The Raw Materials Behind Rhode: An Ingredient Deep Dive
A cosmetic chemist + brand builder walks through the raw materials behind instagram’s favorite peptide glaze.
The internet has had a lot to say about e.l.f. Beauty’s acquisition of Rhode. (Perhaps the most clear-headed comes from Allure, and the sharpest from Slutty Founder. I also liked this take from Thinking Out Loud.)
Acquisition motivations and rumors aside, I’m curious about what e.l.f actually bought. The effortless cool of Hailey Bieber and her personal brand, undoubtably. Access to the LVMH (read: Sephora) ecosystem, sure. Expansion of their portfolio of premium skincare made to scale (Rhode now sits next to Naturium, and maybe soon Bubble?!), definitely.
But what did they buy in terms of IP? Are the formulas worth their weight in gold? Are there opportunities to build even more margin while maintaining quality at scale?
Looking at Raw Materials, Not Ingredients
You can tell a lot about a brand by the raw materials it uses in its formulas, intentionally or not. Not just the ingredients listed on the back of the bottle—but the exact blends, the processing aids, and the subtle sourcing decisions that reveal how a product was made, why it was made that way, and where it could’ve maybe been more efficiently formulated.
It’s a sad truth that a lot of skincare brands don’t have a solid understanding of their raw materials. They may be able to deliver some scientifically-accurate copy about individual INCIs, but not all brands have internal knowledge of the specific raw materials used in their formulas, let alone how each choice on the bench effects performance, cost, and marketing potential.
I’m a cosmetic chemist with almost a decade of experience in designing formulas raw material by raw material. My background is in physical chemistry, but I found my professional stride in understanding how to translate marketing speak into intentional formulation choices and vice versa, ensuring that the resulting formulas don’t just deliver against product briefs, but are inline with brand values, under budget, and of the highest-possible quality.
I’ve formulated for indie skincare startups and beauty CPG giants alike. I’ve worked in almost all parts of the beauty world, from personal assistant to co-founder as a cosmetic chemist, product development strategist, raw material expert, content creator, coffee getter, creative director, and now independent product development consultant.
I help brands navigate formulation, with a particular focus on intentional raw material choice. It’s my goal to help brands understand molecule-by-molecule and penny-by-penny how each formula decision affects their formulas, marketing, and bottom line. I am also working on a skincare venture of my own.
I started this Substack to discuss how raw materials shape our favorite beauty products. As consumers grow savvier and competition stiffer, I suspect a shift toward more intentional raw material choices, even if they don’t make it to marketing copy.
This week I took a scalpel to Rhode’s core skincare lineup—plus their best-selling peptide lip treatment—to reverse-engineer the likely raw materials behind the INCI lists. Not to play “gotcha,” but because I was curious: Was this brand built on best-in-class formulation strategy? Or was it built in silos—each product developed independently, optimized for itself, but not necessarily for the brand as a whole?
Here’s what I found:
The 9 Raw Materials I Think Power Rhode
Here are the nine raw materials I believe sit behind Rhode's success. I’m not talking about just “niacinamide” or “ceramides”—I mean the specific complexes, emulsifiers, or blends likely used in these formulas.
ABS Acai Sterols EFA: Active Concepts
AE Sil 10 (or) AE Sil 12: AE Chemie
Caprol® MPGO: ABITEC Corporation
HyloGlo™ HA: SMA
one or several LexFeels: Inolex
Natrosol™ Plus 330 CS Cetyl Hydroxyethylcellulose: Brenntag
SEPITONIC™ M3.0: Seppic
SpecKare CMD Flux: Spec-Chem
SymRelief® Green (or) SymRelief® 100: Symrise
1. ABS Acai Sterols EFA – Active Concepts
Found in: Glazing Milk
INCI: Euterpe Oleracea Sterols (and) Linoleic Acid (and) Oleic Acid (and) Linolenic Acid
Description: A multifunctional blend of Euterpe Oleracea Sterols and omega fatty acids (oleic, linoleic, linolenic). Its inclusion here shows a preference for multi-benefit emollients that play well in emulsion systems.
Evidence: Adding omegas (Oleic, Linoleic, and Linolenic) is a rare move, though one I think should be used more often. To infuse these essential free fatty acids into skincare formulas, chemists will more often reach for oils with a natural abundance of each, creating blends for both function and story. (I discuss my preferred way to use oils precisely in my article outlining my predictions for beauty formulation.) In this context, they were key to identifying arguably one of the best sources of sterols out there. I’m personally obsessed with the Active Concepts raw material portfolio. This was a perfect choice for this formula imho.
2. AE Sil 10 or 12 – AE Chemie
Found in: Peptide Glazing Fluid
INCI: Sclerocarya Birrea Seed Oil (and) Tetradecane
Description: These marula-based oils blended with tetradecane add a silky, elegant finish. Their presence hints at intentionality in the lipid phase—and a brand that understands sensory matters.
Evidence: Marula oil (made famous by Drunk Elephant!) can be sourced from lots of suppliers. But it’s particular combination with Tetradecane was worth looking into. Low and behold AE Chemie has two blends of these two lightweight emollients.
3. Caprol® MPGO – ABITEC
Found in: Glazing Milk
INCI: Polyglyceryl-3 Oleate (and) Polyglyceryl-10 Mono/Dioleate
Description: A blend of polyglyceryl-3 oleate and polyglyceryl-10 mono/dioleate. It’s what helps this milk emulsify without compromising skin feel—offering both function and elegance.
Evidence: Polyglyceryl-3 Oleate can be used individually, but I suspect it was more efficient to use it as part of a pair. Caprol MPGO was the obvious choice.
4. HyloGlo™ HA – SMA
Found in: Barrier Restore Cream
INCI: Water (and) Glycerin (and) Sodium Hyaluronate (and) Hydrolyzed Glycosaminoglycans (and) Hydrolyzed Hyaluronic Acid (and) Hyaluronic Acid (and) Tremella Fuciformis Polysaccharide (and) Polyglutamic Acid
Description: A complex of five hyaluronic acids, plus polyglutamic acid and tremella, optimized for multi-depth hydration.
Evidence: Hyaluronic Acid and its derivatives are almost impossible to precisely trace through an ingredient list alone. Within this one INCI you could have one to many individually-added versions of various molecular weights. Plus there are dozens if not hundreds of suppliers offering their particular blends of HAs, all with similar or same INCIs. The hint here came from the use of Tremella Fuciformis Polysaccharide, a more unique offshoot of HA. It may be included independently, but the fact that this raw material’s INCI list matches up too well with the formula’s INCI couldn’t have been coincidence. This particular blend makes sense for a formula focused on overnight moisturization via occlusion vs a skin prep step focused on immediate and lightweight hydration. It makes sense that the Barrier Restore Cream and Glazing Milk use different HA blends. That said, I wonder if there could have been a more efficient choice of an HA blend for both SKUs. More below.
5. LexFeel Series – Inolex
Found in: Peptide Glazing Fluid
INCI: Diheptyl Succinate (and) Capryloyl Glycerin/Sebacic Acid Copolymer
Description: Rhode’s Peptide Fluid includes a blend of Diheptyl Succinate and Capryloyl Glycerin/Sebacic Acid Copolymer, a clear sign of a LexFeel ester. These give the serum a skin-mimicking glide and are smart choices for long-term sensory consistency.
Evidence: I love using Diheptyl Succinate. But more than that I love using Diheptyl Succinate in combination with Capryloyl Glycerin/Sebacic Acid Copolymer. Once I saw the copolymer I immediately looked for DS. Each could be used individually, but Inolex provides several blends of these two, each with a precise feel. Using a LexFeel, especially in combination with one of the AE Sils was, I think, such a clever way to fine-tune skin feel and melt in this formula, and protect IP. Sure It was simple enough to spot these two raw materials, but it would take some considerable bench time to uncover the exact ratio and raw material within each series.
6. Natrosol™ Plus 330 CS – Ashland (via Brenntag)
Found in: Glazing Milk
INCI: Cetyl Hydroxyethylcellulose
Description: A modified cellulose that subtly thickens and improves sensory profile. It’s likely the “fine-tuner” that gives the milk its distinctive flow and cushion without tack.
Evidence: Something has to be responsible for Glazing Milk’s iconic texture, and this has to be it. Other rheology modifiers and lightweight emulsion stabilizers (i.e. the Carbomer and Xanthan Gum) are likely too low in the formula to significantly drive texture. A little goes a long way with Carbomer and Xanthan Gum, but I still suspect the formula needed a stand alone cellulose to provide long term stability and lightweight skin melt.
7. SEPITONIC™ M3.0 – Seppic
Found in: Glazing Milk
INCI: Magnesium Aspartate (and) Zinc Gluconate (and) Copper Gluconate
Description: This trio—Magnesium Aspartate, Zinc Gluconate, Copper Gluconate—is Seppic’s signature mineral complex. Its appearance tells me Rhode opted for a bioavailable, story-driven source of skin-replenishing trace elements.
Evidence: Copper, Zinc, and Magnesium ions can be found in numerous salt forms, but Zinc Gluconate is quite rare. As soon as I saw it I thought of Seppic; they, in my experience, use it best.
8. SpecKare CMD Flux – Spec-Chem
Found in: Glazing Milk
INCI: Ceramide NP (and) Ceramide AP (and) Ceramide EOP (and) Phytosphingosine (and) Cholesterol (and) Sodium Lauroyl Lactylate (and) Carbomer (and) Xanthan Gum (and) Ethylhexylglycerin (and) Phenoxyethanol (and) Water
Description: This pre-blended ceramide complex (NP, AP, EOP) mirrors the skin's natural lipid structure and comes pre-dispersed for easy use in lightweight emulsions. It explains the elegant texture of Glazing Milk and reinforces barrier health without the waxy drag.
Evidence: Adding each of the three key ceramides would be expensive and tricky to scale efficiently; ceramides can inadvertently crystalize or create stiff, occlusive textures when used alone. Going for a pre-made ceramide blend was a smart move here, especially for a lightweight emulsion. The surfactant and preservative duo included in the pre-mix was the key to identifying this particular blend. In contrast, I suspect the Cermaide NP may have been added individually in the Barrier Butter. Different ceramides in different formulas makes sense, though I do wonder if this was another opportunity for formula cohesion. More below.
9. SymRelief® 100 or Green – Symrise
Found in: Barrier Restore Cream
INCI: Bisabolol (and) Zingiber Officinale (Ginger) Root Extract
Description: This ready-to-go blend of Bisabolol + Ginger Root Extract is designed to calm inflammation and reduce redness. A smart off-the-shelf choice with great claims support.
Evidence: Both ingredients could have been added individually from any number of reputable suppliers. But the unique combination was too much of a coincidence to ignore. There are rarely coincidences in cosmetic chemistry.
A Quick Note on the Pineapple Cleanser
I couldn’t find any definitive clues or hints for specific raw materials in either the Pineapple Refresh Cleanser or the Peptide Lip Treatment. I also think these two formulas are the weakest.
The Peptide Glazing Fluid, on the other hand, is by far their strongest. From my quick audit it looks to have been formulated with focus and precision. Every ingredient in its place, with no fluff. Plus, it’s difficult to precisely dupe.
The cleanser, on the other hand, leaves so much to be desired. For a brand so good at optics, pineapple enzymes and green tea feels mismatched with the rest of the formulas…and, just, boring. I would’ve kept the same formula, cut the pineapple enzymes, green tea extract, and seabuckthorn oil and instead turn the marketing lens onto the glycolipds, phytosteryl/octyldodecyl lauroyl glutamate, and hydroxypropyltrimonium hyaluronate.
These three ingredients are a bit harder to talk about because their names are not as common or as easy to pronounce, but they are far more compelling. Cut the distracting naturals, and instead tell a moisturize-while-you cleanse story, with ingredients specifically designed to help nourish, restore, and hydrate your skin as you cleanse.
If you really wanted an enzyme or exfoliation story, go with a BHA like Betaine Salicylate, which is way more at home in a balm than are enzymes (which are best suited for watery gels).
I feel like Rhode must’ve briefed out “a cleanser” and just went with whatever a chemist choose for them. The cleanser formula is fine, it just feels like it doesn’t really belong with the rest of the routine. It’s a missed opportunity. (If they needed color to stand out on social, why not go with a malachite blue or algae green?)
A Capsule Line That Could Have Used a Capsule Ingredient Strategy
Rhode doesn’t need the latest advances in biotechnology, sustainable materials, or derm-science to achieve clinical results. This is not a OneSkin or Augustinus Bader play. This is quality skincare at a masstige price point where texture and packaging are the main focus. This is science-backed without being overtly science-forward, a very clever and intentional play. It’s a solid thesis: you don’t have to be reddit skincare nerd to have access to high-quality skin regimen.
But from just a quick chemist audit, I’m left with the impression that each of these formulas was developed individually and independently of each other. Some strategic (and smart!) work went into creating the core collection lineup: what product types, with what claims, and what textures. But I feel the strategy stopped short. Cohesion comes from packaging and positioning, but not from formulation.
If all of these formulas were placed in beakers and labelled with only their ILs, I would not have put them in the same brand, let alone one with so few SKUs.
Rhode’s four-step skincare routine is smartly minimal, I will give them that. Each product—Glazing Milk, Peptide Glazing Fluid, Barrier Restore Cream, and Pineapple Refresh Cleanser—is designed to layer, mix, and be bundled. But the formulations don’t always reflect that cohesion.
From a chemist’s POV, I see a lot of missed opportunities to consolidate raw materials across SKUs. And that matters. When you develop multiple products at once, a shared “ingredient wardrobe” can:
Simplify supply chains
Reduce costs through bulk purchasing
Minimize regulatory burdens
Strengthen brand identity through subtle product synergy
I've built this approach for brands before—leveraging a small pool of thoughtfully selected raw materials to develop SKUs that feel distinct but are deeply interconnected. Rhode, by contrast, seems to have chosen different peptides, different ceramides, and different hyaluronic acid complexes for nearly every product. Which, to be fair, makes each formula good.
But I can’t help wonder about a missed opportunity to find efficiencies in a more cohesive collection. Again, this is only based on the assumptions I’ve made above. It could very well be that the core collection was precisely formulated for the best claims, textures, and cost of goods.
As the Rhode formulas are brought into e.l.f.’s fold it will be curious to see if any reformulations are gradually rolled out; e.l.f. didn’t earn its highest-quality-at-lowest-prices status without some savvy ingredient decisions.
I have way more nerdy notes than could make it into this piece. For any specific questions, feel free to reach out!