Impeccable Blurring Second-Skin Matte Foundation 000N dupes and alternatives Anastasia Beverly Hills
4.4 (4,961)·Very fair · Neutral undertone
Closest shade match is the equivalent shade, scored on colour, depth and undertone only. Closest overall alternative is the most similar foundation overall, scored on shade match (55%), finish and visual result (25%), wear and performance (15%) and skin suitability (5%).
Overall alternativesShade matchesRanked by the overall match: the most similar foundation on shade, finish, wear and skin suitability together. Each row leads with its overall match; the shade match is beneath it.
Ranked by the overall match: the most similar foundation on shade, finish, wear and skin suitability together. Each row leads with its overall match; the shade match is beneath it.
Matches: Same neutral undertone· Same matte finish· Both claim a blurring effect
Differences: Buildable rather than full coverage· No skin-like finish claimed· Does not claim not settling into lines
Score details
Shade match
90
Finish & visual result
82
Wear & performance
38
Skin suitability
60
Close colour · Matte · Buildable coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 13% ingredient overlap
Differences: Buildable rather than full coverage · No skin-like finish claimed · Does not claim not settling into lines · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Not marketed for normal skin · Contains listed fragrance
The closest shade to Anastasia Beverly Hills Impeccable Blurring Second-Skin Matte Foundation 000N (Very fair · Neutral undertone) in each concealer range, compared on measured colour, depth and undertone. Price never changes the order.
Concealer shade colours are sampled from retailer swatch images, so check the shade on the retailer page before buying.
Why the closest shade match works
Dior Forever Skin Perfect 24H Multi-Use Foundation Stick in 00 N Neutral, against Anastasia Beverly Hills Impeccable Blurring Second-Skin Matte Foundation in 000N. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shade000NClosest shade match00 N NeutralHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall95
Colour60%92#f3e2db#f9e8deVery close colourColour difference 1.9 (0 is identical)
Finish35%56MatteNaturalSome differenceNatural finish rather than matte
Coverage30%80FullBuildableCloseBuildable coverage rather than full (buildable: one step of tolerance)
Skin-like finish20%40ClaimedNot listedSome differenceOnly your product claims a skin-like finish; the match does not list it
Blurring15%100ClaimedClaimedSameBoth products claim a blurring or smoothing effect
Wear & performance15% of overall · 3 of 5 compared38
Longevity30%3512-hour wear24-hour wearDifferent24-hour wear claimed against 12-hour wear
Transfer resistance20%—not comparableNot listedNot listedNot claimed by eitherNeither product lists transfer resistance
Settling20%40ClaimedNot listedSome differenceOnly your product claims not settling into pores or fine lines; the match does not list it
Colour stability15%—not comparableNot listedNot listedNot claimed by eitherNeither product lists colour stability (no oxidation)
Comfort15%40ClaimedNot listedSome differenceOnly your product claims a comfortable, lightweight feel; the match does not list it
Skin suitability5% of overall60
Skin type100%60Normal, combination, oilyNormal, dry, oilyBoth marketed for normal/oily skin
Overall match 78/100Shade match 95/100High confidence· Digital match
Weights are each part's share of the overall match and each attribute's share of its part; an attribute neither product lists is not comparable and its weight goes to the others in its part. Confidence reflects data quality, not similarity. Price and ingredients are not part of either score.
R.E.M. Beauty Sweetener Foundation in fair 1 n, against Anastasia Beverly Hills Impeccable Blurring Second-Skin Matte Foundation in 000N. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shade000NClosest overall alternativefair 1 nHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall89
Colour60%88#f3e2db#ffeee8Very close colourColour difference 2.6 (0 is identical)
Coverage30%80FullBuildableCloseBuildable coverage rather than full (buildable: one step of tolerance)
Skin-like finish20%40ClaimedNot listedSome differenceOnly your product claims a skin-like finish; the match does not list it
Blurring15%100ClaimedClaimedSameBoth products claim a blurring or smoothing effect
Wear & performance15% of overall · 3 of 5 compared59
Longevity30%4012-hour wearNot listedSome differenceOnly your product claims long wear; the match does not list it
Transfer resistance20%—not comparableNot listedNot listedNot claimed by eitherNeither product lists transfer resistance
Settling20%100ClaimedClaimedSameBoth products claim not settling into pores or fine lines
Colour stability15%—not comparableNot listedNot listedNot claimed by eitherNeither product lists colour stability (no oxidation)
Comfort15%40ClaimedNot listedSome differenceOnly your product claims a comfortable, lightweight feel; the match does not list it
Skin suitability5% of overall33
Skin type100%33Normal, combination, oilyCombinationBoth marketed for combination skin
Overall match 80/100Shade match 89/100Medium confidence· Digital match
Weights are each part's share of the overall match and each attribute's share of its part; an attribute neither product lists is not comparable and its weight goes to the others in its part. Confidence reflects data quality, not similarity. Price and ingredients are not part of either score.
31 similar shades scored two ways: the shade match on colour, depth and undertone; the overall match on shade match, finish and visual result, wear and performance and skin suitability. Ingredients are shown for information and used by the filters only. Prices are shown next to every match and never change a score. How scoring and confidence work.
Shade colours are sampled from Beautler’s processing of retailer swatch images and are a digital approximation. Prices and stock were last checked when the product was imported; the retailer page is the source of truth.