Airbrush Flawless Long-Wear Blur Concealer 15 Deep dupes and alternatives Charlotte Tilbury
4.5 (1,799)·Deep · 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: Same neutral undertone· Same full coverage· Both claim 24-hour wear
Differences: Natural rather than matte finish· No blurring effect claimed· Does not claim not settling into lines
Score details
Shade match
89
Finish & visual result
70
Wear & performance
83
Skin suitability
33
Close colour · Natural · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 8% ingredient overlap
Differences: Natural rather than matte finish · No blurring effect claimed · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for dry/oily skin · Contains listed fragrance
Retailer shade note: deep skin with neutral undertones
Matches: Same matte finish· Same full coverage· Both claim a blurring effect
Differences: Slightly lighter· Olive rather than neutral undertone· Does not claim transfer resistance
Score details
Shade match
73
Finish & visual result
100
Wear & performance
66
Skin suitability
60
Slight colour difference · Matte · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 6% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly lighter · Olive rather than neutral undertone · Does not claim transfer resistance · Not marketed for dry skin · Contains listed fragrance
Retailer shade note: deep skin with very warm, golden or olive undertones
Matches: Same matte finish· Both claim a blurring effect· Both claim not settling into lines
Differences: Slightly deeper· Slightly warmer undertone· Medium rather than full coverage
Score details
Shade match
75
Finish & visual result
93
Wear & performance
55
Skin suitability
60
Close colour · Matte · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 7% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly deeper · Slightly warmer undertone · Medium rather than full coverage · Does not claim transfer resistance · Not marketed for dry skin
Retailer shade note: D2 - Deep with warm undertones
Matches: Same matte finish· Both claim a blurring effect· Both claim 24-hour wear
Differences: Slightly lighter· Slightly warmer undertone· Medium rather than full coverage
Score details
Shade match
75
Finish & visual result
85
Wear & performance
75
Skin suitability
28
Close colour · Matte · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 7% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly lighter · Slightly warmer undertone · Medium rather than full coverage · Does not claim transfer resistance · Not marketed for normal/oily skin
Matches: Same neutral undertone· Same full coverage· Both claim 24-hour wear
Differences: Slightly deeper· Natural rather than matte finish· No blurring effect claimed
Score details
Shade match
78
Finish & visual result
70
Wear & performance
83
Skin suitability
33
Slight colour difference · Natural · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 8% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly deeper · Natural rather than matte finish · No blurring effect claimed · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for dry/oily skin · Contains listed fragrance
Retailer shade note: deep skin with neutral undertones
Matches: Same neutral undertone· Same full coverage· Both claim 24-hour wear
Differences: Slightly lighter· Natural rather than matte finish· No blurring effect claimed
Score details
Shade match
77
Finish & visual result
70
Wear & performance
83
Skin suitability
33
Slight colour difference · Natural · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 8% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly lighter · Natural rather than matte finish · No blurring effect claimed · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for dry/oily skin · Contains listed fragrance
Retailer shade note: deep skin with neutral undertones
Matches: Same matte finish· Same full coverage· Both claim a blurring effect
Differences: Slightly deeper· Slightly cooler undertone· Does not claim not settling into lines
Score details
Shade match
68
Finish & visual result
100
Wear & performance
52
Skin suitability
60
Slight colour difference · Matte · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 3% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly deeper · Slightly cooler undertone · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for dry skin · Contains drying alcohol
Retailer shade note: for very deep skin with cool undertones
The closest shade to Charlotte Tilbury Airbrush Flawless Long-Wear Blur Concealer 15 Deep (Deep · 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
Too Faced Born This Way Super Coverage Multi-Use Concealer in Chestnut, against Charlotte Tilbury Airbrush Flawless Long-Wear Blur Concealer in 15 Deep. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shade15 DeepClosest shade matchChestnutHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall94
Colour60%91#87533c#86563bVery close colourColour difference 2.2 (0 is identical)
Depth15%99DeepDeepSameDepth difference: 0.9
Retailer descriptionDeepDeepBoth described as deepThe retailers describe the same depth
Finish & visual result25% of overall · 3 of 4 compared70
Finish35%56MatteNaturalSome differenceNatural finish rather than matte
Coverage30%100FullFullSameSame full 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%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%40Not listedClaimedSome differenceThe match claims a comfortable, lightweight feel; your product does not list it
Skin suitability5% of overall60
Skin type100%60Normal, dry, oilyNormal, dry, combinationBoth marketed for normal/dry skin
Overall match 82/100Shade 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.
Tarte Shape Tape Full Coverage Matte Concealer in 57G rich golden, against Charlotte Tilbury Airbrush Flawless Long-Wear Blur Concealer in 15 Deep. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shade15 DeepClosest overall alternative57G rich goldenHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall88
Colour60%94#87533c#874f35Very close colourColour difference 1.7 (0 is identical)
Depth15%98DeepDeepSameDepth difference: 1.5
Retailer descriptionDeepNot statedNo depth word in one descriptionNot compared
Finish & visual result25% of overall · 3 of 4 compared100
Finish35%100MatteMatteSameSame matte finish
Coverage30%100FullFullSameSame full 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 · 3 of 5 compared66
Longevity30%6024-hour wear16-hour wearSome difference16-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%—not comparableNot listedNot listedNot claimed by eitherNeither product lists a comfortable, lightweight feel
Skin suitability5% of overall60
Skin type100%60Normal, dry, oilyNormal, combination, oilyBoth marketed for normal/oily skin
Overall match 86/100Shade match 88/100High 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$4 less (11%)
