Airbrush Flawless Long-Wear Blur Concealer 4 Fair-Medium dupes and alternatives Charlotte Tilbury
4.5 (1,799)·Fair · Cool 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 cool 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
87
Finish & visual result
70
Wear & performance
83
Skin suitability
33
Close colour · 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: light skin with cool rosy undertones
Matches: Same cool 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
85
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: fair skin with cool rosy undertones
Matches: Same cool undertone· Same full coverage· Both claim not settling into lines
Differences: Slightly lighter· Natural rather than matte finish· No blurring effect claimed
Score details
Shade match
87
Finish & visual result
70
Wear & performance
65
Skin suitability
60
Close colour · Natural · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 8% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly lighter · Natural rather than matte finish · No blurring effect claimed · Does not claim transfer resistance · Not marketed for oily skin
Retailer shade note: very fair with rosy undertones
$30Ulta Beauty(product price)$6 less (17%)4.7 (491)
Matches: Very close colour· Same cool undertone· Claims a skin-like finish
Differences: Slightly lighter· Natural rather than matte finish· Buildable rather than full coverage
Score details
Shade match
91
Finish & visual result
58
Wear & performance
65
Skin suitability
50
Very close colour · Natural · Buildable coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 5% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly lighter · Natural rather than matte finish · Buildable rather than full coverage · No blurring effect claimed · Does not claim transfer resistance
Retailer shade note: very fair with cool undertones
Matches: Same cool undertone· Same full coverage· Both claim not settling into lines
Differences: Slightly lighter· Natural rather than matte finish· No blurring effect claimed
Score details
Shade match
83
Finish & visual result
70
Wear & performance
65
Skin suitability
60
Close colour · Natural · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 8% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly lighter · Natural rather than matte finish · No blurring effect claimed · Does not claim transfer resistance · Not marketed for oily skin
Matches: Similar undertone (neutral vs cool)· Both claim a blurring effect· Claims a lightweight feel
Differences: Slightly lighter· Natural rather than matte finish· Medium rather than full coverage
Score details
Shade match
85
Finish & visual result
66
Wear & performance
51
Skin suitability
100
Close colour · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 5% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly lighter · Natural rather than matte finish · Medium rather than full coverage · Does not claim transfer resistance · Does not claim not settling into lines
Retailer shade note: very fair, cool-neutral undertones
Matches: Same cool undertone· Both claim a blurring effect· Claims a lightweight feel
Differences: Slightly deeper· Natural rather than matte finish· Medium rather than full coverage
Score details
Shade match
84
Finish & visual result
66
Wear & performance
51
Skin suitability
100
Close colour · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 14% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly deeper · Natural rather than matte finish · Medium rather than full coverage · Does not claim transfer resistance · Does not claim not settling into lines
The closest shade to Charlotte Tilbury Airbrush Flawless Long-Wear Blur Concealer 4 Fair-Medium (Fair · Cool 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
bareMinerals ORIGINAL Liquid Mineral Brightening Concealer in Very Fair 0.5C, against Charlotte Tilbury Airbrush Flawless Long-Wear Blur Concealer in 4 Fair-Medium. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shade4 Fair-MediumClosest shade matchVery Fair 0.5CHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall95
Colour60%93#efc7b4#eac7b3Very close colourColour difference 1.9 (0 is identical)
Depth15%99FairFairSameDepth difference: 0.7
Retailer descriptionFairVery fairSome differenceRetailer descriptions one depth band apart
Finish & visual result25% of overall · 3 of 4 compared38
Finish35%0MatteLuminousDifferentLuminous finish rather than matte
Coverage30%80FullBuildableCloseBuildable coverage rather than full (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 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 overall50
Skin type100%50Normal, dry, oilyNot publishedSkin-type suitability not published for one product
Overall match 74/100Shade match 95/100Medium 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 22B light beige, against Charlotte Tilbury Airbrush Flawless Long-Wear Blur Concealer in 4 Fair-Medium. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shade4 Fair-MediumClosest overall alternative22B light beigeHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall94
Colour60%91#efc7b4#e9c8b9Very close colourColour difference 2.2 (0 is identical)
Depth15%100FairFairSameDepth difference: 0.3
Retailer descriptionFairLightSome differenceRetailer descriptions one depth band apart
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 90/100Shade 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.
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$4 less (11%)
