Luminous Silk Hydrating Face and Under-Eye Concealer 7 dupes and alternatives Armani Beauty
4.4 (2,347)·Medium light · Warm · peach 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 shade match: colour, depth and undertone only. Each row leads with its shade match; the overall match is beneath it.
Ranked by the shade match: colour, depth and undertone only. Each row leads with its shade match; the overall match is beneath it.
$12.99Ulta Beauty(product price)$29.01 less (69%)4.3 (3,814)
Matches: Very close colour· Same warm undertone· Both claim long-wearing
Differences: Matte rather than radiant finish· Full rather than medium coverage· No skin-like finish claimed
Score details
Shade match
93
Finish & visual result
36
Wear & performance
80
Skin suitability
50
Very close colour · Matte · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 5% ingredient overlap
Differences: 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
The closest shade to Armani Beauty Luminous Silk Hydrating Face and Under-Eye Concealer 7 (Medium light · Warm · peach 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
Tarte Shape Tape Full Coverage Matte Concealer in 42S tan sand, against Armani Beauty Luminous Silk Hydrating Face and Under-Eye Concealer in 7. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shade7Closest shade match42S tan sandHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall95
Colour60%92#d5a382#cea07dVery close colourColour difference 1.9 (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%100ClaimedClaimedSameBoth products claim a blurring or smoothing effect
Wear & performance15% of overall · 3 of 5 compared54
Longevity30%70Long-wearing16-hour wearSome differenceThe match claims 16-hour wear; your product says long-wearing without hours
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, combination, oilySkin-type suitability not published for one product
Overall match 74/100Shade match 95/100Medium 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.
NARS Soft Matte Complete Concealer in Biscuit, against Armani Beauty Luminous Silk Hydrating Face and Under-Eye Concealer in 7. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shade7Closest overall alternativeBiscuitHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall93
Colour60%90#d5a382#dda881Very close colourColour difference 2.3 (0 is identical)
Finish35%12RadiantMatteDifferentMatte finish rather than radiant
Coverage30%100MediumMediumSameSame medium coverage
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 compared54
Longevity30%70Long-wearing12-hour wearSome differenceThe match claims 12-hour wear; your product says long-wearing without hours
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, combination, oilySkin-type suitability not published for one product
Overall match 76/100Shade match 93/100Medium 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.