Airbrush Flawless Foundation 5 Cool dupes and alternatives Charlotte Tilbury
4.3 (2,828)·Light · Cool 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· Same cool undertone· Same medium coverage
Differences: Natural rather than matte finish· No skin-like finish claimed· Does not claim transfer resistance
Score details
Shade match
96
Finish & visual result
73
Wear & performance
38
Skin suitability
100
Very close colour · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 5% ingredient overlap
Differences: Natural rather than matte finish · No skin-like finish claimed · Does not claim transfer resistance · Does not claim colour stability · Does not claim a lightweight feel
Matches: Near-identical swatch colour· Same medium coverage· Both claim a blurring effect
Differences: Neutral rather than cool undertone· Natural rather than matte finish· No skin-like finish claimed
Score details
Shade match
88
Finish & visual result
73
Wear & performance
63
Skin suitability
60
Looks identical · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 8% ingredient overlap
Differences: Neutral rather than cool undertone · Natural rather than matte finish · No skin-like finish claimed · Does not claim transfer resistance · Does not claim colour stability · Not marketed for oily/sensitive skin
Retailer shade note: M2.25 - medium with neutral undertones
Matches: Near-identical swatch colour· Same medium coverage· Both claim a skin-like finish
Differences: Olive rather than cool undertone· Natural rather than matte finish· Does not claim transfer resistance
Score details
Shade match
82
Finish & visual result
85
Wear & performance
63
Skin suitability
60
Looks identical · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 0% ingredient overlap
Differences: Olive rather than cool undertone · Natural rather than matte finish · Does not claim transfer resistance · Does not claim colour stability · Not marketed for oily/sensitive skin
Retailer shade note: medium light tan with olive undertones
Matches: Near-identical swatch colour· Same medium coverage· Both claim colour stability
Differences: Neutral rather than cool undertone· Natural rather than matte finish· No skin-like finish claimed
Score details
Shade match
88
Finish & visual result
64
Wear & performance
74
Skin suitability
60
Looks identical · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 12% ingredient overlap
Differences: Neutral rather than cool undertone · Natural rather than matte finish · No skin-like finish claimed · No blurring effect claimed · Does not claim transfer resistance · Not marketed for oily/sensitive skin
Retailer shade note: medium with neutral undertone
Matches: Near-identical swatch colour· Same medium coverage· Both claim a blurring effect
Differences: Neutral rather than cool undertone· Natural rather than matte finish· No skin-like finish claimed
Score details
Shade match
89
Finish & visual result
73
Wear & performance
49
Skin suitability
80
Looks identical · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 0% ingredient overlap
Differences: Neutral rather than cool undertone · Natural rather than matte finish · No skin-like finish claimed · No long-wear claim · Does not claim transfer resistance · Does not claim colour stability · Not marketed for oily skin
Retailer shade note: medium-tan neutral skin with peach undertones
Matches: Very close colour· Same medium coverage· Both claim a skin-like finish
Differences: Olive rather than cool undertone· Natural rather than matte finish· Does not claim transfer resistance
Score details
Shade match
81
Finish & visual result
85
Wear & performance
63
Skin suitability
60
Very close colour · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 0% ingredient overlap
Differences: Olive rather than cool undertone · Natural rather than matte finish · Does not claim transfer resistance · Does not claim colour stability · Not marketed for oily/sensitive skin
Retailer shade note: medium light tan with olive undertones
Matches: Both claim a skin-like finish· Both claim a lightweight feel· No drying alcohol listed
Differences: Neutral rather than cool undertone· Natural rather than matte finish· Buildable rather than medium coverage
Score details
Shade match
80
Finish & visual result
76
Wear & performance
63
Skin suitability
80
Colour not compared · Natural · Buildable coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 3% ingredient overlap
Differences: Neutral rather than cool undertone · Natural rather than matte finish · Buildable rather than medium coverage · No blurring effect claimed · Does not claim transfer resistance · Does not claim colour stability · Not marketed for sensitive skin
Matches: Near-identical swatch colour· Same medium coverage· Claims not settling into lines
Differences: Natural rather than matte finish· No skin-like finish claimed· No blurring effect claimed
Score details
Shade match
91
Finish & visual result
64
Wear & performance
49
Skin suitability
20
Looks identical · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 6% ingredient overlap
Differences: Natural rather than matte finish · No skin-like finish claimed · No blurring effect claimed · No long-wear claim · Does not claim transfer resistance · Does not claim colour stability · Not marketed for combination/dry/normal/oily skin
Matches: Near-identical swatch colour· Both claim a blurring effect· Both claim 24-hour wear
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone· Natural rather than matte finish· Buildable rather than medium coverage
Score details
Shade match
80
Finish & visual result
73
Wear & performance
63
Skin suitability
60
Looks identical · Natural · Buildable coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 4% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone · Natural rather than matte finish · Buildable rather than medium coverage · No skin-like finish claimed · Does not claim transfer resistance · Does not claim colour stability · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Not marketed for combination/sensitive skin · Contains listed fragrance
Retailer shade note: medium skin with ambery undertones
Matches: Both claim a skin-like finish· Both claim a lightweight feel· No drying alcohol listed
Differences: Slightly deeper· Neutral rather than cool undertone· Natural rather than matte finish
Score details
Shade match
73
Finish & visual result
76
Wear & performance
63
Skin suitability
80
Colour not compared · Natural · Buildable coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 3% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly deeper · Neutral rather than cool undertone · Natural rather than matte finish · Buildable rather than medium coverage · No blurring effect claimed · Does not claim transfer resistance · Does not claim colour stability · Not marketed for sensitive skin
The closest shade to Charlotte Tilbury Airbrush Flawless Foundation 5 Cool (Light · Cool 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
Glossier Stretch Fluid Foundation for Buildable Coverage in Light 4, against Charlotte Tilbury Airbrush Flawless Foundation in 5 Cool. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shade5 CoolClosest shade matchLight 4How they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall96
Colour60%94#eebe94#f3bf8fVery close colourColour difference 1.6 (0 is identical)
Depth15%99LightLightSameDepth difference: 0.9
Retailer descriptionMediumNot statedNo depth word in one descriptionNot compared
Finish35%56MatteNaturalSome differenceNatural finish rather than matte
Coverage30%100MediumMediumSameSame medium coverage
Skin-like finish20%100ClaimedClaimedSameBoth products claim 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 overall48
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%40Not listedClaimedSome differenceThe match claims not settling into pores or fine lines; your product does not list it
Colour stability15%40ClaimedNot listedSome differenceOnly your product claims colour stability (no oxidation); the match does not list it
Comfort15%100ClaimedClaimedSameBoth products claim a comfortable, lightweight feel
Skin suitability5% of overall20
Skin type100%20Combination, dry, normal, oily, sensitiveSensitiveBoth marketed for sensitive skin
Overall match 80/100Shade match 96/100Medium 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.
L'Oréal Paris Infallible 32H Fresh Wear Foundation in 440 Natural Rose, against Charlotte Tilbury Airbrush Flawless Foundation in 5 Cool. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shade5 CoolClosest overall alternative440 Natural RoseHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall96
Colour60%94#eebe94#e6b991Very close colourColour difference 1.6 (0 is identical)
Depth15%95LightLightSameDepth difference: 2.9
Retailer descriptionMediumNot statedNo depth word in one descriptionNot compared
Overall match 85/100Shade match 96/100Medium 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.
Sephora
Ulta Beauty(product price)Costs $7 more
