Beyond SPF: Rethinking Sun Protection in a Changing Market - Part 1
Stanisław Kruś - Head of Global Technical Center Sun Care at BASF, Sven Klare - Technical Manager Applied Innovation Sensory Additives Cosmetic Solutions at Evonik and Ev Suess - Global Head of Sun Protection, Functionals and Colors Business Unit at Symrise
Panel Interview
Should the industry shift messaging from “% of UV blocked” to “% of UV that gets through”? What would that change?
Stanislaw Krus, BASF:
Today’s communication often focuses on the percentage of UV radiation that is blocked by the sunscreen layer, which can be misleading. What truly matters is the amount of UV radiation that actually reaches the skin, meaning the transmitted fraction. UV-induced damage is directly linked to the number of photons penetrating the skin. Even small differences in transmitted UV can therefore translate into a meaningful increase in biological impact. By shifting the narrative toward “% of UV that gets through”, this reframing could help correct common misconceptions around SPF and clarify why SPF 30 provides twice the protection of SPF 15.
What makes achieving SPF 50 significantly more complex than SPF 30 from a formulation standpoint?
Stanislaw Krus, BASF:
Achieving SPF 50 is not just a matter of adding more UV filters to the formulation. Increasing the filter load to reach high SPF targets typically creates challenges in texture, whitening, and greasiness. Therefore, a highly optimized UV filter system is required, balancing filter concentrations, solubility, dispersion, and photostability. Additionally, many commonly used UV filters have come into debate due to their potential effects on human health or the environment. Keeping up with these multiple requirements—effectiveness, regulatory compliance, safety, environmental sustainability, and consumer satisfaction—makes the development of sunscreens a challenging endeavor: it involves selecting the right combination of UV filters and formulation technologies to create products that are both effective and desirable.
Modern approaches therefore rely on maximized UV filter efficacy, combining the core lipophilic filter system with highly effective particulate filter technologies like Tinosorb® M and/or Tinosorb® A2B, and/or water-soluble UV filters like Uvinul® TS Hydro that increase SPF and UVA protection while reducing the need for a high emollient content and optimizing sensory. This is as important for beach suncare to increase compliance and reapplication willingness as for daily-use products, where user experience ultimately drives repurchase.
Sven Klare, Evonik:
Achieving SPF 50 is considerably more complex than SPF 30 because it is not simply a matter of using more UV filters. In practice, formulators quickly run into challenges because the maximum use concentration of certain UV filters limits their loading, or the UVA/SPF balance might be insufficient. Additional constraints further complicate the process. For example, if water resistance is the target, the use of water-soluble filters becomes limited. Switching the UV filter system forces formulators to choose a different emollient combination, particularly to properly dissolve crystalline UV filters. As a result, the sensorial profile changes, meaning texture optimization must be addressed in parallel.
From a formulation standpoint, higher UV filter loads – especially in emulsions – can also lead to instability. This often requires reformulation of the emulsifier system, for example by selecting robust solutions such as TEGO® Care PBS 6 MB. Overall, choosing to go to SPF 50 from a successful SPF 30 project is not a quick win, as several interconnected adjustments require careful balancing across efficacy, stability and sensory performance.
Ev Suess, Symrise:
From a formulation perspective, the step from SPF 30 to SPF 50 is not linear. While SPF 30 can often be achieved with moderate UV filter loads within relatively standard emulsion systems, SPF 50 usually requires a much more optimized formulation architecture, as progressively higher protection levels are increasingly difficult to reach. This often translates into higher UV filter concentrations, which can place greater stress on the emulsion system and create challenges in terms of stability, skin compatibility, and sensorial profile. To address this, formulators rely not only on filter selection, but also on performance enhancers that improve the efficiency of the overall system. Solutions such as SymEffect® UV, SymEffect® Sun and SymSol® ProSun from Symrise, can support filter performance, film formation, formulation stability, and water resistance. Others like Neo Heliopan® Fusion offer a simplified route to high SPF by combining multiple modern UV filters in one ready-to-use blend. Ultimately, achieving SPF 50 is about balancing high protection with acceptable aesthetics and robust formulation design, rather than simply increasing the filter load.
How do you balance high SPF performance with texture and user experience, especially in daily-use products?
Sven Klare, Evonik:
For high SPF performance, formulators typically need to use high concentrations of UV filters. However, this high loading can lead to an unpleasant texture, including stickiness, increased waxiness, and lower absorption. One way to improve the texture is to use UV filters more efficiently with the help of film-forming SPF boosters, such as TEGO® FILMSTAR BST1, allowing for a lower overall filter load. Another approach is to incorporate sensory particles, such as natural cellulose, which can absorb excess oil and reduce stickiness. Finally, adding specific oils, such as ECOHANCE® Soft BOL (INCI: Butyl Oleate), can further enhance a formulation and create an attractive skin feel.
Ev Suess, Symrise:
For daily-use sunscreens, balancing high SPF with a light and pleasant user experience starts with the right vehicle design. Achieving this is no longer just a question of UV filters, but of how the full formulation matrix is built around them. Among the key ingredients to achieve this are emulsifiers, which can help create stable, skin-friendly emulsion systems, or formulation boosters, such as the SymEffect® range, which can support more efficient UV filter performance, improved film formation, and greater formulation robustness. The right choice of emollients can help fine-tune spreadability and after-feel, contributing to a more elegant sensorial profile. Ultimately, high daily-use performance depends on a formulation architecture that delivers protection, stability, and consumer acceptance in equal measure.
How are ingredient systems from companies like Evonik enabling multifunctional sunscreens that go beyond UV protection?
Sven Klare, Evonik:
We are clearly seeing the “skinification” of sun care as a key trend. On the one hand, Evonik as a well-known supplier of active ingredients such as ceramides or natural collagen, can directly support the development of multifunctional sunscreens. On the other hand, we are also enhancing our functional ingredients with added dermatological benefits. For example, with TEGO® FILMSTAR BST1 we have demonstrated soothing and skin barrier repair function properties following irritation with a surfactant. This is highly complementary to the use of actives, as functional ingredients are already required to achieve high SPF performance. Incorporating additional skin benefits into these systems therefore allows formulators to deliver multiple advantages without adding formulation complexity. We expect to expand further in this direction in the future.
As consumers demand multifunctional products, how does combining UV protection with skincare benefits impact the robustness and credibility of SPF claims?
Ev Suess, Symrise:
The shift toward multifunctional sunscreens reflects a broader evolution in skin care, where sun protection is increasingly viewed not only as daily defense, but as an essential part of a prevention and longevity approach to skin health. Consumers now expect daily-use sun care to provide reliable UV protection alongside added benefits for the skin. For brands, this creates an opportunity to position sunscreen more firmly within the wider skin care routine. At the same time, from both a formulation and claims perspective, protection must remain the primary anchor of the product. Any additional benefits need to be integrated without compromising the formation of a uniform and resistant UV filter film on the skin, as this remains fundamental to SPF robustness, photostability, and the overall credibility of the protection claim.
Are we at risk of overloading sunscreens with claims (anti-aging, hydration, microbiome support), and does this dilute the core function of UV protection?
Stanislaw Krus, BASF:
The primary role of sunscreens is photoprotection, and this must always be ensured first: an SPF claim requires UV filters and robust performance validation using standardized methods. Additional benefits, such as hydration or anti-aging, can be integrated if they are compatible with the present filters and do not compromise their performance. When designed properly, multifunctional sunscreens can be beneficial, as they support consumer demand for tailored solutions and convenient products, and can encourage more consistent re-application or daily use.
With increasing demand for sustainable and biodegradable ingredients, how do you balance environmental goals with proven UV protection performance and photostability?
Stanislaw Krus, BASF:
Achieving a balance between sustainability and performance requires a holistic, data-driven approach. We therefore developed a state-of-the-art technology that evaluates the environmental impact of UV filter systems. Internationally recognized, environmentally relevant parameters are considered, including acute and chronic aquatic toxicity, sediment and terrestrial toxicity, adsorption, endocrine disruption, bioaccumulation (including the logarithmic octanol-water partitioning coefficient (log Pow)), and biodegradation to support formulators in product development. With our technology, they can select UV filter combinations with the lowest environmental impact from the development stage without compromising performance.
Additionally, we recently launched our first biomass balance (BMB) UV filter. This new version of our well-known Uvinul® T 150 offers a significantly reduced carbon footprint compared to the conventional version while delivering the same trusted efficacy.
Sven Klare, Evonik:
UV protection performance and photostability need to be fulfilled and tested according to generally accepted testing methods and the respective legislation in the countries they are sold. At the same time, there is no inherent conflict between these performance criteria and the use of biobased or biodegradable ingredients. Modern sunscreen formulation can deliver the same high level of protection as more traditional systems.
In fact, we are seeing increasing demand from consumers to develop more sunscreens using natural emulsifiers, oils, film formers and thickeners. Today it is already possible to design the majority of a sunscreen formulation – the full chassis around the UV filters – using such sustainable ingredients.
The main piece still missing for a fully circular sunscreen is the availability of biobased and/or biodegradable UV filters. As Evonik does not supply UV filters, we hope that these products will become available on the market soon.
Ev Suess, Symrise:
While demand for more sustainable and biodegradable solutions continues to grow, certain naturally derived or mineral-based approaches can be more difficult to stabilize and may also present limitations in terms of sensorial performance, such as visible whitening. The priority is to improve overall formulation efficiency rather than compromise on protection. At Symrise, this means investing in supporting technologies such as smart film formers and formulation boosters that help optimize UV filter performance, with the aim of achieving the required SPF and photostability with a more efficient use of filters and a reduced formulation burden. Solutions such as SymEffect® UV and SymEffect® Sun support more efficient sunscreen architectures by enhancing filter performance, improving formulation stability and water resistance, and helping maintain an elegant skin feel. In parallel, ingredients like SymSol® ProSun address the challenge of solubilizing crystalline UV filters and preventing re-crystallization, which is essential for stable high-SPF systems and reliable long-term performance. In this way, sustainability is not approached as a trade-off against efficacy, but as a formulation challenge that can be addressed through smarter system design.
How do regional regulatory differences (EU vs. FDA vs. APAC) complicate the development of globally consistent high-SPF products?
Stanislaw Krus, BASF:
Regional differences in approved UV filters remain one of the biggest challenges for global sunscreen development. In regions such as Europe, APAC, and MERCOSUR, broader approved filter portfolios allow formulators to design products that meet both high performance in terms of SPF and UVA-PF values and modern sensorial expectations.
The United States is a special case, with a much more limited list of approved filters. This makes it more difficult to achieve the same performance, photostability, and texture experienced by European or Asian consumers. At the same time, regional trends, such as phasing out certain filters in Europe or Asia, further complicate alignment. Looking ahead, the potential FDA-approval of Tinosorb® S in the U.S. could help bridge this gap, but for now, developing truly global, high-SPF products still requires careful regional adaptation rather than a one-size-fits-all approach.
Ev Suess, Symrise:
The absence of a harmonized global sunscreen framework remains a major challenge for product development. UV filter portfolios, permitted combinations, testing requirements, and labeling rules still vary significantly across regions. As a result, formulators cannot simply develop one universally transferable high-SPF product but often need to adapt the same concept for the EU, the US, LATAM and APAC markets. For brands and suppliers alike, this increases development complexity, timelines, and cost, while also slowing broader access to advanced sun protection technologies across markets.
