In short

Consumer group Choice tested 20 sunscreens and found only four provided the SPF protection their label claimed.

The brands dispute the findings and say their own testing shows their sunscreens meet or exceed their SPF claims.

What's next?

Experts say Australians should still have confidence that sunscreens work even if some tests results show a lower SPF than what labels say.

Fun quote:

The worst performer was the most expensive — Ultra Violette's Lean Screen SPF50+ Mattifying Zinc Sunscreen, which costs $52 for 75 millilitres, and returned an SPF rating of four.

Mr de Silva said this result was so low the team commissioned a smaller additional test at a German lab to validate the results.

"Those tests found the product had an SPF of five … an almost identical result to our initial testing," he said.

A spokesperson for Ultra Violette said the company did an urgent SPF test of the sunscreen in April and it came back with an SPF of 61.7, confirming its original test results.

The company said it had not received a single substantiated claim of sunburn.

The company said it did not accept the Choice results as "even remotely accurate" and human error during testing was highly probable.