ORIGINAL Liquid Mineral Brightening Concealer Tan 4N dupes and alternatives bareMinerals
4.3 (1,273)·Medium · Neutral 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: Very close colour· Same neutral undertone· Claims a skin-like finish
Differences: Radiant rather than luminous finish· Medium rather than buildable coverage· No long-wear claim
Score details
Shade match
92
Finish & visual result
77
Wear & performance
40
Skin suitability
50
Very close colour · Radiant · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 6% ingredient overlap
Differences: Radiant rather than luminous finish · Medium rather than buildable coverage · No long-wear claim · Does not claim not settling into lines · Does not claim a lightweight feel
Retailer shade note: medium deep with neutral undertones
Matches: Claims a blurring effect· Claims transfer resistance· Both claim not settling into lines
Differences: Slightly deeper· Slightly warmer undertone· Radiant rather than luminous finish
Score details
Shade match
77
Finish & visual result
79
Wear & performance
65
Skin suitability
50
Close colour · Radiant · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 15% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly deeper · Slightly warmer undertone · Radiant rather than luminous finish · Medium rather than buildable coverage · Does not claim a lightweight feel
Retailer shade note: D0 - medium-deep to deep with warm undertones
Matches: Very close colour· Claims a skin-like finish
Differences: Olive rather than neutral undertone· Radiant rather than luminous finish· Medium rather than buildable coverage
Score details
Shade match
84
Finish & visual result
77
Wear & performance
40
Skin suitability
50
Very close colour · Radiant · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 6% ingredient overlap
Differences: Olive rather than neutral undertone · Radiant rather than luminous finish · Medium rather than buildable coverage · No long-wear claim · Does not claim not settling into lines · Does not claim a lightweight feel
Retailer shade note: medium deep with neutral olive undertones
Matches: Very close colour· Claims a skin-like finish
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone· Radiant rather than luminous finish· Medium rather than buildable coverage
Score details
Shade match
84
Finish & visual result
77
Wear & performance
40
Skin suitability
50
Very close colour · Radiant · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 6% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone · Radiant rather than luminous finish · Medium rather than buildable coverage · No long-wear claim · Does not claim not settling into lines · Does not claim a lightweight feel
Retailer shade note: medium deep with golden undertones
Matches: Very close colour· Claims a skin-like finish
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone· Radiant rather than luminous finish· Medium rather than buildable coverage
Score details
Shade match
84
Finish & visual result
77
Wear & performance
40
Skin suitability
50
Very close colour · Radiant · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 6% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone · Radiant rather than luminous finish · Medium rather than buildable coverage · No long-wear claim · Does not claim not settling into lines · Does not claim a lightweight feel
Retailer shade note: medium deep with subtle peach undertones
Matches: Claims a blurring effect· Claims transfer resistance· Both claim not settling into lines
Differences: Slightly deeper· Slightly warmer undertone· Radiant rather than luminous finish
Score details
Shade match
73
Finish & visual result
79
Wear & performance
65
Skin suitability
50
Close colour · Radiant · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 15% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly deeper · Slightly warmer undertone · Radiant rather than luminous finish · Medium rather than buildable coverage · Does not claim a lightweight feel
Retailer shade note: MD2.75 - medium-deep with warm undertones, and a deep peach tone
The closest shade to bareMinerals ORIGINAL Liquid Mineral Brightening Concealer Tan 4N (Medium · Neutral 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
e.l.f. Cosmetics 16HR Camo Concealer in Tan Neutral, against bareMinerals ORIGINAL Liquid Mineral Brightening Concealer in Tan 4N. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shadeTan 4NClosest shade matchTan NeutralHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall94
Colour60%90#cb8c59#d18f53Very close colourColour difference 2.3 (0 is identical)
Depth15%97MediumMediumSameDepth difference: 1.9
Retailer descriptionTanTanBoth described as tanThe retailers describe the same depth
Finish & visual result25% of overall · 2 of 4 compared37
Finish35%0LuminousMatteDifferentMatte finish rather than luminous
Coverage30%80BuildableFullCloseFull coverage rather than buildable (buildable: one step of tolerance)
Skin-like finish20%—not comparableNot listedNot listedNot claimed by eitherNeither product lists a skin-like finish
Blurring15%—not comparableNot listedNot listedNot claimed by eitherNeither product lists a blurring or smoothing effect
Wear & performance15% of overall · 3 of 5 compared86
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%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 overall50
Skin type100%50Not publishedOily, combination, normalSkin-type suitability not published for one product
Overall match 76/100Shade 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.
Rare Beauty Liquid Touch Brightening Concealer in 400W, against bareMinerals ORIGINAL Liquid Mineral Brightening Concealer in Tan 4N. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shadeTan 4NClosest overall alternative400WHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall88
Colour60%87#cb8c59#c48f65Very close colourColour difference 2.7 (0 is identical)
Depth15%100MediumMediumSameDepth difference: 0.2
Retailer descriptionTanMedium tanSome differenceRetailer descriptions one depth band apart
Finish & visual result25% of overall · 3 of 4 compared77
Finish35%78LuminousRadiantCloseRadiant finish rather than luminous
Coverage30%100BuildableMediumCloseMedium coverage rather than buildable (buildable: one step of tolerance)
Skin-like finish20%40Not listedClaimedSome differenceThe match claims a skin-like finish; your product does not list it
Blurring15%—not comparableNot listedNot listedNot claimed by eitherNeither product lists a blurring or smoothing effect
Wear & performance15% of overall · 3 of 5 compared100
Longevity30%100Long-wearingLong-wearingSameBoth products claim long wear
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 overall50
Skin type100%50Not publishedOily, dry, combination, normalSkin-type suitability not published for one product
Overall match 85/100Shade 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.
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$7 less (23%)
