Sirenetta by Aurore

rating tier poor

brand rating & evaluation

Sirenetta by Aurore

brand rating & evaluation
overall rating: Poor
rating tier poor

Our ratings are based on a scale from 1 (Avoid) to 5 (Top Choice).

See how we rate.


The Shifting Gaia rating evaluates brands based on sustainable practices, ingredients and materials, and social responsibility, among others. Below are a few factors influencing this brand's score:

overview

sustainability
4.6 out of 10
non-toxic
4.0 out of 10
social responsibility

about

Sirenetta by Aurore is a Lebanon-based beauty brand focusing on body care items like oils, butters, mists, and soaps. 

sustainability

Rotating arrow
Sustainability
score:
4.6 out of 10

details:

Packaging

The body butter comes in a tin jar with a tin lid which is eco-friendly. The bronzing oil however is in a plastic spray bottle with a plastic pump mechanism. The brand does use some glass (the body mist appears to be in a glass spray bottle with a plastic cap), which is recyclable, but most components (lids, pumps, jars) are virgin plastic. There is no evidence of recycled content or compostable biomaterials in use. No refill or reuse program is offered; every product is sold in its own new container, and the website does not mention any take-back scheme or refill discounts. 

Ingredient Sustainability

Sirenetta’s ingredient sourcing and materials show a mix of natural and synthetic components, but lack any transparency or certifications to ensure environmental sustainability. Many core ingredients are naturally derived and renewable. For example, Sirenetta’s formulas use a lot of plant-based oils and butters – coconut oil, olive oil, sweet almond oil, shea butter, avocado oil, etc. These ingredients are biodegradable and come from renewable crops. 

Shea butter and cocoa butter, if sourced conventionally, can have sustainability issues (cocoa butter especially is linked to deforestation and unethical labor in West Africa if not Fair Trade/Fair for Life certified). Almond oil likewise has a high water footprint and heavy pesticide use in conventional cultivation. Several synthetic ingredients and processing aids appear in Sirenetta’s formulas, indicating a reliance on petrochemical-derived substances (ceteareth-12 and ceteareth-20, phenoxyethanol and caprylyl glycol). These compounds are typically made from petroleum feedstocks or via energy-intensive chemical processes, and they are not biodegradable in the way natural oils are.

Energy Use & Carbon Footprint

As a small cosmetics producer, the brand has not published any data or commitments regarding manufacturing energy sources, carbon footprint, or climate initiatives. There are no statements about renewable energy usage in production, no carbon-neutral shipping programs, and no carbon offsetting of emissions. 

Waste Management

 There is no evidence of any circular economy initiatives such as refill programs, package take-back, or recycled material use. Product end-of-life is not addressed by the brand: customers are left to dispose of empty bottles and jars through regular trash or recycling streams. The packaging, as noted, is mostly plastic and glass – theoretically recyclable, but the brand does nothing to facilitate or encourage recycling. Sirenetta’s products are one-and-done items that likely contribute to consumer waste after use.

Business Model

The brand carries a range of products and introduces multiple scent “collections” (e.g. the core Sirenetta line and the “Tropical Dream” line) to entice consumers with variety. This approach can lead to customers buying more products. This indicates a conventional business approach focused on growth and turnover, rather than encouraging customers to buy sparingly.

non-toxic

Rotating arrow
Non-toxic
score:
4.0 out of 10

details:

Despite marketing itself as a natural and clean beauty brand, Sirenetta’s formulations contain several ingredients that raise toxicity or safety concerns.

The base formulas are generally skin-friendly (e.g. shea butter and almond oil are very safe, non-toxic moisturizers), however The Pearl de Coco Body Lotion formula contains butylphenyl methylpropional, also known as lilial. Lilial is a fragrance ingredient that has been banned in the EU or its links to endocrine disruption and reproductive toxicity. Its presence in Sirenetta’s lotion is a serious red flag from a non-toxic standpoint.

The lotion also use BHT (butylated hydroxytoluene) as an antioxidant. BHT is a synthetic preservative that is controversial due to potential health effects. While allowed in cosmetics at low levels, studies have associated BHT with endocrine disruption. 

Phenoxyethanol, a preservative in the lotion, is permitted in natural-leaning products but still has a safety profile that includes potential skin irritation and systemic effects in infants. 

We did not find any parabens, phthalates, sulfates (SLS/SLES), or formaldehyde releasers in the ingredient lists, which is good. The brand’s use of mostly plant oils and butters means no mineral oil or petrolatum is used either.

social responsibility

Rotating arrow
Social responsibility
score:

details:

Fair Labor

As a small founder-led brand, a portion of the operations is likely in-house (product formulation and local retail), but many elements of the supply chain are external – especially raw ingredient sourcing (shea butter from West Africa, oils from various countries, packaging from manufacturers, etc.). The brand has not published any code of conduct or ethical sourcing policy. 

Animal Welfare

No animal-derived ingredients are present in any of the ingredient lists we reviewed – the formulas rely on plant oils, botanical extracts, and synthetic inputs, with no use of common animal by-products like beeswax, lanolin, carmine, etc.

Community Engagement

No concrete information is provided on any charitable giving or community projects. We did not find any evidence of Sirenetta donating a portion of profits to environmental organizations, participating in local community welfare, or running any ongoing social initiatives. The concept might have been part of the brand story, but without transparency, it comes across as a vague claim rather than a substantive program.