Polysorbate 60 vs Polysorbate 80 comparison

Polysorbate 60 and 80 are widely utilized nonionic surfactants in cosmetics and medicine. Despite belonging to the same class of raw materials, variations in synthetic raw materials and molecular structure lead to distinct focuses in performance, processing adaptability, and application scenarios. When selecting such raw materials, there's no need to determine which one is absolutely superior. The key lies in whether it aligns with the actual formulation requirements and production conditions of the product.

In the realm of nonionic surfactants, Polysorbate 60 and 80 have become essential tools for formulators due to their excellent emulsifying and solubilizing abilities. They can effectively blend oil and water phases while dissolving insoluble ingredients. Found in numerous fields from daily skincare products to pharmaceutical preparations, they are indispensable key ingredients, especially in products that need to ensure system stability and consider skin feel.

However, these two raw materials differ in performance characteristics and cost, and their applicable scenarios don't completely overlap. For enterprises and formulators, the choice between them should be made by comprehensively considering product positioning and production technology. The following comparison is conducted from six dimensions: performance, processing, application, cost, selection suggestions, and conclusions, to offer practical references for raw material selection.

I. Performance Comparison

1. Heat Resistance Performance

Polysorbate 60 is made from saturated fatty acids (stearic acid). Its molecules are arranged regularly, making it resistant to oxidation or decomposition in high-temperature environments. It's suitable for formulas that undergo high-temperature treatment. For instance, some creams and skincare products produced via high-temperature processes can maintain stable performance.

Polysorbate 80 uses unsaturated fatty acid (oleic acid) as a raw material. Its molecular structure contains double bonds, which readily react with oxygen at high temperatures, so its heat resistance is slightly worse than that of Polysorbate 60. However, in low-temperature environments, the structure of unsaturated fatty acids reduces intermolecular forces, providing better fluidity. Even with low-temperature and easily solidified ingredients, it can disperse them evenly to prevent agglomeration.

Summary: Polysorbate 60 excels in high-temperature resistance and is suitable for products processed at high temperatures or used in medium-to-high-temperature environments for long periods. Polysorbate 80 is more appropriate for medium-to-low-temperature scenarios.

2. Solubility

Although Polysorbate 60 is a water-soluble nonionic surfactant, when added to water in excessive amounts, its molecules tend to aggregate, causing slight stratification. It requires stirring for dispersion, and the dispersion effect is reliable.

Polysorbate 80 has better water solubility. When it comes into contact with the skin, it feels light and non-sticky. It has obvious advantages in products that aim for a refreshing skin feel, such as serums and summer skincare lotions.

Summary: Polysorbate 80 has superior solubility and dispersibility, making it more suitable for creating uniform, stable, and highly transparent formulas.

3. Skin Texture and Compatibility

After emulsification with Polysorbate 60, the system's texture becomes thick. It has good compatibility with ingredients like mineral oil and CETYL PALMITATE, imparting a rich and mellow skin feel to the product. When used in autumn and winter moisturizing face creams, it can enhance sealing and help the skin retain moisture, making it especially suitable for people with dry skin.

Polysorbate 80 has better fluidity and softness, along with better skin compatibility, providing a light and non-greasy skin feel. In products that seek a refreshing experience, such as summer lotions and oil-control essences, it can reduce the sticky burden. Even when combined with moisturizing ingredients, it won't make the skin feel thick.

Summary: Polysorbate 60 is suitable for products that need a thick skin feel, while Polysorbate 80 is more suitable for formulas that offer a light skin feel.

II. Comparison of Processing Performance

Polysorbate 60 is in a paste form at room temperature, with strong intermolecular forces. During processing, it needs to be heated to above 45 °C to melt, and then mixed with other ingredients to avoid residual unmelted particles affecting the product's appearance and performance. It is recommended for non-transparent dosage forms like lotions and face creams, with the dosage controlled at 0.5% - 5.0%.

Polysorbate 80 is a yellow viscous liquid at room temperature, with low intermolecular forces. It doesn't require complex heating pretreatment and has good solubility. It is more suitable for transparent or semi-transparent formulations such as creams and essences. It performs well in products with a high fat ratio, stabilizing oil-phase components to prevent precipitation. The addition amount in cosmetics can reach 10.3%.

Summary: Polysorbate 80 is more convenient to process, reducing heating processes and energy consumption. Polysorbate 60 requires careful control of the processing temperature to avoid affecting product quality.

III. Typical Application Areas

Polysorbate 60

In the personal care field, it is mostly used in opaque lotions and face creams, such as autumn and winter moisturizing creams. Leveraging its thick skin feel and stability, when combined with Glycol distearate, it can create a pearlescent texture, taking into account both moisturizing and visual effects. In hair conditioners, it can evenly disperse silicone oil and nourishing ingredients to improve hair smoothness.

Polysorbate 80

It is suitable for transparent essences, sunscreens, and other products. For example, in oil-control essences, it utilizes its high solubility and light skin feel, and when matched with MYRISTYL MYRISTATE, it achieves a balance between moisturizing and refreshing. In baby skincare products, due to its gentle skin texture and good dispersibility, it can reduce irritation to sensitive skin.

IV. Cost Factors

Polysorbate 60 has relatively loose storage conditions and can be stored at ≤ 30 °C. However, during the synthesis process, impurities like dioxane are easily produced, requiring additional purification steps, which leads to high production costs.

Although Polysorbate 80 has stricter requirements for moisture control (to prevent excessive moisture during storage), its excellent solubility can reduce stirring energy consumption. Moreover, the limit for dioxane is relatively loose, resulting in lower purification costs. Overall, it has a cost advantage compared to Polysorbate 60.

V. Selection Suggestions

If preparing pastes, non-transparent emulsions, or products that require high-temperature processing, Polysorbate 60 should be given priority.

Polysorbate 80 is more suitable for transparent essences, high-oil-phase sunscreens, and other products that pursue transparency and high dispersion.

For products for sensitive skin or when focusing on processing efficiency, Polysorbate 80 should be selected first.

When the formula contains ingredients such as Coco glucoside that require synergistic stability, Polysorbate 60 can be chosen.

VI. Conclusion

Although both Polysorbate 60 and 80 are non-ionic surfactants, they have their own characteristics in core performance, application scenarios, and cost, and there is no absolute superiority or inferiority. Enterprises and formulators need to combine product formulas, compliance requirements, and production conditions, refer to testing data, and conduct small-scale trials if necessary (our company can provide free samples). In this way, they can find the most suitable raw materials that meet product performance requirements while balancing cost and processing difficulty, ultimately achieving dual improvements in product quality and market competitiveness.