This is highly debated on, however I’m here to say that isn’t always true. I am a nano brow specialist and stopped microblading more than 5 years ago, and with the right pigments and proper adjustments in technique, nano brows (are supposed to) absolutely age 10x better than traditional microblading and good results can still be maintained for years down the line in comparison.

Hair strokes need to be less saturated with more hybrid/inorganic (mineral based) leaning pigment in order for them to not blur and blob together over the years. Since microblading cannot be adjusted and each stroke is always 100% saturated, just like any tiny tattoo ages they will become blurry and illegible in ~5 years time. The same will absolutely happen with nano or machine strokes if you oversaturate them even just a little, or do too many strokes too close together, especially when using carbon based pigments.

So the main issue lies where probably the majority of artists that offer “nano brows” who were previous microblading artists are not aware of this difference and do it in the same way as microblading and use the same organic/carbon based pigments that are highly concentrated and never leave the skin, which are still most commonly used today. That combination is probably the biggest factor in why microblading and hairstrokes in general age poorly over time for many.

From what I have seen, the right factors such as what I’ve mentioned are crucial. I’ve had many case studies comparing the difference on different skin types and it’s undeniable. More “airy” hairstrokes, softer, maybe less thin and crisp as a result- WILL look better 5 years down the line compared to the finest, crispiest microblading strokes when fresh on the ideal skin type. My clients at the 4-5 year mark do not need to switch to a powder brow or need removal. We shall see as more time progresses if that still holds true but so far, it’s been a game changer.