Is expensive SPF really worth it?
The promises of silky textures, chic packaging and designer branding might make high-end SPFs seem like the pinnacle of skincare – but are they actually better? Or are we just blinded by the Instagram-worthy marketing?
Advertisement
Dermatologists and suncare experts weigh in on what you're really getting when you invest in a premium sunscreen and what to look for if you want performance over polish.
Function vs. finish
It's no question that affordable SPFs are just as effective at protecting your skin from the sun as high-end ones.
'Affordable SPFs from trusted brands can offer excellent protection and meet the same safety standards as high-end options,' says consultant dermatologist Dr Sophie Momen.
More expensive SPFs tend to feel better on the skin
'Pricier products may offer more luxurious textures, faster absorption or finishes that feel better on the skin, but in many cases, you're just paying for branding and marketing, rather than superior protection.'
Advertisement
However, the formula and level of protection is incredibly important.
Premium products often boast more advanced UVA protection and skincare actives – and may avoid cheaper chemical filters linked to health concerns. 'There is also a possibility that the price can reflect the type of UV filters used in a formula to protect you,' explains Ultrasun's Abi Cleeve.
Ingredients that justify the investment
Not all SPFs are created equal – and some of the most worthwhile differences lie beneath the surface.
According to Momen, 'An effective SPF should be broad-spectrum, offering both UVB (for burning) and UVA (for ageing) protection and it should be SPF 50, especially if you're outdoors frequently, have pigmentation issues, or are using active skincare ingredients.'
Advertisement
She also recommends formulas with antioxidants like vitamin E or niacinamide, water resistance and non-comedogenic features for acne-prone skin.
'High UVB protection – the SPF number – over 90 per cent UVA filters, additional skincare actives for a 'one and done' in your skincare routine and a formula that sits well on the skin [can justify the cost]' says Cleeve.
'It needs to be effective, comfortable to wear and support your overall wellbeing.'
Eucerin Sun Actinic Control SPF100 Fluid Protezione Cheratosi Attinica
Ultrasun
Extreme SPF50+
Garnier BHA + Niacinamide Daily UV
How to decode the label
A €12 high-street SPF 50 and a €60 luxury equivalent might look similar, but are they really offering the same thing? Technically, yes – and no.
Advertisement
'The SPF number measures UVB protection and must meet strict standards, regardless of the price,' says Momen. 'However, luxury brands may use newer or more photostable filters that provide better UVA protection, which is important for preventing pigmentation and premature ageing.'
On a practical note, you should be looking for a 90 per cent UVA filter or above – this is harder to find in affordable SPFs.
You should ensure your SPF label reads 'broad spectrum'
'Also consider how long the product protects you, and what the water resistance and photostability will be,' says Cleeve. 'A cheaper alternative may end up costing you more if you need to use more of it.'
But don't let the beauty jargon confuse you. There are ways to keep the decoding simple.
Advertisement
'Check for the SPF rating to ensure protection against UVB rays,' says Momen. 'For UVA protection […] look for a UVA symbol in a circle or a five-star UVA rating.'
Cleeve recommends going even further. 'For environmental considerations look for the BASF EcoSun pass. Look for clarity on the percentage of UVA filter and look for those that state they are allergy tested.'
Ultra Violette
Extreme Screen Hydrating Body & Hand Skinscreen SPF 50+
The mistakes you might be making
Even the best SPF can't save you if it's not used correctly. Both experts cite the same major misstep: underestimating your skin's needs.
'Using low-SPF products – like SPF 15 – is a key mistake,' warns Momen. 'Lab testing assumes a much thicker application than most people use, so lower SPFs offer significantly less protection. Always opt for SPF 30–50 – ideally 50!'
Solely relying on the SPF rating as opposed to UVA and UVB protection is also a common oversight. 'Not checking the level of UVA protection alongside choosing their UVB protection [is a major mistake]' explains Cleeve.
She also advises ditching the 'holiday scent,' as fragranced SPFs can cause unnecessary sensitivity during sun exposure.
If you're dealing with sensitive skin, melasma, or acne, your SPF choice matters even more.
'For oily or acne-prone skin, non-comedogenic formulas are essential to avoid breakouts,' says Momen. 'People with melasma or pigmentation issues benefit from tinted sunscreens with strong UVA protection, as these help block visible light too.'
Those with sensitive skin, rosacea, or eczema may benefit from higher-end, hypoallergenic options, says Cleeve, particularly those with mineral-only filters.
MooGoo Tinted SPF 40 Face Cream
The bottom line
So, is splashing out really worth it? Well, if your budget allows for a luxurious, high-performing sunscreen that feels like a dream to wear – go for it. But if you're reaching for a £10 bottle from a trusted brand with broad-spectrum protection and SPF 50, you're still doing your skin a massive favour.
The simple golden rule is to use it generously. Reapply. And whatever the price point, find a formula that fits your lifestyle.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
41 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Sir Chris Hoy explains why he feels 'lucky' after cancer diagnosis granted him 'the time to really appreciate life'
Sir Chris Hoy says his terminal cancer diagnosis has given him something many others never get: time to reflect, reset priorities and truly appreciate life. The Olympic legend, who revealed in October that he has stage four prostate cancer, has become a powerful voice for early detection and a living example that serious illness need not mean the end of meaningful living. Speaking to The Telegraph, Hoy reflected on friends who died suddenly, without the chance to say goodbye. He said: 'What would they have given for that? And therefore, for me, I think: "Well, aren't I lucky?" Look at the privilege I've got, the time to really appreciate life.' Hoy had no symptoms before his diagnosis. Then a sore shoulder led to a scan, which revealed a tumour. Further tests confirmed the cancer had spread to his bones. He was 47. Since then, Hoy, now 49, has thrown himself into raising awareness — particularly for men over 45 or those with risk factors like a family history. His own father was diagnosed with prostate cancer shortly before the London 2012 Olympics, but made a full recovery thanks to early detection. Hoy has also seen the impact of speaking out. NHS data shows a sharp rise in urological cancer referrals since his announcement, while Prostate Cancer UK has reported a major spike in risk assessments among men. He's not one to seek praise — in fact, he draws inspiration from others who spoke publicly about their diagnoses, including Rob Burrow and Doddie Weir. 'They stood up and they smiled and they used humour and they recognised that they could make a difference. I don't really see myself in the same vein as those two, but if I could have any impact at all…' Hoy is currently training for his September event, the Tour de 4, a mass-participation charity ride with routes for all abilities. He'll be tackling the toughest 56-mile route and says the goal is to challenge public perceptions of what living with stage four cancer can look like. He's also clear-eyed about the emotional toll of his diagnosis — including the fear, panic and difficult conversations with his children. But he credits his family, his support network, and the simple power of staying in the present for getting him through. 'It's the fear of the future that causes anxiety and stress for most people,' he said. 'So it's not allowing yourself to fast forward and try and predict what's going to happen because you never know.' Hoy's wife Sarra was diagnosed with multiple sclerosis just weeks after his own news. The couple have faced both challenges side by side, and Sarra is now training for Tour de 4 too. Between workouts, Hoy has returned to motor racing, recently driving at Le Mans with Top Gear's Chris Harris. But he insists the everyday moments matter most — time with his children, a good film, a shared laugh. He hopes his public platform will help others facing cancer feel less alone, and inspire men to get checked before it's too late. 'If my legacy is that less men are dying from prostate cancer, that would be incredible,' he concluded.
Daily Mail
41 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
People are just realizing what paprika is made from and why it is red
It is one of the most common spices in the kitchen, used for everything from seasoning meat to flavoring stews. But the exact origin of paprika has many people scratching their heads. Most spices' names are derived directly from the plant they are made of. Cinnamon, for example, was once cinnamon sticks. Cumin is dried cumin seeds. And ginger is made of ground ginger root. The word 'paprika' also comes from its parent plant. But you might have to work a little harder work out its provenance. The indirect translation comes from the Latin word for 'pepper' according to Etymonline. So when you've sprinkled paprika onto your chicken, chili, or deviled eggs, you're really adding dried out, finely ground bell peppers. Its bright color is thanks to the type of bell pepper used, which is often red. The spice can add tangy, smoky, and even sweet flavors to cooking. It is also dense in nutrients like vitamin A, capsaicin, and carotenoid antioxidants. Vitamin A supports a healthy immune system and helps maintain good vision. Capsaicin is good for heart health, weight loss, and pain management. And carotenoid antioxidants can reduce risk of obesity, diabetes, and some types of cancer. Recently, many people on social media have been stunned to learn the origin of their favorite spice. One person on X posted: 'Why did I just learn that paprika is made from a red bell pepper,' accompanied by a mind-blown emoji. Another shared the revelation and received hundreds of commenters who, likewise, had no idea. 'Okay, why did it take me 31 years of life to find out that PAPRIKA IS JUST GROUND RED BELL PEPPER?!?,' she wrote. ' seriously?!,' one person reacted. 'I refuse to accept this,' commented another. One account, who has labeled themselves the Plant Daddy, explained further that, 'It's Capsicum annum species of which bell pepper are a cultivar, but can be other types of less hot / more sweet pepper cultivars. 'Also is smoked in some regions over oak for diff flavor, other locales also blend in hotter varieties, etc.!' Cultivar plants, like bell pepper, are created through a selective breeding process. Through carefully controlled seed production, farmers can breed produce with the right flavors and colors to eventually make the perfect paprika. Paprika production involves drying out ripe peppers and grinding them into a powder. The spice typically lasts for between two and three years before it begins to lose its potency and color but is still safe to eat. It should be stored in an airtight container in a cool, dry area to maximize its longevity. Originally cultivated in central and southern America, paprika was brought to Europe in the 16th century and proliferated from there. Today it is used in cuisines all across the world, but is particularly associated with Hungarian cooking.
Telegraph
an hour ago
- Telegraph
Please save our anorexic daughter, family pleads with NHS
The family of one of Britain's sickest anorexia patients has issued a desperate appeal to the NHS to offer the 25-year-old a bed in an eating disorder unit. Patricia, as she is known under a court order, weighs 22kg (3st 6 lbs) – the average weight of a seven-year-old – and has a body mass index of 9, making her among the most unwell eating disorder patients in the country. On Thursday, her parents and aunt won a landmark legal battle overturning a court order that had blocked the NHS from treating her anorexia for 21 months. Mrs Justice Arbuthnot ruled that doctors must be permitted to provide life-saving treatment, including the option of force-feeding, which had been denied under an earlier court order. This is the first time the Court of Protection has reversed a ruling to withhold eating disorder care. 'In danger of deteriorating' On Saturday, her family issued a desperate appeal for the NHS to act on the judgment and help save her life. They told The Telegraph said: 'We are incredibly grateful to the judge. Her ruling has removed the legal barriers that prevented Patricia from being admitted to a specialist unit for almost two years. 'But unless a consultant steps forward now to offer her a bed, she will still die. Patricia is back home, still dangerously underweight and in danger of deteriorating. 'Every suitable unit in the country has been contacted, but for months none has replied to say they have a bed. 'We know how fragmented the system is, but Patricia doesn't have time for NHS bureaucracy to fail her. If a bed isn't found in the next few days, it may be too late. 'We're not asking for special treatment – just for our brilliant, bright and loving daughter and niece to receive the same care as any other critically ill patient. 'Please, if you run an NHS unit for complex eating disorder cases that is autism-friendly and works collaboratively with patients, check your referral inbox. 'We need every consultant psychiatrist with an available bed to ask their team, 'can we help save this young woman's life?' Patricia can only survive if someone says yes.' 'Don't let bureaucracy cost Patricia her life' Patricia's parents and aunt also issued a direct plea to the Health Secretary, who framed it as part of his war on red tape when he announced plans to scrap NHS England in March. 'Please, Mr Streeting, do not let bureaucracy cost Patricia her life,' they said. 'If a consultant with a bed does not see the referral in time, and she dies as a result, it would be a tragedy beyond words.' The original 2023 judgment in Patricia's case, issued by the now-retired Mr Justice Moor, followed a decision by clinicians at Cambridgeshire and Peterborough NHS Foundation Trust that her anorexia was 'untreatable'. The judge agreed, finding that although Patricia lacked the capacity to make treatment decisions, she had the 'autonomy' to refuse care. He claimed she was 'days or even hours' from death and ruled that force-feeding was not in her best interests. She could, he said, be discharged for palliative care at home. But Patricia, who has always insisted she wants to live, defied expectations. She survived the next 18 months, but without access to eating disorder treatment, her condition worsened. By March, she weighed just 19kg, with a BMI of 7.3 and was at 'immediate' risk of death. Over eight hearing days between March and May, Mrs Justice Arbuthnot heard evidence from Patricia's parents, a psychologist, gastroenterologist and several psychiatrists — including Dr Ali Ibrahim, a consultant who gave a pro bono opinion in favour of compulsory treatment to restore Patricia to a healthy weight. He acknowledged the trauma that force-feeding can cause, but cited outcomes showing patients often recover and later feel grateful for the care they had once resisted. The family was represented pro bono by barrister Oliver Lewis, who worked for more than 150 hours on the case. In court, he argued Patricia is so severely ill she 'cannot distinguish between broader wishes ['I want to live'] and the narrower ones regarding life-saving interventions ['I don't want NG feeding'].' The submission from her parents and aunt included increasingly desperate WhatsApp messages they had received from Patricia pleading for help. On 28 February, she wrote to her aunt: 'I don't want to die… I want to walk up mountains. I want to swim in the sea. I want cuddles and kisses. I want to play and have fun. 'I'm so so scared. I'm terrified. Please help me more. WE [sic] haven't got much time to play with. I'll never walk if we don't sort things now.' Norfolk and Norwich University Hospital NHS Trust, where she is being monitored, and Cambridgeshire and Peterborough NHS Foundation Trust, which provides her mental health care, opposed the family's application. Both argued that force-feeding would be futile, a position that appears to contradict NHS guidance that anorexia is not a terminal illness and should be treated. The trusts can be named after The Telegraph successfully challenged court reporting restrictions twice. NHS Norfolk and Waveney Integrated Care Board, which commissions Patricia's care, can also be identified. In her judgment, Mrs Justice Arbuthnot ruled in favour of the parents' application, stating: 'I agreed with Mr Lewis when he said, echoing Dr Ibrahim's observation, that by 'respecting [Patricia's] autonomy, the court [in 2023] had permitted her anorexia to call the shots'. The court found Patricia remained incapable of making treatment decisions, and that the previous ruling had failed to protect her welfare.
