Worst Sunscreens in 2020

Tired of simple, safe, effective sunscreens? Bored of formulas containing harmless yet helpful ingredients? Wish those ingredients lists were more complicated? Then this list is definitely for you.

I try to make the educational content on SimplySunSafe as user-friendly as possible, striving to bring my readers not only quality product recommendations but also to arm you with the knowledge to make sound purchasing decisions and get the best overall sunscreen for yourself and your loved ones.

As a result, these guides can have lots of advice on what to look for, without spending a lot of time sharing what should be avoided. Today, we’re going to flip the script and show you the ugly side of sunscreen.

SimplySunSafe now brings you the worst sunscreens money can buy. When you are shopping for a terrible sunscreen, it’s important to know what to look for so you don’t accidentally purchase something that offers pique protection without any health risks.

After all, what’s life without a little risk?

After thorough research into requirements for sunscreen to be as ineffective, misleading, and risky as possible, SimplySunSafe recommends Hampton Sun SPF 70 for Kids Continuous Spray Sunscreen as the first-place worse sunscreen. Read on for a detailed buyer’s guide, comparison table, and in-depth reviews of the 5 worst sunscreens I’ve found.

To ensure you get sunscreen that uses ingredients and methods of application that are unnecessary and harmful, look out for the following features:

Poor UVA/UVB Balance

Most modern sunscreens say either ‘UVA/UVB’ or ‘broad spectrum’ protection on the labels. This refers to the sunscreen’s purported ability to shield you from both UVA and UVB radiation from the sun’s rays.

Even though the naked eye doesn’t see it that way, the sun’s rays deliver multiple types of radiation. The ones that we count on sunscreens to protect us from are referred as UVA radiation and UVB radiation.

UVA radiation is the form that is responsible for accelerated signs of aging. It does invisible damage to the skin on a cellular level, which can result in sagging skin that wrinkles prematurely and may even result in skin cancer due to DNA damage.

The more immediately recognizable form of solar radiation is UVB radiation which causes the red, painful skin damage that we know as a sunburn.

The active ingredients that sunscreen manufacturers choose to use in their formulas do not all provide the same level of protection. Most sunscreen active ingredients either only protect from UVB rays, or protect from UVA rays only about ⅓ as well as they protect from UVB rays.

So when shopping for the worst sunscreens possible, you’ll want to pay attention to active ingredients and choose a sunscreen that does as terrible a job as possible to balance the UVA and UVB protection in their products.

Ultra-high SPF

Next on our shopping list for the worst sunscreen is getting an SPF that is as high as you can find.

We know that the big SPF rating on the bottle of sunscreen is supposed to tell us something about the quality, right? Most of us assume that more is better, which does sort of make sense.

However, in order to better understand what those SPF ratings mean and become better able to weed out the worst sunscreens on the shelf, let’s take a look at this table:

As you can see, once you pass SPF 30 the difference in the amount of UVB protection offered are really quite tiny. Lower SPF ratings do offer significantly more protection than none at all, but anything SPF 50 and over is really just a label meant to lull you into a false sense of security.

The EWG also mentions in their sunscreen report that SPF ratings are not always reliable, and even estimates that some of their rated products have an SPF much lower than what is stated on the bottle.

Remember these facts when you go shopping. Pick the highest SPF products you see as potential candidates for the worst of the worst. Bonus points are to be awarded if a high-SPF version of a product is significantly more expensive than the same formula’s moderate-SPF sunscreen.

Paying an arm and a leg for an extra percentage point of sun protection is a sure sign that you’ve found a terrible sunscreen.

Chemical over physical

Just as not every active ingredient in sunscreen provides equal amounts of protection, the type and overall quality of the active ingredients differ. These active ingredients can be broadly classified into types of protection: physical and chemical.

When on the hunt for awful sunscreen, ALWAYS choose chemical over physical.

Physical sunscreens act almost like a knight’s suit of armor. These ingredients are meant to sit on the surface of the skin, shrouding it from the sun’s radiation by bouncing the light away before it ever even reaches the skin.

Think of it as if you’re wearing special armor that’s made up of hundreds of tiny mirrors – the skin behind the mirror never gets hurt because all incoming light gets deflected back the way it came.

Chemical sunscreens work a bit differently. These chemical ingredients soak into the skin, and work to absorb light as it hits the skin, before the skin can absorb it and become itself damaged.

This may sound easier or more effective, but the method is not without its drawbacks. Many of these ingredients have been shown to cause skin allergies with repeated use, and some enter the bloodstream where they mimic hormones, causing complications as time goes on.

Most chemical sunscreens will contain a mix of avobenzone, homosalate, octisalate, octocrylene, and oxybenzone. All of these have the potential to irritate the skin and wreak havoc on your body by posing as a variety of hormones.

The EWG has expressed particular concern about the use of oxybenzone in sunscreen products, as it shows indications of being a powerful endocrine disruptor and allergen.

They haven’t made it illegal yet though, so get those chemical sunscreens while you can!

Sprays, Never Lotion

When you are making your purchasing decision, sprays are always going to be worse than lotions. Sprays give you an increased risk of inhalation. Inhalation is a much more direct (read: concentrated) form of exposure than topical application, which can more quickly result in toxicity and health complications.

This is especially true of children, one of the target demographics of spray sunscreens. Little ones don’t like to stay in one place for too long, so spray sunscreens seem heaven-sent in their ease of application. You can let them wiggle all around and you just have to apply a generous stream of sunscreen. This means they can inhale it as well as get it in the sensitive tissue of their mouth, eyes and nose.

Another trouble with sprays is that it is nearly impossible to provide even application, reaching all areas of exposed skin, and covering that skin to an adequate extent to actually reap the benefits of the sunscreen.

When you look at all of these reasons combined, it becomes clear that spray sunscreens are just plain worse than lotions.

	Hampton Sun Sunscreen for Kids	Banana Boat Ultra Defense	Neutrogena Age Shield	Panama Jack Sunscreen	Coppertone Water Babies
SPF	70	100	110	70	50
Broad spectrum	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
Active ingredients	Avobenzone (3%), Homosalate (15%), Octisalate (5%), Octocrylene (10%), Oxybenzone (6%)	Avobenzone (3%), Homosalate (10%), Octisalate (5%), Octocrylene (10%), Oxybenzone (6%)	Avobenzone (3%), Homosalate (15%), Octisalate (5%), Octocrylene (10%), Oxybenzone (6%)	Avobenzone (3%), Homosalate (2.5%), Octisalate (5%), Octocrylene (2.75%), Oxybenzone (6%)	Avobenzone (3%), Homosalate (13%), Octisalate (5%), Octocrylene (2%), Oxybenzone (4%)
Spray	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	Yes
Price	$$$$	$$$	$$$	$$	$

After thorough research that combined discussing issues with customers, reviewing customer feedback, examining manufacturer specifications, and participating in skincare forums, SimplySunSafe has chosen the 5 worst sunscreens. All of these sunscreens provide chemical protection of SPF 50 or greater, contain oxybenzone, and can irritate the skin with repeated use.

1. Hampton Sun SPF 70 for Kids Continuous Spray Sunscreen

CHECK PRICE

Hampton Sun for Kids continuous spray sunscreen formula provides broad spectrum, chemical protection of SPF 70. It does this through a mix of active ingredients: avobenzone (3%), homosalate (15%), octisalate (5%), octocrylene (10%), and oxybenzone (6%).

This chemical cocktail goes a long way towards this sunscreen’s top spot in the list. What really tips it over the edge is the ultra-high SPF (that’s poorly balanced with UVA protection), and the fact that it is far and away the most expensive option on this list.

This is especially surprising given that there are other sunscreen with the same formulas, touting higher SPFs, and this product costs twice as much as they do.

Hampton Sun has really made an all-around awful sunscreen here, between the groundless cost, misleadingly high SPF, poorly balanced protection, and chemical ingredients that are known to cause health issues.

2. Banana Boat Ultra Defense Max Skin Protect Spray Sunscreen SPF 100

CHECK PRICE

This spray sunscreen from Banana Boat’s Ultra Defense Max line provides the user with broad spectrum, chemical sunscreen protection of SPF 100. Compared to Hampton Sun, that SPF comes a bargain price.

The formula uses a familiar combination of chemical active ingredients: avobenzone (3%), homosalate (10%), octisalate (5%), octocrylene (10%), and oxybenzone (6%). Given that this sunscreen’s formula is nearly identical to Hampton Sun but actually has a higher SPF, it drops down to second simply because it’s more cost effective.

It still has all the same features: that ultra-high, possibly unreliable SPF that is not securely balanced with UVA protection, the superstar oxybenzone and the other chemical henchmen that always go along with it and the risk of skin irritation with repeated use.

3. Neutrogena Age Shield Face Sunscreen SPF 110

CHECK PRICE

Though not a spray formula, Neutrogena Age Shield Face Sunscreen makes the list due in no small part to its giant SPF claim: 110!

It provides this broad spectrum,chemical protection through a combination of active ingredients: avobenzone (3%), homosalate (15%), octisalate (5%), octocrylene (10%), and oxybenzone (6%).

As far as the inactive ingredients in this sunscreen, only 3 of them are immediately recognizable: water, silica, and beeswax. Most consumers would have to google every other ingredients just to get an idea of what you’re putting on your skin.

This formula is a clear choice for anyone who is looking for a harsh and unbalanced sunscreen that claims to protect you from the affects of aging while loading its formula with chemicals known to disrupt the endocrine system and irritate the skin.

As another negative, it has the highest level of water resistance!

4. Panama Jack Continuous Spray Sunscreen SPF 70

CHECK PRICE

This SPF 70 continuous spray formula made my Panama Jack delivers broad spectrum, chemical protection through a combination of active ingredient chemicals: avobenzone (3%), homosalate (2.5%), octisalate (5%), octocrylene (2.75%), and oxybenzone (6%).

This formula sprays completely clear, so it is even more difficult than normal to tell how much skin you’re covering.

Ambiguous coverage combined with the high SPF claims only boost the chance that you’ll treat this sunscreen as a ‘fix it and forget it’ preventative, failing to re-apply in addition to not covering enough skin in the first place.

The SPF claim is also lower than the others, though still high enough to make the list, hence it’s place here the lower rungs of the rankings.

5. Coppertone Water Babies Quick Cover Spray Sunscreen SPF 50

CHECK PRICE

Last but not least, rounding out the list of the 5 worst sunscreens money can buy is Coppertone Water Babies Quick Cover continuous spray sunscreen.

This sunscreen provides broad spectrum, chemical coverage with an SPF rating of 50 via multiple active ingredients: avobenzone (3%), homosalate (13%), octisalate (5%), octocrylene (2%), and oxybenzone (4%).

Make no mistake, just because this option is at the bottom of this ‘worst 5’ list, doesn’t mean that it has strayed into the realm of good choices.

This sunscreen was noted by the EWG as providing particularly poor balance of UVA and UVB radiation protection, and does contain all of the same chemical concerns as the other four choices.

The factor that made Coppertone the more moderate choice and dropped it down to last was the SPF – while still quite high, it is in a more normal range that would not be as misleading as the others.

Conclusion

I hope that you’ve enjoyed reading this little spoof on the types of guide I normally write. My aim was to provide you a broader picture of what goes into deciding whether a sunscreen is good or bad.

In these condensed guides it simply isn’t possible to go over all the factors at once. This seemed like a fun way to go over topics that aren’t necessarily covered as much and maybe get a little bit of humor into your day.

While all of these sunscreens truly are poor choices, SimplySunSafe does recommend Hampton Sun SPF 70 for Kids Continuous Spray Sunscreen as the worst sunscreen. However, there is always time to learn more about our favorite subjects, and mine is sunscreen!

If there is a product that you just absolutely detest and wish people would stop buying, let me know! That way I can take a look at it, and possibly keep it in mind for future guides like this one.