Why Switching Cosmetic Raw Material Suppliers Isn't Always a Simple Swap
Over the past few years, cosmetic manufacturers have faced increasing pressure from rising ingredient costs, supply chain disruptions, and longer lead times. As a result, many beauty brands have started looking for alternative raw material suppliers to reduce costs, improve ingredient availability, or simply manage increasing production costs.
On paper, replacing one supplier with another often appears straightforward. If the replacement ingredient has exactly the same INCI name, surely it should perform the same way?
Unfortunately, cosmetic formulation isn't that simple.
One of the biggest misconceptions in product development is believing that the same INCI name guarantees the same performance. While the INCI identifies what an ingredient is, it tells you very little about how that ingredient behaves in a finished cosmetic product.
Throughout my career, I've seen products become unstable, lose viscosity, separate, change appearance, and even fail preservation (challenge) testing after what seemed like a simple supplier change.
The formulation hadn't changed.
The manufacturing process hadn't changed.
The only difference was the supplier of a single raw material.
Understanding why this happens can save months of redevelopment, repeated testing and thousands of euros in manufacturing costs.
What Does an INCI Name Actually Tell You?
The International Nomenclature of Cosmetic Ingredients (INCI) is a standardised naming system designed to identify cosmetic ingredients. However, an INCI name is simply an identification system.
It does not describe:
How the ingredient was manufactured
Its purity
Active content
Molecular structure
Molecular weight distribution
Particle size
Solvent system
Physical characteristics
Proprietary processing technology
Two suppliers can legally sell ingredients with exactly the same INCI declaration while producing materials that behave very differently inside a cosmetic formulation. This is why experienced formulation chemists evaluate much more than the ingredient name before approving a supplier change.
Emulsifiers & Co-emulsifiers
Emulsifiers and co-emulsifiers are among the most critical ingredients in creams and lotions. Although two suppliers may provide materials with exactly the same INCI declaration, they may not perform identically in a formulation. Differences in manufacturing process, purity, composition, and the ratio of individual components can all influence the final product.
A good example is Cetearyl Alcohol. Although it has a single INCI name, it is actually a mixture of cetyl alcohol and stearyl alcohol. Different suppliers may offer different cetyl-to-stearyl ratios. Since cetyl alcohol generally contributes a lighter, creamier skin feel, while stearyl alcohol provides more structure, viscosity, and hardness, changing this ratio can noticeably affect the texture, viscosity, stability, and sensory profile of the finished emulsion.
The same principle applies to many emulsifier systems. Even when two emulsifiers share the same INCI declaration, subtle differences in composition or manufacturing can influence how effectively they stabilize an emulsion.
As a result, a cream that has remained perfectly stable for months may suddenly begin separating, become thinner or thicker, or simply feel different on the skin after switching to another supplier—even though the ingredient name has not changed.
This is why selecting an alternative emulsifier or co-emulsifier involves much more than comparing the INCI declaration or Technical Data Sheet. It requires a technical assessment and, where appropriate, reformulation and repeat stability testing to confirm that the new material performs as expected in the finished product.
Emollients & Glycols
Emollients and glycols are often perceived as interchangeable, but different suppliers frequently offer different grades of what appears to be the same ingredient. These subtle differences can influence skin feel, spreadability, absorption, product clarity, and overall formulation stability. Although the product may still meet its specifications, consumers may immediately notice that it feels lighter, heavier, drier, or greasier than before.
Surfactants
Surfactant systems are particularly sensitive to supplier changes.
Different manufacturers may supply materials with different active matter levels, stabilizing systems, or impurity profiles. Some suppliers also include sodium chloride as part of the raw material, while others do not.
The result? A shampoo, body wash, or facial cleanser that previously had the perfect viscosity may suddenly become much thinner—or much thicker—even though the formulation itself has not changed.
Botanical Extracts
Botanical extracts are probably one of the most challenging ingredient categories to replace. Even when two suppliers use the same botanical source and declare the same INCI name, the extracts themselves may be significantly different.
Several factors influence the final composition of a botanical extract, including:
Country of origin
Climate conditions
Soil quality
Harvest season
Plant maturity
Extraction method
Extraction solvent
One supplier may extract using glycerin, while another may use propylene glycol, butylene glycol, ethanol, or water. Although the botanical source remains the same, the active composition, extraction profile, and solvent system may differ considerably.
In addition, botanical extracts are typically supplied with their own preservation system to ensure microbiological stability during storage. Different suppliers may use different preservatives or preservative blends, meaning that the same botanical extract may arrive with a different preservative system already incorporated.
This can have several implications. Firstly, the preservative system itself may interact differently with the finished formulation and influence its overall preservation performance and stability. Secondly, because different preservatives are used, the INCI declaration of the finished cosmetic product may also change, requiring updates to the ingredient list, Product Information File (PIF), Cosmetic Product Safety Report (CPSR), and product label.
These differences can also affect product color, odor, viscosity, stability, and efficacy.
Unless a botanical ingredient is supplied as a highly standardized extract with tightly controlled specifications, replacing suppliers should always be approached with caution. A scientific risk assessment should be carried out to determine whether reformulation or repeat testing is required.
Vegetable Oils
Vegetable oils are another ingredient category where supplier changes deserve careful evaluation.
Refined, semi-refined, and unrefined grades differ significantly in color, odor, fatty acid profile, antioxidant content, and oxidation stability.
Even oils with identical INCI names may perform differently depending on the refining process and the quality of the starting material. These differences can influence not only the appearance and oxidative stability of the finished product but also its sensory profile and shelf life.
Thickeners & Rheology Modifiers
Thickeners are one of the most supplier-sensitive ingredient categories in cosmetic formulation. Materials sharing the same INCI may have different molecular weights, particle sizes, branching structures, or manufacturing processes. These seemingly small differences can significantly influence viscosity, flow behavior, suspension properties, and long-term stability.
A good example is Xanthan Gum. Although two suppliers may declare exactly the same INCI, different grades can vary in particle size, molecular weight, and hydration behavior. One grade may hydrate quickly and produce a smooth, elegant gel, while another may require different processing conditions, create a more stringy texture, or produce a noticeably different viscosity and skin feel.
Another example is Carbomer. While carbomers are available in different grades designed for specific applications, even materials with the same INCI supplied by different manufacturers may vary in crosslinking, particle characteristics, and performance. As a result, one carbomer may produce a crystal-clear, high-viscosity gel, while another may generate lower viscosity, different flow behavior, or respond differently to electrolytes and neutralization. This can have a significant impact on the finished product's appearance, texture, and stability.
This is often why a formulation that previously looked perfect suddenly becomes too runny, too thick, or develops a different rheological profile after introducing a new supplier.
That's why changing a thickener should never be treated as a simple one-to-one replacement. A technical assessment, comparative formulation work, and, where appropriate, stability testing are often necessary to confirm that the alternative material performs as expected in the finished product.
Why Comparing Specifications Isn't Enough
Many purchasing decisions rely heavily on Technical Data Sheets (TDS), Specifications or Certificates of Analysis (CoA).
While these documents are essential, they cannot predict exactly how an ingredient will behave inside your formulation.
Two ingredients can meet identical specifications while performing very differently in the finished cosmetic product. This is why supplier qualification should involve much more than paperwork. It should include a scientific and technical assessment supported by practical laboratory validation.
When Should Testing Be Repeated?
Not every supplier change requires repeating every test. However, every supplier change should begin with a scientific risk assessment.
Questions worth asking include:
Is this ingredient critical to product stability?
Does it influence viscosity?
Is it part of the preservation system?
Does it contribute to product efficacy?
Could it affect packaging compatibility?
Has the supplier changed the manufacturing process or grade?
Depending on the level of risk, additional work may include:
Comparative formulation studies
Reformulation assessment
Stability testing
Preservation (Challenge) testing
Packaging compatibility testing
Performance verification
The extent of testing should always reflect the potential impact of the ingredient change. A Small Change Can Have a Big Impact. A supplier change may look insignificant on paper.
In formulation science, however, even a small difference in raw material composition can have a significant impact on product quality, stability, sensory profile, and regulatory compliance.
The cost of properly evaluating a supplier change is almost always lower than the cost of discovering a problem after production has already started.
Before switching a supplier, don't just compare the INCI declaration or the specification sheet. Ask yourself whether the material has truly been demonstrated to be technically equivalent within your formulation.
Success in cosmetic formulation isn't determined by how similar two ingredients look on a Technical Data Sheet. It's determined by how they perform in the finished product.
About Me
I'm Justyna Szpak, an independent cosmetic formulation chemist with over 20 years of experience in cosmetic R&D. From my fully equipped laboratory in Ireland, I help brands develop innovative, safe and compliant cosmetic products—from the initial concept through formulation, testing, regulatory compliance, and manufacturing support.
Whether you're creating your first product or expanding an existing range, I'd be delighted to help you bring your idea to life.
Let's create beauty together.
Comments