Hollywood Contour Wand Medium/Dark dupes and alternatives Charlotte Tilbury
4.3 (3,104)·Bronze · Light
Closest shade match is the equivalent shade, scored on colour, depth, undertone and colour family only. Closest overall alternative is the most similar contour overall: shade match 55%, finish, pigmentation and format 25%, wear and performance 15%, comfort and skin suitability 5%.
Overall alternativesShade matchesRanked by the overall match: the most similar contour on shade, finish, wear and comfort 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 contour on shade, finish, wear and comfort and skin suitability together. Each row leads with its overall match; the shade match is beneath it.
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour· Matte rather than satin (finish)· Stick rather than liquid (format)
Score details
Shade match
75
Finish, pigmentation & format
62
Wear & performance
70
Comfort & skin suitability
40
Slight colour difference · Matte · Buildable
Ingredients (not scored): 4% ingredient overlap
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour · Matte rather than satin (finish) · Stick rather than liquid (format) · 16-hour wear rather than long-wearing (longevity)
Retailer shade note: light-medium with neutral undertones
Tom Ford Architecture Soft Matte Contour Duo in Intensity 1.0, against Charlotte Tilbury Hollywood Contour Wand in Medium/Dark. Matched on the contour pan. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shadeMedium/DarkClosest shade matchIntensity 1.0How they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall96
Colour50%94#ac6e39#a66c3bVery close colourColour difference 1.6 (0 is identical)
Depth25%97LightLightSameDepth difference 1.7 on the 0–100 scale
Undertone—not comparableNot listedNot listedUndertone unknown on one side
Colour family25%100BronzeBronzeSameSame colour family
Finish, pigmentation & format25% of overall · 1 of 3 compared89
Finish60%89SatinNaturalCloseNatural finish rather than satin
Pigmentation20%—not comparableNot listedSheerNot listed for eitherAn opacity not listed for one product
Format20%—not comparableLiquidNot listedNot listed for eitherFormat not listed for one product
Wear & performance15% of overall · 1 of 3 compared40
Longevity50%40Long-wearingNot listedSome differenceOnly your product claims long wear; the match does not list it
Transfer resistance30%—not comparableNot listedNot listedNot listed for eitherNeither product lists transfer resistance
Comfort & skin suitability5% of overall · 1 of 3 compared40
Comfort40%40Not listedClaimedSome differenceThe match claims a comfortable feel; your product does not list it
Hydration20%—not comparableNot listedNot listedNot listed for eitherNeither product lists hydration
Skin types40%—not comparableNot listedNormalNot listed for eitherSkin types not listed for one product
Overall match 83/100Shade 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.
NARS Laguna Bronzer Powder Talc-Free in Laguna 05, against Charlotte Tilbury Hollywood Contour Wand in Medium/Dark. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shadeMedium/DarkClosest overall alternativeLaguna 05How they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall90
Colour50%84#ac6e39#b27547Close colourColour difference 3.1 (0 is identical)
Depth25%92LightDeep / darkCloseDepth difference 3.8 on the 0–100 scale
Undertone—not comparableNot listedWarmUndertone unknown on one side
Colour family25%100BronzeBronzeSameSame colour family
Finish, pigmentation & format25% of overall · 2 of 3 compared80
Finish60%100SatinSatinSameSame satin finish
Pigmentation20%—not comparableNot listedSheerNot listed for eitherAn opacity not listed for one product
Format20%20LiquidPowderDifferentPowder rather than liquid
Wear & performance15% of overall · 1 of 3 compared100
Longevity50%100Long-wearingLong-wearingSameBoth products claim long wear
Transfer resistance30%—not comparableNot listedNot listedNot listed for eitherNeither product lists transfer resistance
Comfort & skin suitability5% of overall · 1 of 3 compared40
Comfort40%40Not listedClaimedSome differenceThe match claims a comfortable feel; your product does not list it
Hydration20%—not comparableNot listedNot listedNot listed for eitherNeither product lists hydration
Skin types40%—not comparableNot listedCombination, Dry, Normal, Oily, SensitiveNot listed for eitherSkin types not listed for one product
Overall match 87/100Shade match 90/100Medium 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, undertone and colour family; the overall match on shade match, finish, pigmentation and format, wear and performance and comfort and suitability. A pair with no swatch colour on one side or Low data confidence is listed without a score. 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$36 less (82%)
