According to research published in Time, only 18% of cosmetics claims in consumer magazines are considered believable. Yet here’s the contradiction, the market has never been more promising. The global beauty sector is projected to reach $590 billion by 2030 [1]. So the question facing formulators isn’t whether to substantiate claims, but how to do it credibly, efficiently, and ethically.
The answer lies in rigorous, scientifically validated testing that turns formulation science into marketable proof.
Why Claims Testing Drives Sales
When Harris Williams surveyed 1,250 US beauty consumers in 2023, the findings were clear: product efficacy (91.9%) and functional benefits (89.4%) ranked as the top factors driving purchasing decisions, outweighing clean and safe formulations (80.4%). Clinical and scientific studies also featured as an important selection criterion for 66.1% of respondents [2]. Consumers aren’t just hoping products work. They’re actively prioritising proof that they do.
The financial confidence behind this trend is striking. In the same survey, 95% of consumers said they expected to spend the same or more on beauty and personal care in the coming year, with daily skincare and haircare leading planned increases [2]. This is a market where demand is resilient and where substantiated performance claims are what tip purchasing decisions.
The investment community has noticed too. A 2023 Accenture report found that brands with science-led claims attracted 2.5 times more venture capital funding than those leading with natural and sustainable positioning [3]. For brands seeking growth capital or acquisition, robust efficacy data isn’t just a marketing asset. It’s a valuation driver.
In vitro and clinical testing both play a valuable role and can complement each other: in vitro tests can demonstrate activity at a mechanistic, easily quantifiable level, while clinical tests show the resulting impact on human volunteers and the more subtle, sensory endpoints.
Beyond Marketing: Claims Testing Informs Better R&D
While the sales case for claims testing is compelling, its value extends far beyond marketing copy. Efficacy testing during product development reveals which ingredients and formulations actually deliver results, allowing R&D teams to optimise before launch rather than reformulate after expensive market failures.
Let’s say you’re developing an anti-ageing serum with five active ingredients. Which ones actually work? Which combinations deliver the best results? You could make educated guesses based on supplier data sheets, or you could know for certain. For example, cell-based antioxidant testing can rank these ingredients individually and in combination, revealing synergistic effects that wouldn’t be apparent from ingredient literature alone.
One XCellR8 study assessed five cosmetic actives and their combinations using the OxiSelect™ method in human keratinocytes [5]. The results demonstrated that while one ingredient showed the strongest individual activity, its potency increased significantly when combined with other ingredients – a synergistic effect that directly informed the final formulation for optimal antioxidant activity. This is the kind of insight that transforms product development from guesswork into precision.
The Animal-Free Imperative: Ethics, Science, and Future-Proofing
The cosmetics industry has largely moved beyond animal testing for safety, driven by EU bans and consumer pressure – but most laboratories still rely on animal-derived components in their test systems – such as foetal bovine serum (FBS), animal tissues and animal-derived antibodies. This creates a contradiction for brands positioning themselves as cruelty-free or vegan. How can a product be truly cruelty-free if the testing that substantiates its claims was conducted using materials from animals?
XCellR8’s completely animal-product-free approach addresses this gap. Using human-derived cells and tissues cultured in human-relevant conditions, our test systems offer maximum relevance to human physiology while eliminating all animal components. This isn’t just an ethical stance – it’s strategically sound science. Human skin cells respond to cosmetic ingredients as human skin will, not as animal tissues.
For a brand claiming “vegan” or “cruelty-free” status, having claims data generated in a completely animal-product-free laboratory strengthens that positioning in a way that testing conducted with FBS simply cannot. It’s about integrity all the way through the supply chain.
Making Scientific Rigor Accessible: The Tiered Approach
Let’s address the elephant in the room, comprehensive testing can be expensive. Studies using 3D reconstructed human tissue models, advanced imaging, and molecular analysis can require significant investment. This has often left smaller brands choosing between weak substantiation and stretched budgets – neither of which is ideal.
XCellR8’s tiered testing approach solves this problem by allowing brands to match their investment to their needs and stage of development. Think of it as choosing the right tool for the job. For antioxidant claims, the tiers progress from basic chemical screening assays that confirm ingredient activity, to cell-based testing in human keratinocytes that demonstrates physiological relevance, to full 3D skin models that replicate real-world application and exposure. Each tier adds scientific rigor; brands choose based on their positioning and budget.
This flexibility democratises access to quality testing while maintaining scientific standards. The same GLP-accredited laboratory, the same human-relevant models, the same expert analysis – just scaled to match commercial reality.
From Barrier Protection to “No Tears”: A Test for Every Claim
So what can you actually test for? The scope of available claims testing has expanded significantly. Modern in vitro testing portfolios address the specific claims that consumers care about and regulators scrutinise. Here are some examples of claims that XCellR8’s team of scientists regularly help companies to substantiate:
- Collagen boosting
- Skin barrier protection
- Antioxidant
- Mild to skin
- Mild to eye / No Tears
- Regenerative ageing: NAD+/NADH boosting
Each claim type requires its own evidence base. Skin barrier claims – “strengthens skin barrier,” “protects barrier function” – can be substantiated using Transepithelial Electrical Resistance (TEER) measurements on reconstructed human epidermis, combined with lipidomic analysis that quantifies ceramide levels. For antioxidant claims, testing progresses from chemical screening to cell-based analysis in human keratinocytes, demonstrating how active ingredients protect against oxidative stress.
For facial cleansers and baby products, mildness testing using the XtraMild method provides ET50 values (the time taken to reduce tissue viability by 50%) that allow products to be classified and ranked. A validated prediction model translates these values into categories from “non-irritating” to “severe,” with benchmark databases enabling competitive comparisons.
Each test is designed around the claim being made, ensuring that the data generated directly supports the language that will appear on packaging and marketing materials. This alignment between laboratory work and commercial application is what transforms testing from a compliance exercise into a strategic asset.
Much of our claim support work is designed to support bespoke projects, and our scientists love the challenge of creating a protocol as unique as each product tested. We also have some exciting R&D underway to offer a range of new, previously unaddressed cosmetic claims – watch this space.
The Path Forward
The convergence of consumer demand, regulatory pressure, and competitive necessity has made claims substantiation essential. But done well, it’s far more than a defensive measure. Robust testing informs better product development, enables premium positioning, builds consumer trust, and future-proofs brands against tightening regulations.
The opportunity here is significant: in a market projected to grow by over $200 billion in the next eight years, brands that can credibly demonstrate their products’ efficacy will capture disproportionate value. The gap between what consumers expect and what many brands can prove is closing fast. The path from lab to label has never been more critical – or more commercially rewarding for those who get it right.
If you’d like to explore how claims testing could support your product development and marketing strategy, get in touch with our team at info@x-cellr8.com.
Sources
[1] McKinsey & Company (2025) The state of fashion: beauty 2025: solving the growth puzzle. Available at: https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/consumer-packaged-goods/our-insights/a-close-look-at-the-global-beauty-industry-in-2025
[2] Harris Williams (2023) Health & Beauty Annual Survey. Available at: https://assets.ctfassets.net/xpbu77rkft4z/5ZoaxGoVZps8DaIZmoLGeA/cd6ee2d8ac19f049c781b16564a2608e/CONS_Report_Health___Beauty_Study_2023.pdf
[3] BeautyMatter (2024) The Evolution of Consumer and Clinical Testing. Available at: https://beautymatter.com/articles/the-evolution-of-consumer-and-clinical-testing
[4] US Federal Trade Commission (2023) FTC Warns Almost 700 Marketing Companies That They Could Face Civil Penalties if They Can’t Back Up Their Product Claims. Available at:
[5] Treasure, C., Sim, B., Roscoe, L. and Belot, N. (2024) In Vitro Assessment of the Anti-Oxidant Potential of Five Active Cosmetic Ingredients in the Development of an Anti-Ageing Skincare Formulation. XCellR8 Case Study. Available at: https://www.x-cellr8.com/case-studies/antioxidant-activity
———
Contact us if you’d like to learn how you can support our mission, become a corporate sponsor or donate to our crowdfunder.
Email info@x-cellr8.com
Call +44 (0)1925 607 134.
Follow Us!