How accurate are sunscreen SPF claims? Tests show that most brands fall short

One sunscreen, advertised as having a sun protection factor (SPF) of 50+, returned an SPF test result of four.

Consumer advocate Choice tested the SPF claims of 20 popular brands, including Cancer Council, Banana Boat and Bondi Sands, in its "specialised, accredited sunscreen lab".

More than three-quarters of SPF 50+ sunscreens did not have the advertised protection, with most rating between SPF 24 and SPF 43, Choice found.

Choice CEO Ashley de Silva said, "Of the 20 sunscreens we tested, only four products actually met their SPF 50 or 50+ claims".

"Consumers expect sunscreen to protect them in line with the SPF rating on the product, but as our testing has shown, the SPF label doesn't always match what's in the bottle," he said.

Many of the brands included in Choice's report have disputed the research, saying their testing returned different results.

The consumer advocacy group has notified the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) and the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA).

Mr de Silva said Choice was "calling on the TGA to urgently carry out its own sunscreen compliance testing and on the ACCC to investigate if any SPF claims are misleading".

"Currently, the TGA relies on reports provided by manufacturers to ensure the safety, quality and efficacy of sunscreen products," he said.

"Unfortunately, these reports may not be providing the accurate information consumers need when choosing sunscreens for themselves and their families."

Sunscreens were chosen from a range of brands, retailers, and price points, and tested by experts, Choice said.

The lowest protection rating went to Ultra Violette's Lean Screen SPF 50+ Mattifying Zinc Skinscreen, which returned an SPF of four.

A 75ml container retails for $41.60 at Sephora.

Mr de Silva said the researchers were so surprised by the result that a second test was performed.

"We were really shocked to see the results for Ultra Violette's Lean Screen SPF 50+ product, so much so that we actually decided to test a different batch at a completely different lab in Germany to confirm the results," Mr de Silva said.

"Those tests found the product had an SPF of five - an almost identical result to our initial testing," he said.

Ultra Violette has disputed Choice's claim, saying their own tests returned an SPF result of more than 60.

"Ultra Violette is deeply committed to the health and safety of our customers and only works with reputable, TGA licensed manufacturers who perform substantial quality release testing in accordance with the strictest SPF standards in the world," a spokesperson for the company said.

"Given our commitment to producing the highest quality sunscreens for consumers, we do not accept these results as even remotely accurate. It is also essential to note here that the recognised authority governing sunscreens in Australia is the TGA, not Choice Magazine."

Sunscreen with SPF 40+ results

Sunscreen with SPF 30+ results

Sunscreen with SPF 20+ results

But it's not all bad news. Four sunscreens were found to offer as much, or more, sun protection than was touted on the label.

The four sunscreens that met their SPF claims were:

Choice's CEO said: "It's important to highlight that this testing does not mean sunscreen doesn't work".

"While some specific sunscreens did not meet their claimed SPF, a sunscreen with an SPF of 30 or even 20 still offers a significant amount of sunscreen protection, and any sunscreen is better than none at all."

*This article has been updated to include Ultra Violette's response to Choice's research.