Impeccable Blurring Second-Skin Matte Foundation 5WP dupes and alternatives Anastasia Beverly Hills
4.4 (4,961)·Tan · 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: Same warm undertone· Both claim a skin-like finish· Both claim a lightweight feel
Differences: Slightly lighter· Natural rather than matte finish· Buildable rather than full coverage
Score details
Shade match
77
Finish & visual result
70
Wear & performance
68
Skin suitability
90
Colour not compared · Natural · Buildable coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 5% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly lighter · Natural rather than matte finish · Buildable rather than full coverage · No blurring effect claimed · Does not claim not settling into lines
The closest shade to Anastasia Beverly Hills Impeccable Blurring Second-Skin Matte Foundation 5WP (Tan · 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 shade match works
Tower 28 Beauty SunnyDays Skin Tint in 50 Sunset, against Anastasia Beverly Hills Impeccable Blurring Second-Skin Matte Foundation in 5WP. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shade5WPClosest shade match50 SunsetHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall94
Colour60%91#b2815c#b07c52Very close colourColour difference 2.1 (0 is identical)
Depth15%96TanTanSameDepth difference: 2.4
Retailer descriptionTanTanBoth described as tanThe retailers describe the same depth
Finish35%56MatteNaturalSome differenceNatural finish rather than matte
Coverage30%40FullLightDifferentLight coverage rather than full (buildable: one step of tolerance)
Skin-like finish20%100ClaimedClaimedSameBoth products claim a skin-like finish
Blurring15%40ClaimedNot listedSome differenceOnly your product claims a blurring or smoothing effect; the match does not list it
Wear & performance15% of overall · 4 of 5 compared51
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%40ClaimedNot listedSome differenceOnly your product claims not settling into pores or fine lines; the match does not list it
Colour stability15%40Not listedClaimedSome differenceThe match claims colour stability (no oxidation); your product does not list it
Comfort15%100ClaimedClaimedSameBoth products claim a comfortable, lightweight feel
Skin suitability5% of overall28
Skin type100%28Normal, combination, oilyNormal, dry, sensitiveBoth marketed for normal skin
Overall match 75/100Shade match 94/100High 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.
bareMinerals ORIGINAL Loose Matte Talc-Free Mineral Powder Foundation SPF 15 in Golden Tan 20, against Anastasia Beverly Hills Impeccable Blurring Second-Skin Matte Foundation in 5WP. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shade5WPClosest overall alternativeGolden Tan 20How they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall85
Colour60%90#b2815c#bb8159Very close colourColour difference 2.3 (0 is identical)
Depth15%98TanMedium tanCloseDepth difference: 1.4
Retailer descriptionTanTanBoth described as tanThe retailers describe the same depth
Coverage30%80FullMediumCloseMedium 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%40ClaimedNot listedSome differenceOnly your product claims a blurring or smoothing effect; the match does not list it
Wear & performance15% of overall · 3 of 5 compared72
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%100ClaimedClaimedSameBoth products claim a comfortable, lightweight feel
Skin suitability5% of overall67
Skin type100%67Normal, combination, oilyCombination, oilyBoth marketed for combination/oily skin
Overall match 79/100Shade match 85/100Medium 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.
30 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.