Luminous Silk Hydrating Face and Under-Eye Concealer 11 dupes and alternatives Armani Beauty
4.4 (2,347)·Medium tan · Olive · neutral olive undertone
Closest shade match is the equivalent shade, scored on colour, depth and undertone only. Closest overall alternative is the most similar concealer 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 concealer 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 concealer on shade, finish, wear and skin suitability together. Each row leads with its overall match; the shade match is beneath it.
Matches: Same olive undertone· Both claim a blurring effect· Claims not settling into lines
Differences: Slightly deeper· Matte rather than radiant finish· Full rather than medium coverage
Score details
Shade match
82
Finish & visual result
45
Wear & performance
54
Skin suitability
50
Close colour · Matte · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 2% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly deeper · Matte rather than radiant finish · Full rather than medium coverage · No skin-like finish claimed · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Contains listed fragrance
Retailer shade note: tan to deep skin with very warm, golden or olive undertones
$8Ulta Beauty(product price)$34 less (81%)4.3 (8,153)
Matches: Both claim long-wearing· Claims not settling into lines· Both claim a lightweight feel
Differences: Slightly cooler undertone· Satin rather than radiant finish· Full rather than medium coverage
Score details
Shade match
68
Finish & visual result
59
Wear & performance
82
Skin suitability
50
Close colour · Satin · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 7% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly cooler undertone · Satin rather than radiant finish · Full rather than medium coverage · No skin-like finish claimed · No blurring effect claimed
Retailer shade note: deep with rosy cool undertones
$12.99Ulta Beauty(product price)$29.01 less (69%)4.3 (3,814)
Matches: Both claim long-wearing
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone· Matte rather than radiant finish· Full rather than medium coverage
Score details
Shade match
75
Finish & visual result
36
Wear & performance
80
Skin suitability
50
Close colour · Matte · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 5% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone · Matte rather than radiant finish · Full rather than medium coverage · No skin-like finish claimed · No blurring effect claimed · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Contains drying alcohol
Matches: Both claim long-wearing· Claims not settling into lines
Differences: Slightly deeper· Slightly warmer undertone· Matte rather than radiant finish
Score details
Shade match
71
Finish & visual result
36
Wear & performance
68
Skin suitability
50
Close colour · Matte · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 12% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly deeper · Slightly warmer undertone · Matte rather than radiant finish · Full rather than medium coverage · No skin-like finish claimed · No blurring effect claimed · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Contains drying alcohol
Retailer shade note: for deep skin w/ warm undertones
The closest shade to Armani Beauty Luminous Silk Hydrating Face and Under-Eye Concealer 11 (Medium tan · Olive · neutral olive undertone) in each foundation range, compared on measured colour, depth and undertone. Price never changes the order.
Foundation shade colours are sampled from retailer swatch images, so check the shade on the retailer page before buying.
Why the closest shade match works
Fenty Beauty Pro Filt'r Instant Retouch Longwear Liquid Concealer in 400, against Armani Beauty Luminous Silk Hydrating Face and Under-Eye Concealer in 11. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shade11Closest shade match400How they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall88
Colour60%95#cc8b59#cf905fLooks identicalColour difference 1.5 (0 is identical)
Finish35%12RadiantMatteDifferentMatte finish rather than radiant
Coverage30%60MediumFullSome differenceFull coverage rather than medium
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 compared68
Longevity30%100Long-wearingLong-wearingSameBoth products claim long wear
Transfer resistance20%—not comparableNot listedNot listedNot claimed by eitherNeither product lists transfer resistance
Settling20%40Not listedClaimedSome differenceThe match claims not settling into pores or fine lines; your product 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 overall50
Skin type100%50Not publishedNormal, dry, combination, oilySkin-type suitability not published for one product
Overall match 70/100Shade match 88/100Medium 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.
e.l.f. Cosmetics Hydrating Camo Concealer in Deep Caramel, against Armani Beauty Luminous Silk Hydrating Face and Under-Eye Concealer in 11. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shade11Closest overall alternativeDeep CaramelHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall74
Colour60%83#cc8b59#d19269Close colourColour difference 3.2 (0 is identical)
Finish35%78RadiantSatinCloseSatin finish rather than radiant
Coverage30%60MediumFullSome differenceFull coverage rather than medium
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 compared82
Longevity30%100Long-wearingLong-wearingSameBoth products claim long wear
Transfer resistance20%—not comparableNot listedNot listedNot claimed by eitherNeither product lists transfer resistance
Settling20%40Not listedClaimedSome differenceThe match claims not settling into pores or fine lines; your product 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 overall50
Skin type100%50Not publishedDry, combination, normalSkin-type suitability not published for one product
Overall match 70/100Shade match 74/100Medium 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.
Ulta Beauty
Sephora$10 less (24%)
