Comedogenic ingredient checker.

Where comedogenic ratings came from

The most-cited comedogenicity data comes from two sources:

• Kligman & Fulton (1981): 100% concentration of test ingredients applied to rabbit ear skin for 2 weeks. Comedones graded 0-5.
• Fulton (1989): refined version, still rabbit ear, still high concentrations.

The problem: rabbit ear skin is anatomically different from human face skin. The pilosebaceous unit (where comedones form) has different keratinization patterns. The follicle anatomy is different. And — critically — testing 100% concentrations doesn't tell you what happens at the 1-5% concentrations actually used in skincare products.

A 2014 review in Dermatologic Surgery tested 27 ingredients in human models at formulation-realistic concentrations. Only 8 of the 27 ingredients with high Kligman scores actually produced comedones in human testing. The rest were false positives — flagged as comedogenic in the rabbit model but harmless in practice.

The myths this tool exists to push back on

Coconut oil isn't categorically bad for everyone

Coconut oil rates 4/5 on the Fulton scale and is famously "the worst comedogenic" on TikTok. In practice: people with very oily skin and active comedonal acne do tend to break out from coconut oil applied directly to the face. But coconut oil applied to body or hair (where comedone-prone follicles are different) is fine for most people. And many people with dry skin tolerate small amounts mixed into other products without issue. The 4/5 rabbit rating doesn't predict your individual response.

Isopropyl myristate is the actual problem ingredient nobody flags

Isopropyl myristate (IPM) and isopropyl palmitate are some of the most well-documented comedogenic ingredients in human testing — far more reliable as comedone triggers than the famously-flagged oils. They appear in many lightweight "non-comedogenic" lotions because they create a silky finish. The 2014 review confirmed both as reliably comedogenic. Worth scanning your moisturizer ingredient list for.

"Non-comedogenic" claims are unregulated

In the US, EU, and most markets, "non-comedogenic" on a label is a marketing claim with no required testing or certification. A brand can put it on a product that contains isopropyl myristate, lanolin, or sodium lauryl sulfate. The only reliable check is parsing the ingredient list.

What this tool actually flags

Based on the 2014 review and subsequent human-testing data, the tool flags ingredients in three tiers:

• High confidence comedogenic: isopropyl myristate, isopropyl palmitate, myristyl myristate, octyl palmitate, isopropyl isostearate. Documented in human models.
• Moderate confidence: high-concentration coconut oil, cocoa butter, certain esters and fatty alcohols when used as primary emollients. Context-dependent.
• Worth-knowing but lower priority: laureth-4, sodium lauryl sulfate (irritant + comedogenic for some), red dyes (in heavy concentrations).

The tool intentionally doesn't flag every ingredient that scored 3+ on the Fulton scale — because doing so would force you to avoid ingredients that don't actually break out human skin in real products.

What to do with the result

Three tiers of action:

• If 0 flags: the product is unlikely to be the comedone source. Look at upstream causes (hair products, pillowcase, hormonal patterns).
• If 1-2 flags in the latter part of the list: low concentration, probably not the culprit. Worth monitoring.
• If 1+ flags in the first third of the list: high concentration, plausible cause. Try a 4-week elimination — swap the product for a flagged-ingredient-free alternative and see if comedones improve.

Combine this with our closed comedones treatment plan for the full picture — topical actives + ingredient avoidance + lifestyle audit is the three-pronged approach that actually moves the needle.