LED face masks · head to head
Two of the nine LED face masks in our comparison table, side by side. Every figure below is one the manufacturer publishes itself; where a brand stays silent the cell says so.
The short answer
The Silk’n LED Face Mask 100 emits at 463 nm, 592 nm, 633 nm. The Therabody TheraFace Mask Glo emits at 415 nm, 633 nm, 830 nm. The Therabody TheraFace Mask Glo covers both red and near-infrared, the two ranges with the strongest published evidence for skin; the Silk’n LED Face Mask 100 does not.
Neither brand publishes an irradiance figure, so the dose the two masks deliver cannot be compared from the specification sheets.
Side by side
| Specification | Silk’n LED Face Mask 100 | Therabody TheraFace Mask Glo |
|---|---|---|
| Wavelengths | 463 nm592 nm633 nm | 415 nm633 nm830 nm |
| LEDs | 100 | 504 |
| Published irradiance | Not published | Not published |
| Dose per session | — | — |
| Session | ~10 min | 12 min |
| Modes | 4 colours | 3 wavelengths + vibration |
| Regulatory | CE marked cosmetic device — no FDA clearance for this model | FDA cleared · CE |
| Fit | Semi-rigid | Semi-rigid, cordless |
| Power | Rechargeable, ~130 min runtime | Cordless rechargeable |
| Price (EU) | €160.00 €1.60 per LED | €349.00 €0.69 per LED |
“Published irradiance” means the brand prints an output figure on its own product page. “FDA cleared” is not “FDA approved” — see the questions below.
Where they differ
Evidence notes
The Silk’n LED Face Mask 100 uses 100 LEDs at 463 nm, 592 nm, 633 nm, in sessions of ~10 min.
A cosmetic device rather than a certified medical one. Its 463 nm and 592 nm are less evidence-backed than the core red and near-infrared.
The Therabody TheraFace Mask Glo uses 504 LEDs at 415 nm, 633 nm, 830 nm, in sessions of 12 min.
Cites a 104-subject study, the largest the brand claims in the category — brand-run. The vibration is a comfort extra, not a skin mechanism.
Questions
The Silk’n LED Face Mask 100 emits at 463 nm, 592 nm, 633 nm. The Therabody TheraFace Mask Glo emits at 415 nm, 633 nm, 830 nm. The Therabody TheraFace Mask Glo covers both red and near-infrared, the two ranges with the strongest published evidence for skin; the Silk’n LED Face Mask 100 does not.
Neither brand publishes an irradiance figure, so the dose the two masks deliver cannot be compared from the specification sheets.
The Therabody TheraFace Mask Glo carries more diodes: 504 against 100. Diode count sets how evenly light reaches the face — a coverage figure, not an efficacy figure.
Silk’n LED Face Mask 100: CE marked cosmetic device — no FDA clearance for this model. Therabody TheraFace Mask Glo: FDA cleared · CE. Clearance under section 510(k) means the manufacturer showed substantial equivalence to a device already on the market and met safety standards — it is not FDA approval, and it is not evidence of efficacy.
Keep comparing