Impeccable Blurring Second-Skin Matte Foundation 1.5WP dupes and alternatives Anastasia Beverly Hills
4.4 (4,961)·Fair · Warm · peach 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: Near-identical swatch colour· Same matte finish· Both claim a blurring effect
Differences: Neutral rather than warm undertone· Buildable rather than full coverage· No skin-like finish claimed
Score details
Shade match
90
Finish & visual result
82
Wear & performance
68
Skin suitability
84
Looks identical · Matte · Buildable coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 14% ingredient overlap
Differences: Neutral rather than warm undertone · Buildable rather than full coverage · No skin-like finish claimed · Does not claim not settling into lines
Retailer shade note: fair or light skin tones with a neutral undertone
Matches: Near-identical swatch colour· Same warm undertone· Both claim a skin-like finish
Differences: Natural rather than matte finish· Medium rather than full coverage· No blurring effect claimed
Score details
Shade match
97
Finish & visual result
70
Wear & performance
54
Skin suitability
84
Looks identical · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 16% ingredient overlap
Differences: Natural rather than matte finish · Medium rather than full coverage · No blurring effect claimed · No long-wear claim · Does not claim not settling into lines
Matches: Near-identical swatch colour· Similar undertone (neutral vs warm)· Same matte finish
Differences: No skin-like finish claimed· No blurring effect claimed· No long-wear claim
Score details
Shade match
94
Finish & visual result
79
Wear & performance
40
Skin suitability
84
Looks identical · Matte · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 11% ingredient overlap
Differences: No skin-like finish claimed · No blurring effect claimed · No long-wear claim · Does not claim not settling into lines · Does not claim a lightweight feel
Matches: Near-identical swatch colour· Same matte finish· Same full coverage
Differences: No skin-like finish claimed· No blurring effect claimed· No long-wear claim
Score details
Shade match
92
Finish & visual result
79
Wear & performance
40
Skin suitability
84
Looks identical · Matte · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 11% ingredient overlap
Differences: No skin-like finish claimed · No blurring effect claimed · No long-wear claim · Does not claim not settling into lines · Does not claim a lightweight feel
Matches: Near-identical swatch colour· Same full coverage· Both claim a skin-like finish
Differences: Neutral rather than warm undertone· Natural rather than matte finish· No blurring effect claimed
Score details
Shade match
89
Finish & visual result
76
Wear & performance
63
Skin suitability
60
Looks identical · Natural · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 4% ingredient overlap
Differences: Neutral rather than warm undertone · Natural rather than matte finish · No blurring effect claimed · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for combination skin
Retailer shade note: light skin with neutral undertones
Matches: Near-identical swatch colour· Both claim a blurring effect· Both claim 16-hour wear
Differences: Neutral rather than warm undertone· Natural rather than matte finish· Medium rather than full coverage
Score details
Shade match
90
Finish & visual result
67
Wear & performance
72
Skin suitability
60
Looks identical · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 23% ingredient overlap
Differences: Neutral rather than warm undertone · Natural rather than matte finish · Medium rather than full coverage · No skin-like finish claimed · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for oily skin
Matches: Near-identical swatch colour· Same warm undertone· Claims transfer resistance
Differences: Natural rather than matte finish· Medium rather than full coverage· No skin-like finish claimed
Score details
Shade match
97
Finish & visual result
52
Wear & performance
51
Skin suitability
60
Looks identical · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 19% ingredient overlap
Differences: Natural rather than matte finish · Medium rather than full coverage · No skin-like finish claimed · No blurring effect claimed · Does not claim not settling into lines · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Not marketed for oily skin
The closest shade to Anastasia Beverly Hills Impeccable Blurring Second-Skin Matte Foundation 1.5WP (Fair · Warm · peach 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 match works
Makeup By Mario SurrealSkin Natural Finish Foundation in 3 W, against Anastasia Beverly Hills Impeccable Blurring Second-Skin Matte Foundation in 1.5WP. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shade1.5WPClosest match3 WHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall98
Colour60%98#e8c9b0#ebcaafLooks identicalColour difference 0.8 (0 is identical)
Depth15%99FairFairSameDepth difference: 0.7
Retailer descriptionLightLightBoth described as lightThe retailers describe the same depth
Finish35%56MatteNaturalSome differenceNatural finish rather than matte
Coverage30%80FullMediumCloseMedium coverage rather than full (buildable: one step of tolerance)
Skin-like finish20%100ClaimedClaimedSameBoth products claim a skin-like finish
Blurring15%100ClaimedClaimedSameBoth products claim a blurring or smoothing effect
Wear & performance15% of overall · 3 of 5 compared68
Longevity30%7012-hour wearLong-wearingSome differenceYour product claims 12-hour wear; the match says long-wearing without hours
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%100ClaimedClaimedSameBoth products claim a comfortable, lightweight feel
Skin suitability5% of overall100
Skin type100%100Normal, combination, oilyNormal, combination, oilyBoth marketed for normal/combination/oily skin
Overall match 89/100Shade match 98/100High 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.
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.
Sephora
Ulta Beauty(product price)$14 less (29%)
