Our process
Every recommendation is supposed to follow the same sequence: independent selection, cross-skin-type testing, ingredient review, scoring, and refresh. This page makes that process visible.
Selection and purchase
The strongest category sites decide what to test by search demand, gaps in coverage, and editorial relevance. They are not driven by PR distribution lists.
Skin type mapping
Hold, finish, and flaking vary heavily by skin behaviour. Recommendations become more credible when they acknowledge those differences instead of pretending one product suits everyone.
12-hour protocol
A specialist review needs checkpoints for hold, smudging, flaking, finish drift, and touch-up requirements over time.
Ingredient scrutiny
Because brow gel sits close to the eye area, ingredient transparency and irritant awareness should be built into the editorial process.
Scoring and ranking
| Criterion | Weight | Measured through |
|---|---|---|
| Hold and integrity | 30% | Wear duration, flaking onset, and consistency |
| Finish quality | 20% | Natural result, colour fidelity, and brush control |
| Skin type performance | 25% | Behaviour across oily, dry, and combination wear |
| Ingredient quality | 15% | Irritant profile, transparency, and formulation logic |
| Value for money | 10% | Price, longevity, and market positioning |
Refresh cycle
Formulas change. New launches appear. Strong category pages are reviewed and updated when the facts move, not when traffic drops.