Which Test Bodies Publish an SPF Number
Last updated September 13, 2026
The single fact that shapes this whole section: most organisations that test sunscreens never publish a measured SPF for a named product. They publish a grade, a verdict, or an action. That is a fact about the test bodies, not a gap in our research, and it is why a table of measured figures can only be built from a handful of sources.
Who publishes what
| Body | Where | A measured SPF per product? | What it publishes instead |
|---|---|---|---|
| CHOICE | Australia | Yes | A measured SPF for every product in its 2025 round, free, in a media release, with each brand's response in the accompanying article. |
| Consumer Reports | United States | In part | Five products named with a figure on the free page; the remaining ratings of its 130-product round are members-only. |
| EU Safety Gate | European Union | Yes, in most alerts | A regulator-measured value in eight of the twelve sunscreen SPF alerts since 2023, plus the action taken and the notifying country. |
| Which? | United Kingdom | No | A pass or a “Don't Buy”. Measured values sit behind membership. A product must fail twice, on two samples, before Which? calls it a Don't Buy. |
| Stiftung Warentest and VKI | Germany and Austria | No | Grades — “mangelhaft”, “nicht zufriedenstellend” — never a measured value, even to subscribers. Since December 2024 it tests by the HDRS method, DIN EN ISO 23698:2024, rather than ISO 24444. |
| TGA | Australia | No | Regulatory action, plus formulation-level findings. Its one published figure in this story is that a shared base formulation “is unlikely to have an SPF greater than 21”. |
| AEMPS | Spain | No | Stop-sale and lot-recall notices naming seven products in 2024, with findings expressed as a claimed protection level against a tested one rather than as numbers. |
| Peer-reviewed studies | International | No | The 2025 twelve-laboratory ALT-SPF study coded its 32 products, and the 2022 US market survey blinded its 51 to the laboratory. Neither yields a product-level row. |
Several other European consumer organisations — OCU in Spain, UFC-Que Choisir in France, Altroconsumo in Italy, Öko-Test in Germany — run their own rounds and report failures, but their per-product grids sit behind membership and we did not reach a citable page carrying a measured figure against a named product. None of their results appears as a number here. One Öko-Test finding is worth recording with its dispute attached: the magazine reported a Rossmann own-brand sunscreen short of its LSF 50 claim in June 2025, and Rossmann disputes it, saying its own testing gave SPF 58.
The rounds in this database
-
16 of 20 sunscreens didn't meet SPF claims in CHOICE test
CHOICE, Australia — June 2025. Publishes a measured figure. -
21 Best Sunscreens of 2026, Lab-Tested and Reviewed
Consumer Reports, United States — April 2026. Publishes a measured figure — measured SPF is published for a handful of named products; the full 130-product table is behind CR's paywall. -
Sunscreens using the same base formulation as Ultra Violette Lean Screen SPF 50+
Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA), Australia — September 2025 to April 2026. Publishes actions or grades, not measured figures. -
The Korean sunscreen SPF disclosures, 2020-2022
Independent and brand-commissioned laboratories, South Korea — December 2020 to October 2022. Publishes a measured figure. -
Safety Gate alerts for sunscreens whose measured SPF fell short of the label
EU Safety Gate (RAPEX), European Union — June 2023 to August 2026. Publishes a measured figure.
Why the same sunscreen can measure 4 at one laboratory and 64 at another
Because the standard method is more variable than its users expect, and the bodies applying it say so. The TGA's published position is that variability of SPF test results associated with the ISO 24444 test is a known problem internationally and domestically, attributing it to differences between test subjects, differences in how technicians apply the product, and the fact that skin redness is assessed by eye.
The strongest evidence for that is a 2025 study that sent 32 coded sunscreens to twelve pre-qualified laboratories and concluded that the interlaboratory variability of SPF results is considerable and likely greater than expected by the public and regulatory bodies, with variability rising as SPF rises. The products in that study were coded, so it names no brands and produces no rows for this database — but it is the reason a single measured figure should be read as one laboratory's result on one batch, not as the product's true SPF.
Three jurisdictions are moving at once. Cosmetics Europe revised its industry recommendation eight days after the CHOICE report, shifting its preference to in vitro and hybrid methods and setting out a retest protocol. The TGA opened a consultation in March 2026 proposing stronger oversight of SPF testing laboratories and periodic re-testing. Korea's MFDS put out an advance notice in August 2026 proposing that in vitro test data from internationally standardised methods be accepted as evidence in its functional-cosmetics SPF review; comment on it closed on 18 September 2026.
What we looked for and did not find
- Japan. No test of sunscreen SPF claims by a Japanese regulator or public body was found for 2023–2026: no comparative product test on sunscreen from the National Consumer Affairs Center in any year, and no Act Against Unjustifiable Premiums and Misleading Representations order on sunscreen across the full FY2024 and FY2025 enforcement indexes. Two Japanese databases are rendered in JavaScript and could not be queried, so a single targeted entry cannot be ruled out.
- The FDA. Nothing in this database is an FDA measurement. The FDA does not routinely test finished sunscreens.
- A 2026 Korean allegation. A Korean video creator alleged that most of a discount retailer's sunscreens fell below their labels; the retailer disputes the methodology on the record, no laboratory or report number was disclosed, and no measured figures were published. Nothing from it appears here.
SPF List did not test these products. The results on this page were published by the named test body or regulator; quotes and links go to the original publication. Brand responses and later developments are listed where they were published. Formulations change; a result applies to the batch and date tested.