The POREfessional Blurring & Smoothing Foundation 19N Triumph dupes and alternatives Benefit Cosmetics
4.3 (5,585)·Light medium · Neutral 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· Both claim a blurring effect· Both claim 24-hour wear
Differences: Slightly cooler undertone· Matte rather than natural finish· Buildable rather than medium coverage
Score details
Shade match
87
Finish & visual result
81
Wear & performance
80
Skin suitability
60
Very close colour · Matte · Buildable coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 20% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly cooler undertone · Matte rather than natural finish · Buildable rather than medium coverage · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Not marketed for normal skin · Contains listed fragrance · Contains drying alcohol
Retailer shade note: medium skin with cool undertones
Matches: Very close colour· Same neutral undertone
Differences: Radiant rather than natural finish· Light rather than medium coverage· No blurring effect claimed
Score details
Shade match
96
Finish & visual result
62
Wear & performance
60
Skin suitability
84
Very close colour · Radiant · Light coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 22% ingredient overlap
Differences: Radiant rather than natural finish · Light rather than medium coverage · No blurring effect claimed · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Contains listed fragrance
Retailer shade note: medium shade, neutral undertone
Matches: Very close colour· Both claim 24-hour wear
Differences: Slightly cooler undertone· Radiant rather than natural finish· Buildable rather than medium coverage
Score details
Shade match
87
Finish & visual result
70
Wear & performance
80
Skin suitability
84
Very close colour · Radiant · Buildable coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 20% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly cooler undertone · Radiant rather than natural finish · Buildable rather than medium coverage · No blurring effect claimed · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Contains listed fragrance · Contains drying alcohol
Retailer shade note: medium skin with cool undertones
Matches: Near-identical swatch colour· Same neutral undertone
Differences: Radiant rather than natural finish· Full rather than medium coverage· No blurring effect claimed
Score details
Shade match
97
Finish & visual result
62
Wear & performance
40
Skin suitability
84
Looks identical · Radiant · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 17% ingredient overlap
Differences: Radiant rather than natural finish · Full rather than medium coverage · No blurring effect claimed · No long-wear claim · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Contains listed fragrance
Retailer shade note: intense medium shade, neutral undertone
$15Ulta Beauty(product price)$32 less (68%)3.9 (223)
Matches: Very close colour· Same neutral undertone· Claims a skin-like finish
Differences: Radiant rather than natural finish· Light rather than medium coverage· No blurring effect claimed
Score details
Shade match
93
Finish & visual result
58
Wear & performance
60
Skin suitability
84
Very close colour · Radiant · Light coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 22% ingredient overlap
Differences: Radiant rather than natural finish · Light rather than medium coverage · No blurring effect claimed · No long-wear claim · Contains listed fragrance
Retailer shade note: Medium skin tone, neutral-warm beige undertone
Matches: Very close colour· Claims a skin-like finish· Both claim a blurring effect
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone· Matte rather than natural finish· Full rather than medium coverage
Score details
Shade match
87
Finish & visual result
67
Wear & performance
72
Skin suitability
60
Very close colour · Matte · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 21% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone · Matte rather than natural finish · Full rather than medium coverage · Not marketed for combination skin · Contains drying alcohol
Retailer shade note: Medium with Peachy Undertones
$15Ulta Beauty(product price)$32 less (68%)3.9 (223)
Matches: Very close colour· Same neutral undertone· Claims a skin-like finish
Differences: Radiant rather than natural finish· Light rather than medium coverage· No blurring effect claimed
Score details
Shade match
92
Finish & visual result
58
Wear & performance
60
Skin suitability
84
Very close colour · Radiant · Light coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 22% ingredient overlap
Differences: Radiant rather than natural finish · Light rather than medium coverage · No blurring effect claimed · No long-wear claim · Contains listed fragrance
Retailer shade note: Medium skin tone, neutral-cool beige undertone
The closest shade to Benefit Cosmetics The POREfessional Blurring & Smoothing Foundation 19N Triumph (Light medium · Neutral 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
Jung Saem Mool Essential Skin Nuder Long-Lasting Hydrating Compact Cushion Foundation in 25N Bronze, against Benefit Cosmetics The POREfessional Blurring & Smoothing Foundation in 19N Triumph. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shade19N TriumphClosest shade match25N BronzeHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall99
Colour60%99#d7ab8d#d6aa8dLooks identicalColour difference 0.4 (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 · 2 of 5 compared80
Longevity30%7024-hour wearLong-wearingSome differenceYour product claims 24-hour wear; the match says long-wearing without hours
Transfer resistance20%—not comparableNot listedNot listedNot claimed by eitherNeither product lists transfer resistance
Settling20%—not comparableNot listedNot listedNot claimed by eitherNeither product lists 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 overall0
Skin type100%0Normal, combination, oilyDryMarketed for different skin types
Overall match 89/100Shade match 99/100Medium 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.
Haus Labs Triclone Skin Tech Medium Coverage Foundation in 300 Medium, against Benefit Cosmetics The POREfessional Blurring & Smoothing Foundation in 19N Triumph. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shade19N TriumphClosest overall alternative300 MediumHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall98
Colour60%97#d7ab8d#d8ad8dLooks identicalColour difference 1.0 (0 is identical)
Finish & visual result25% of overall · 3 of 4 compared100
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%100ClaimedClaimedSameBoth products claim a blurring or smoothing effect
Wear & performance15% of overall · 2 of 5 compared80
Longevity30%7024-hour wearLong-wearingSome differenceYour product claims 24-hour wear; the match says long-wearing without hours
Transfer resistance20%—not comparableNot listedNot listedNot claimed by eitherNeither product lists transfer resistance
Settling20%—not comparableNot listedNot listedNot claimed by eitherNeither product lists 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 overall28
Skin type100%28Normal, combination, oilyNormal, dry, sensitiveBoth marketed for normal skin
Overall match 92/100Shade match 98/100Medium 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.
SephoraCosts $1 more
Target
