Loading...
Dr. Jart+ Cicapair Tiger Grass Color Correcting Treatment scores 8.5/9.8 and Peter Thomas Roth Peptide Skinjection™ Amplified Wrinkle-Fix Refillable Serum scores 8.3/9.8 — a near-tie where your skin type decides the winner.
These two are neck and neck — just 0.2 points apart.
Scores last verified: June 2026
22 unique
26 unique
These two moisturisers take different paths to a similar destination. Both formulas include solid hydrating ingredients, and the overall scores reflect that — the gap here is genuinely slim.
Hydration Efficacy is another area of separation. Peter Thomas Roth Peptide Skinjection™ Amplified Wrinkle-Fix Refillable Serum scores 9.8 here versus 8.3 for Dr. Jart+ Cicapair Tiger Grass Color Correcting Treatment. That difference comes down to how each formula is built — the ingredient list tells the story.
Dr. Jart+ Cicapair Tiger Grass Color Correcting Treatment brings Niacinamide, Centella Asiatica Extract, and Madecassoside as actives, while peter Thomas Roth Peptide Skinjection™ Amplified Wrinkle-Fix Refillable Serum relies on Saccharomyces Lysate, Acetyl Hexapeptide-8, and Pentapeptide-18. Both approaches have merit, but the positioning and supporting ingredients make the difference.
Dr. Jart+ Cicapair Tiger Grass Color Correcting Treatment is better if you have
Peter Thomas Roth Peptide Skinjection™ Amplified Wrinkle-Fix Refillable Serum is better if you have
At mid-range pricing with a score of 8.5, Dr. Jart+ Cicapair Tiger Grass Color Correcting Treatment delivers strong value. Peter Thomas Roth Peptide Skinjection™ Amplified Wrinkle-Fix Refillable Serum sits at the premium level with a 8.3 score — the extra cost doesn't translate to better scores here.
It's a close call — both products score within 0.3 points of each other. Your choice depends on your specific skin concerns.
Based on ingredient analysis, Dr. Jart+ Cicapair Tiger Grass Color Correcting Treatment scores higher overall. See the full score breakdown above for details on each attribute.
Yes, they share common ingredients. Check the ingredient face-off section above for a detailed comparison.
The key differences are in their active ingredients and formulation approach. Check the attribute battle above for a detailed breakdown.
We may earn a commission from purchases made through our links, at no extra cost to you. This helps us keep Gracie free and independent.
Some links on this site are affiliate links. We may earn a commission from purchases made through our links, at no extra cost to you. This helps us keep Gracie free and independent.
© 2026 Gracie. All rights reserved. Data sourced from Open Beauty Facts (ODbL) and EU CosIng.