers; MAC's poor PFAS grade (30/100) and silent stance suggest potential concern, though specific compound identity is unknown.

Source: ATSDR
45/ 100
🫧

Film-forming polymer residue and microfiber shedding

Polymer-based mascaras can shed microfibers into the eye, particularly with poor removal or lash friction. No specific safety issue with MAC Stack documented, but wax-polymer formulations are inherently prone to this if not removed gently.

70/ 100
⚠️

Fragrance allergens and ocular irritation

Mascaras typically contain fragrance compounds. MAC Stack's full fragrance list is not publicly itemized. Sensitive eyes may react to undisclosed fragrances; formaldehyde releasers are not commonly reported in MAC mascaras, but contact sensitivity is individual.

70/ 100
⚠️

Bacterial colonization if stored or capped improperly

All liquid mascaras, including wax-based formulas, can harbor bacteria if caps are left loose or the product is stored in warm/humid conditions. Not unique to MAC Stack but a standard mascara hygiene concern; no brand-specific microbial contamination on record.

70/ 100

What’s reassuring

⛏️

Heavy metals

MAC Stack uses standard iron oxide pigments for black color. No recalls or reported heavy metal contamination in MAC mascaras. Estee Lauder discloses compliance with cosmetic heavy metal limits, though full pigment sourcing is not public.

Source: FDA
95/ 100

The full breakdown

What it's made of and why it matters

MAC Stack Mascara uses wax and film-forming polymers as its base, which coat and thicken lashes. The waterproofing mechanism relies on unspecified waterproofing agents, which in mascaras typically include silicones or fluorinated compounds that resist water breakdown. Because MAC does not publicly disclose the specific chemistry of these waterproofing agents, the exact risk profile for water-resistant properties cannot be fully assessed. This opacity is the core concern, separate from standard mascara chemistry.

The brand's record and disclosure

MAC Cosmetics (Estee Lauder-owned) has not published detailed ingredient breakdowns or sustainability/safety certifications for mascara formulations beyond standard label compliance. The brand maintains no publicly available PFAS policy or waterproofing agent disclosure despite the widespread industry shift toward transparency in this area. No major product recalls or formaldehyde/heavy metal contaminations are on record for MAC mascaras, but the silence on water-resistance chemistry is inconsistent with competitors like Maybelline and Clinique, which have begun specifying alternatives.

How it compares in its category

Waterproof mascaras as a category carry higher scrutiny than non-waterproof types because the waterproofing agents are often the least transparent ingredient. MAC Stack sits in the mid-to-premium tier; similar products from Estee Lauder subsidiaries (Clinique Lash Power) and mass-market rivals (Maybelline Lash Sensational) increasingly disclose polymer and silicone use but still vary on fluorinated additives. Prestige brands have not uniformly adopted fluorine-free waterproofing, making MAC's silence typical for its price point but not a pass on safety grounds.

If you buy it

Apply mascara only to the upper lash line and avoid skin contact during removal to minimize ocular irritation. Remove with a proper makeup remover (micellar water or oil-based cleanser) rather than harsh rubbing, which can damage the lash and increase microfiber shedding into the eye. Replace the mascara every 3 months or sooner if clumping or odor develops, as wax and polymer formulations degrade and can harbor bacteria. Do not use on children or if you have known sensitivities to fragrances or film-forming resins.

What we don’t know

Basis
Model estimate, 35% confidence, not a lab result
Lab test
None on record for this exact product
Brand statement
MAC has made none

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

Safer alternatives in Waterproof Mascara

Burt's Bees 100% Natural Nourishing Mascara, Black Brown

Burt's Bees

100% Natural Nourishing Mascara, Black Brown

Wax, pigments, natural oils (typical mascara base)

PFAS Grade75Excellent
Overall Grade67Good
🏷️

Fragrance allergens and undisclosed sensitizers

Limited concern

70
⚠️

Bacterial growth and contamination in wax formula

Limited concern

70

Lower concern; conventional non-waterproof formula with no identified PFAS drivers.

Risky category by default

More waterproof mascara 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.