Rhode Skin

rhode doesn't make any ingredient commitments at the brand-level. Its parent company makes commitments across all owned brands, including to avoid parabens, phthalates, and uncertified palm oil, but it's unclear what applies to this brand. Choice of ingredients is a strong determinant of environmental impact. rhode appears to still use a few ingredients that pose a significant threat to the climate, including microplastics and some other petrochemical-based ingredients.

It carries products that have certifications from Leaping Bunny, PETA Animal Test-free, .

rhode shares some details on its packaging on product pages. While it uses some recycled plastic, it appears to rely primarily on virgin petro-based plastics for its packaging, which greatly increases its emissions and waste footprint. Its parent company, e.l.f. Beauty, Inc. has made efforts to minimize the amount of material used in some of its product containers, including by specific efforts to avoid excessive materials. It has also made efforts to minimize the volume of material used in its secondary or tertiary shipping packaging, but it's unclear what applies to this brand.

rhode's parent company, e.l.f. Beauty Inc., shares information on its overall energy strategy. It uses 100% renewable energy to power its corporate offices and US retail distribution center and solar represents a small portion of its supplier energy utilization. e.l.f. Beauty Inc. has vague targets for expanding its use of renewable energy. It implements water conservation measures, including switching from a heating process to a cooling process and introducing recycled water in its production. e.l.f. Beauty Inc. has a global production span, which is standard for the industry.

Commons couldn't find evidence that this brand offers any alternative models to lower its waste footprint, such as refills or takeback programs. It provides recycling and/or disposal guidance for all of its products.

It's unclear if this brand releases new items seasonally or otherwise frequently, which can create excess waste.

Commons is still evaluating this brand's marketing emails.

rhode has a sustainability page with high-level details on its climate strategy, but this page is hard to find on its website. Its parent company, e.l.f. Beauty Inc. publishes a detailed annual report with a clear, impact-driven strategy and progress reporting. Its last annual report was published in 2024. rhode shares a complete list of ingredients used in its products, on a per product basis.

rhode's parent company, e.l.f. Beauty Inc., measures and publicly reports its company-level emissions in partnership with SASB. It includes a breakdown by scope 1&2 and scope 3 emissions. The last reporting period was 2024. In its most recent update, its estimated emissions footprint was 164,607 tons CO2e.

rhode's parent company, e.l.f. Beauty Inc., has SBTi-approved emissions reduction targets for the short-term (1-5 years). It has reported on its progress within the past year, and is on track for its scope 1+2 targets. Though its scope 3 emissions are the largest proportion of its footprint, it doesn't currently share any scope 3 reduction targets. Commons couldn't find evidence that this brand offsets any emissions.

rhode's parent company, e.l.f. Beauty Inc., doesn't publish information about its supply chain partners. It publicly shares a supplier code of conduct, which prohibits forced labor, includes environmental clauses, and prohibits child labor. Its code of conduct doesn't disallow unauthorized subcontracting, ensure a living wage, ensure the right to collective bargaining, or establish grievance mechanisms. e.l.f. Beauty Inc. doesn't have a stated policy of regularly auditing its supply chain partners. This may increase human and environmental risks. It has labor certifications within its supply chain, including Fairtrade.

Commons wasn't able to find evidence of any trade association memberships or any relevant policy for this brand. Its parent company, e.l.f. Beauty Inc., isn't a member of any key advocacy organizations that are blocking climate policy. It isn't a member of advocacy organizations advancing climate policy. It doesn't employ any state lobbyists. It didn't donate more than $100k to climate-obstructive candidates or PACs from 2018-2024.