Loading...
Medicube Zero Pore Pad 2.0 scores 8.2/9.8 vs Qiriness Le Wrap Exfolys at 7.4/9.8. Medicube Zero Pore Pad 2.0 wins for active ingredients.
Medicube Zero Pore Pad 2.0 edges ahead, winning 3 of 5 attributes.
Scores last verified: April 2026
28 unique
27 unique
Where Medicube Zero Pore Pad 2.0 really shines is active ingredient strength, scoring 6.3 compared to Qiriness Le Wrap Exfolys's 2.5. Its formula features Niacinamide, Allantoin, and Gluconolactone in high positions, signalling meaningful concentrations.
Irritation Risk is another area of separation. Medicube Zero Pore Pad 2.0 scores 9.5 here versus 9.2 for Qiriness Le Wrap Exfolys. That difference comes down to how each formula is built — the ingredient list tells the story.
Medicube Zero Pore Pad 2.0 brings Niacinamide, Allantoin, and Gluconolactone as actives, while qiriness Le Wrap Exfolys relies on Bisabolol, Tocopherol, and Ascorbyl Palmitate. Both approaches have merit, but the positioning and supporting ingredients make the difference.
Medicube Zero Pore Pad 2.0 is better if you have
Qiriness Le Wrap Exfolys is better if you have
Medicube Zero Pore Pad 2.0 comes in at mid-range pricing with a 8.2 score, which is solid value at that tier.
Medicube Zero Pore Pad 2.0 edges ahead with a slightly stronger formulation, but Qiriness Le Wrap Exfolys is still a solid pick.
Based on ingredient analysis, Medicube Zero Pore Pad 2.0 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.
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.