Three different approaches to skin renewal, and why "natural retinol" isn't quite the right phrase.
Retinol has been a skincare favourite for decades.
Then came bakuchiol, quickly marketed as a "natural retinol alternative."
And more recently, plant extracts such as Bidens pilosa have entered the conversation around gentler approaches to skin renewal.
But are they actually the same thing?
No.
And understanding the difference is much more useful than simply asking which one is "best".
First: what does retinol actually do?
Retinol is a vitamin A derivative and a precursor to retinoic acid.
Once converted within the skin, it influences processes involved in epidermal turnover, follicular keratinisation and collagen biology.
It is one of the better-established topical ingredients for concerns including early photoageing, uneven texture and some forms of dyschromia.
But there is a trade-off.
Retinoids can cause dryness, peeling, irritation and increased sensitivity, particularly when introduced too quickly or used too frequently.
This is why I don't believe that stronger automatically means better.
A treatment only works if your skin can tolerate it consistently.
Then came bakuchiol
Bakuchiol is a botanical compound that has attracted attention because it appears to influence some pathways associated with retinoid activity.
Unlike retinoids, it does not directly bind to retinoic acid receptors.
The evidence is still considerably smaller than the evidence base for established retinoids, but clinical studies suggest potential benefits for photoageing with relatively good tolerability.
This makes bakuchiol particularly interesting for people who:
- don't tolerate retinoids well
- want a gentler approach to skin renewal
- are new to corrective skincare
- prioritise consistency over intensity
But I would not describe bakuchiol as simply "retinol in a plant."
It isn't.
It is a different ingredient with a different mechanism and a smaller evidence base.
That distinction matters.
And what about Bidens pilosa?
This is where things get particularly interesting for D.E.N.
Bidens pilosa is a botanical extract used in our Retinol Alternative Serum as part of our approach to plant-derived skin renewal.
It belongs to a different category from retinol and should not simply be labelled "natural retinol."
Instead, we think of it as part of a broader strategy: supporting smoother, more radiant-looking skin while prioritising tolerability.
This is an important distinction because "retinol alternative" doesn't necessarily mean one specific molecule.
It can describe a formulation strategy: how can we support skin renewal without relying entirely on conventional vitamin A derivatives?
Retinol vs bakuchiol vs Bidens pilosa
| Retinol | Bakuchiol | Bidens pilosa | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Origin | Vitamin A derivative | Botanical compound | Botanical extract |
| Retinoid? | Yes, retinoid precursor | No | No |
| Direct RAR binding | No, converted to retinoic acid | No | Not presented as a retinoid |
| Evidence base | Extensive | Growing | Formulation-dependent |
| Main interest | Renewal, texture, photoageing | Gentler retinoid-functional approach | Plant-derived skin renewal |
| Irritation potential | Can be significant | Generally considered lower | Depends on formulation and individual tolerance |
| D.E.N. approach | Not the focus of our Retinol Alternative Serum | Useful comparison | Used in our Retinol Alternative Serum |
So which one should you use?
This is where I think skincare has become unnecessarily competitive.
We don't need to declare a winner.
Retinol has a strong evidence base and an important place in skincare.
Bakuchiol is an interesting botanical option with a growing evidence base, particularly when tolerability is important.
Bidens pilosa offers another plant-derived approach that can be incorporated into a carefully designed formulation.
The question isn't:
"Which ingredient is the strongest?"
It's:
"Which approach makes sense for my skin?"
The problem with chasing intensity
One of the most common mistakes I see is treating irritation as evidence that a product is working.
It isn't.
If your skin becomes persistently red, tight, burning or uncomfortable, increasing the strength or adding another active is unlikely to be the smartest next step.
Sometimes the skin needs less.
This is why I believe corrective skincare should be introduced gradually, with barrier support alongside it.
Consistency beats intensity.
Why we chose Bidens pilosa for D.E.N.
When developing D.E.N., we weren't looking for the ingredient with the loudest marketing story.
We were looking for ingredients that fitted our philosophy:
Evidence where it exists.
Natural-origin ingredients where they make sense.
Formulation designed around tolerability.
No unnecessary complexity.
Our Retinol Alternative Serum combines Bidens pilosa with hydrating and supportive ingredients to create a plant-derived approach to skin renewal.
The goal isn't to make your skin work harder.
It is to help it look healthier, smoother and more radiant while respecting its ability to tolerate treatment.
And that's the real difference
The skincare industry often asks:
What is the strongest ingredient you can use?
I prefer to ask:
What is the least aggressive intervention that can achieve the result we want?
Sometimes that will be retinol.
Sometimes it may be bakuchiol.
Sometimes a botanical approach such as Bidens pilosa makes more sense.
And sometimes the skin isn't ready for any corrective active at all.
That isn't failure.
It's good skincare.

0 comments