PibooAll postsIngredients
Englishko

sidmool

sidmool ECO MULTI BALM

Ingredient analysis and how the ad lines read

Read on 2026-09-14

What is this product?

A Korean anhydrous balm from sidmool, sold as a stick in 4g and 15g off one listing page. Thirteen entries, and the shape of the list is the whole story: five plant triglycerides, a plant butter, jojoba wax ester, beeswax and candelilla wax make up nine of them, with four isolated actives, tocopherol, bisabolol, allantoin and adenosine, filling the rest. There is no water, no humectant, no fragrance, no alcohol and no preservative of the usual kind, the last of which follows from the anhydrous form. That composition decides the fit. The brand claims high moisture, and the occlusive load supports moisture retention, but nothing here supplies moisture, so the product has to go on damp skin to do what the claim says. No amount is printed for any of the thirteen entries. The brand cites no test of any kind, publishes no functional cosmetic notation, and leaves the statutory disclosure block on the page empty, so manufacturer, responsible seller, country and shelf life are all absent from the page that sells it.

What makes it different?

Two things are worth carrying away from this record. First, the formula is plain enough to be read almost entirely off the label: thirteen entries, with no water phase, no humectant, no emulsifier, no silicone and no synthetic emollient anywhere in them. Second, and against that simplicity, the page selling it discloses very little: the statutory disclosure block is an empty shell, so manufacturer, responsible seller, country of manufacture and shelf life are not printed at all, and no amount is given for any of the thirteen entries. Working in its favour is that the brand prints an English INCI list beside the Korean one on the same page, which makes the composition checkable by a reader who cannot read the Korean.

What is in it?

The full ingredient list as the brand publishes it, in the printed order. Each name links to what we know about that ingredient.

Key ingredientWorth a closer look

Ingredients with no mark are ones we found nothing notable about, and when marks overlap on one ingredient we show the caution first.

Did the ad claims hold up?

We checked 6 lines this product advertises against the ingredient list and public documents. 2 of them look likely, though none are proven outright.

likely, not proven2

  • 간편한 스틱형으로 언제 어디서나 간편하게 케어를!
  • 휴대하기 편리한 스틱형 용기

partly backed1

  • 고보습으로 피부를 촉촉하게

overstated ad line1

  • 피부 고민을 해결해 드리기 위한 천연 기능성 더마 화장품입니다.

says nothing2

  • 머리부터 발 끝까지 너무 좋은 편안함
  • 간편하고 똑똑한 멀티 기능

Each line is quoted as the brand published it, and each one was read on its own against the ingredient list and the documents the brand publishes.

How we read these lines

What else is worth seeing?

Products we read alongside this one.