Ingredient ratings / Olea Europaea (Olive) Fruit Oil

Is olive oil comedogenic? Three labs, three different answers

By Skinredients · Checked against the sources 2026-10-16

Label name

Olea Europaea (Olive) Fruit Oil

Also listed as

olive oil, olea europaea fruit oil

Comedogenic grade

0–2 / 5 · Borderline (2–3) or reported positive

Tests

• Fulton 1989: comedogenic 2/5, irritancy 0/5 — rabbit ear, 10% in propylene glycol (standard grade)
• Fulton 1989: comedogenic 1/5 — rabbit ear, 10% in propylene glycol (refined grade)
• Morris & Kwan 1983: comedogenic 0/5 — rabbit ear, undiluted

What the tests found

Olive oil was graded by three rabbit-ear studies, and they didn’t agree.

Fulton 1989. In Fulton’s usual setup, a 1:9 dilution in propylene glycol (method), standard olive oil graded 2 out of 5 for follicle plugging and 0 for irritation. A refined olive oil graded 1 [1]. Refining therefore moved olive oil from Fulton’s borderline band (2–3) into his not-significant one (0–1). His table flags the whole oils section as depending on the source of the raw material. In his discussion he notes that refined sesame, avocado and mink oils did better, and that safflower and sunflower oils are “naturally less comedogenic” [1].

Morris & Kwan 1983. Revlon’s lab put olive oil from Welch, Holme & Clark on the ear undiluted and compared the follicles with the untreated ear under the microscope. They saw no reaction: 0 [2]. Their table lists the oil as 84% oleic acid by triglyceride content.

Kligman & Mills 1972, as reported by Morris and Kwan. Morris and Kwan point out that their olive oil result “differs significantly” from the moderate response Kligman and Mills had reported earlier [2]. Kligman and Mills found that most vegetable oils produced some, usually low, comedogenicity. All of them were inactivated when diluted to 25% in mineral oil [2].

Where the evidence disagrees

• Oleic acid vs. olive oil. Free oleic acid is a known comedogen in the rabbit ear, yet olive oil, the most oleic-rich oil Morris and Kwan tested at 84%, produced nothing, and neither did avocado oil at 77% [2]. Fulton’s general explanation is that mid-chain fatty acids such as lauric and myristic acid drive plugging, and that larger molecules produce less reaction [1]. Olive oil is mostly long-chain C18 fatty acids, which fits the lower grades better than the moderate one.
• “Olive oil” varies. The Cosmetic Ingredient Review (CIR) gives olive oil’s composition as 53–86% oleic acid, 7.5–20% palmitic and 3.5–20% linoleic [4]. That is a wide spread for one ingredient name. Along with Fulton’s refined-versus-standard result and his source-dependence flag, it is a plausible reason three labs got three answers.
• Dose runs backwards. The undiluted sample (Morris & Kwan) scored lower than the 10% solution (Fulton). That points to differences between samples and methods, not between concentrations.
• No human data. No human comedogenicity test of olive oil turned up in these sources. Kligman’s later view was that “many classical oils, notably vegetable oils, are usually non-comedogenic,” but that is a general statement, not an olive oil test [3]. The CIR’s review of plant oils cites the observation that high-quality edible lipids have no documented adverse skin effects in normal individuals, except possibly comedogenicity [4].

Where it shows up, and how much

The CIR assessed olive fruit oil in its 2017 review of plant-derived fatty acid oils. The use data are from 2010 FDA registrations and industry concentration surveys [4]:

• 915 products, at 0.0005–100%. The report singles out olive oil’s maximum of 100% as the highest among the oils it names (avocado was next, at 98%).
• Leave-on products: 617 uses, up to 100%
• Rinse-off products: 298 uses, up to 94%
• Hair products (non-coloring): 190 uses, up to 94%
• Products that may be ingested (lip products): 26 uses, 0.7–26%
• Eye-area products: 26 uses, 0.004–17%

The CIR also lists human patch tests of olive oil in finished products, including 1.6% in a body lotion, 10% in a skin salve and 22% in a body moisturizer. None found sensitization [4]. Those tests didn’t measure pore clogging.

If you want to avoid it

Olive oil’s own grades are already low, which narrows the field. The relevant comparisons from the same two labs:

• Refined olive oil: 1 (Fulton 1989), one band lower than the standard grade. Labels don’t say whether an oil was refined, so a product listing olive oil may contain either [1].
• Avocado oil, the other high-oleic oil: 0 undiluted (Morris & Kwan 1983), but 3 in Fulton’s test, so it is not a safer bet [1][2].
• Castor oil: 1 (Fulton 1989) and 0–1 (Morris & Kwan 1983), one of the few oils both labs graded low [1][2]
• Sunflower oil: 0 (Fulton 1989), one of the two oils Fulton calls naturally less comedogenic [1]

Sources

1. Fulton JE Jr. Comedogenicity and irritancy of commonly used ingredients in skin care products. J Soc Cosmet Chem. 1989;40(6):321-333. https://library.scconline.org/v040n06/13
2. Morris WE, Kwan SC. Use of the rabbit ear model in evaluating the comedogenic potential of cosmetic ingredients. J Soc Cosmet Chem. 1983;34(5):215-225. https://library.scconline.org/v034n05/1
3. Kligman AM. Petrolatum is not comedogenic in rabbits or humans: a critical reappraisal of the rabbit ear assay and the concept of “acne cosmetica”. J Soc Cosmet Chem. 1996;47(1):41-48. https://library.scconline.org/v047n01/44
4. Burnett CL, Fiume MM, Bergfeld WF, et al. Safety Assessment of Plant-Derived Fatty Acid Oils. Int J Toxicol. 2017;36(Suppl 3):51S-129S. https://cir-reports.cir-safety.org/view-attachment/?id=ad62ac6b-8e74-ec11-8943-0022482f06a6 (abstract: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29243540/)

Comedogenic grades describe single raw materials tested in a lab, usually on rabbit ears. They are a guide for acne-prone skin, not a prediction for any product or person, and this page is not medical advice. How the scale works.