The number printed largest on a bottle of sunscreen measures one thing, and it is not the thing most associated with melanoma.
SPF quantifies protection against UVB radiation, the wavelength that causes sunburn. UVA penetrates deeper, drives photoaging, and contributes to skin cancer risk. An SPF 100 product tells a shopper nothing about how much UVA protection it provides, and in the United States there is no rating scale that would.
That gap is the substance of this year's 20th Annual Guide to Sunscreens from the Environmental Working Group, an advocacy organization that reviews sunscreen products against its own criteria each year.
Before the findings, an important framing note. EWG is not a regulator; its standards are stricter than and different from what the FDA requires, and dermatology organizations have long disputed some of its ingredient assessments. Its ratings are one lens, not an official verdict.
What the Review Found
EWG's 2026 guide analyzed 2,990 products and recommended 597, roughly 20%, as delivering both safe and effective protection, according to CNN's report on the guide. Product counts differ across EWG's own materials and secondary coverage, so the precise denominator should be treated loosely.
To be recommended, a product had to protect against both UVA and UVB. Sprays and powders were excluded over inhalation concerns rather than efficacy.
The organization also reported market improvement. David Andrews, PhD, EWG's chief science officer, said use of ingredients such as oxybenzone has dropped sharply and the share of mineral sunscreens has nearly tripled. Alexa Friedman, a senior EWG scientist, told CNN that retinyl palmitate has fallen from roughly 40% of products in 2010 to about 3% today, calling it "good news for consumers."
Andrews framed the remaining problem as structural, stating that "most American sunscreens fail to deliver adequate UVA protection" and attributing it to companies not developing the safety data for newer filters.
A peer-reviewed study by EWG scientists reported that sunscreens delivered, on average, about a quarter of the UVA protection and 59% of the UVB protection stated on their labels. That finding comes from the same organization producing the ratings, which is worth knowing when weighing it.
Why the Labeling Gap Exists
This is the part that is not an advocacy claim but a matter of regulatory fact.
The FDA permits a "broad spectrum" designation for products meeting a minimum UVA threshold, but it is a pass-or-fail label. There is no number. A product barely clearing the bar and one substantially exceeding it carry identical wording.
Other markets do this differently. The European Union requires UVA protection proportional to the SPF and permits a UVA seal, and several Asian markets use a graded PA rating system that gives shoppers a comparative figure.
The United States also has a narrower list of approved UV filters than the EU or Japan, because newer filters with stronger UVA coverage have not completed the U.S. approval process. That is a regulatory backlog, not a conspiracy, and it constrains what American manufacturers can formulate with.
The result is that an American shopper genuinely cannot compare UVA protection between two bottles using the label alone.
Where Commercial Interests Sit
Readers should know who benefits from these ratings.
EWG operates a paid EWG Verified certification program that manufacturers apply for, and it maintains a curated retail storefront featuring verified products. More than 130 SPF products carry the mark this year.
That does not invalidate the underlying UVA point, which is supported independently by how U.S. labeling rules work. It does mean the recommendation list is produced by an organization with a financial relationship to some of the products on it, and that context belongs in any story citing it.
What Dermatologists Say and Why This Matters
The mainstream dermatology position differs from EWG's in emphasis, and the difference is worth understanding.
Dermatology groups generally hold that the best sunscreen is a broad-spectrum product of at least SPF 30 that a person will actually apply, reapply, and tolerate. Their concern with guides that fail large numbers of products is that shoppers become discouraged, conclude that sunscreen is either unsafe or futile, and use less of it.
That concern is well founded. Sunscreen underuse and skipped reapplication are far larger contributors to sun damage than the difference between two adequately formulated products. There is no version of this story in which using less sunscreen is the right response.
The FDA has not concluded that approved sunscreen filters are unsafe, and the systemic absorption studies that generated headlines in recent years measured blood levels rather than demonstrating harm.
How to Choose Without Overthinking It
The practical guidance survives all of the above disagreement.
Look for broad spectrum and SPF 30 or higher. Above roughly SPF 50, the added UVB protection is marginal, so a very high number is not worth a premium.
For stronger UVA coverage under current U.S. rules, zinc oxide is the most reliable single ingredient, since it covers UVA and UVB in a stable way. Titanium dioxide is a reasonable daily option. Among chemical filters, avobenzone provides UVA coverage but degrades in sunlight unless stabilized, so products pairing it with stabilizing ingredients hold up better.
Apply more than feels necessary. Most people use a quarter to half the amount used in testing, which means real-world protection falls well below the labeled SPF regardless of the product. Reapply every two hours and after swimming or sweating.
Lotions and sticks give more reliable coverage than sprays, especially in wind. If using a spray, spray into the hands and rub it in rather than misting from a distance.
Sunscreen is one layer. UPF clothing, wide-brimmed hats, UV-blocking sunglasses and shade during peak intensity between roughly 10 a.m. and 4 p.m. do work that no bottle can.
Anyone with a changing mole, a new growth, a sore that will not heal, or a personal or family history of skin cancer should see a dermatologist rather than adjusting a shopping list.
Watch for FDA action on pending sunscreen filter applications and on the missed congressional deadline for fragrance allergen labeling in cosmetics, which EWG notes would have covered moisturizers with SPF. Either would change what American shelves look like.
Frequently Asked Questions
Does SPF measure UVA protection? No. SPF measures protection against UVB, the wavelength that causes sunburn. It says nothing about UVA.
Is there a UVA rating in the United States? No. The FDA allows a pass or fail "broad spectrum" designation but no graded number. The European Union and several Asian markets use comparative UVA ratings.
Who produced the product review? The Environmental Working Group, an advocacy organization. Its criteria are its own and are stricter than and different from FDA requirements.
Does EWG have a financial interest? It operates a paid EWG Verified certification program that manufacturers apply for and maintains a retail storefront featuring verified products.
Should I stop using sunscreen that is not on the recommended list? No. Dermatology groups hold that a broad-spectrum SPF 30 or higher product used consistently is what matters most. Using less sunscreen is not the right response.
Which ingredient gives the most reliable UVA coverage? Zinc oxide provides stable coverage across both UVA and UVB. Avobenzone covers UVA but degrades in sunlight unless paired with stabilizing ingredients.
Is a higher SPF always better? Above roughly SPF 50, the additional UVB protection is marginal. Applying enough product and reapplying matters more than the number.
