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.
$42Ulta Beauty(product price)$27 less (39%)4.1 (385)
Matches: Near-identical swatch colour· Same neutral undertone· Both claim transfer resistance
Differences: Radiant rather than natural finish· Full rather than medium coverage· No blurring effect claimed
Score details
Shade match
94
Finish & visual result
62
Wear & performance
70
Skin suitability
84
Looks identical · Radiant · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 7% ingredient overlap
Differences: Radiant rather than natural finish · Full rather than medium coverage · No blurring effect claimed · Does not claim not settling into lines
Retailer shade note: medium beige with peachy to neutral undertone for medium skin
The closest shade to Armani Beauty Luminous Silk Foundation 5.9 (Medium light · Neutral · neutral pink 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
Milk Makeup Hydro Grip 12-Hour Hydrating Gel Skin Tint in 7, against Armani Beauty Luminous Silk Foundation in 5.9. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shade5.9Closest shade match7How they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall94
Colour60%96#cea277#d0a073Looks identicalColour difference 1.1 (0 is identical)
Finish & visual result25% of overall · 3 of 4 compared62
Finish35%56NaturalRadiantSome differenceRadiant finish rather than natural
Coverage30%80MediumLightCloseLight coverage rather than medium (buildable: one step of tolerance)
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 compared63
Longevity30%3524-hour wear12-hour wearDifferent12-hour wear claimed against 24-hour wear
Transfer resistance20%40ClaimedNot listedSome differenceOnly your product claims transfer resistance; the match does not list it
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 overall60
Skin type100%60Normal, dry, oilyNormal, dry, sensitiveBoth marketed for normal/dry skin
Overall match 80/100Shade match 94/100Medium 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.
Danessa Myricks Beauty Yummy Skin Soothing Serum Skin Tint Foundation in 6.5, against Armani Beauty Luminous Silk Foundation in 5.9. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shade5.9Closest overall alternative6.5How they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall92
Colour60%94#cea277#cfa67fVery close colourColour difference 1.5 (0 is identical)
Finish & visual result25% of overall · 3 of 4 compared73
Finish35%56NaturalRadiantSome differenceRadiant finish rather than natural
Coverage30%80MediumLightCloseLight coverage rather than medium (buildable: one step of tolerance)
Skin-like finish20%—not comparableNot listedNot listedNot claimed by eitherNeither product lists a skin-like finish
Blurring15%100ClaimedClaimedSameBoth products claim a blurring or smoothing effect
Wear & performance15% of overall · 4 of 5 compared61
Longevity30%7024-hour wearLong-wearingSome differenceYour product claims 24-hour wear; the match says long-wearing without hours
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 overall100
Skin type100%100Normal, dry, oilyNormal, dry, oilyBoth marketed for normal/dry/oily skin
Overall match 83/100Shade match 92/100High 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.
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.
Sephora$20 less (29%)
Ulta Beauty
