Luminous Silk Foundation 13.2 dupes and alternatives Armani Beauty
4.2 (3,003)·Deep tan · Neutral · neutral golden 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: Very close colour· Same neutral undertone· Same natural finish
Differences: Does not claim transfer resistance· Does not claim not settling into lines· Does not claim a lightweight feel
Score details
Shade match
91
Finish & visual result
100
Wear & performance
49
Skin suitability
60
Very close colour · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 5% ingredient overlap
Differences: Does not claim transfer resistance · Does not claim not settling into lines · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Not marketed for oily skin
The closest shade to Armani Beauty Luminous Silk Foundation 13.2 (Deep tan · Neutral · neutral golden 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
Fenty Beauty Soft'Lit Naturally Luminous Hydrating Longwear Foundation in 385, against Armani Beauty Luminous Silk Foundation in 13.2. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shade13.2Closest shade match385How they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall95
Colour60%92#99663f#9e6437Very close colourColour difference 2.0 (0 is identical)
Finish & visual result25% of overall · 3 of 4 compared89
Finish35%100NaturalNaturalSameSame natural finish
Coverage30%100MediumMediumSameSame medium coverage
Skin-like finish20%—not comparableNot listedNot listedNot claimed by eitherNeither product lists 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 compared65
Longevity30%7024-hour wearLong-wearingSome differenceYour product claims 24-hour wear; the match says long-wearing without hours
Transfer resistance20%100ClaimedClaimedSameBoth products claim 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, dry, oilyNormal, dry, combinationBoth marketed for normal/dry skin
Overall match 87/100Shade 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.
Benefit Cosmetics The POREfessional Blurring & Smoothing Foundation in 35N Victorious, against Armani Beauty Luminous Silk Foundation in 13.2. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shade13.2Closest overall alternative35N VictoriousHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall94
Colour60%97#99663f#966541Looks identicalColour difference 1.0 (0 is identical)
Transfer resistance20%40ClaimedNot listedSome differenceOnly your product claims transfer resistance; the match does not list it
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 overall60
Skin type100%60Normal, dry, oilyNormal, combination, oilyBoth marketed for normal/oily skin
Overall match 91/100Shade 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.
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$25 less (36%)
