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 neutral undertone· Same natural finish
Differences: Medium rather than full coverage· Does not claim colour stability· Does not claim a lightweight feel
Score details
Shade match
86
Finish & visual result
91
Wear & performance
63
Skin suitability
28
Very close colour · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 20% ingredient overlap
Differences: Medium rather than full coverage · Does not claim colour stability · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Not marketed for dry/oily skin · Contains listed fragrance · Contains drying alcohol
Retailer shade note: medium deep with neutral golden undertones
The closest shade to Clinique Beyond Perfecting Foundation + Concealer CN 90 Sand (Medium · Neutral · neutral pink 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
m.ph by Mary Phillips Le Skin Weightless Serum Foundation in Medium 110 N, against Clinique Beyond Perfecting Foundation + Concealer in CN 90 Sand. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shadeCN 90 SandClosest shade matchMedium 110 NHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall94
Colour60%96#c1926f#c28f6bLooks identicalColour difference 1.2 (0 is identical)
Depth15%98MediumMediumSameDepth difference: 1.0
Retailer descriptionMediumMediumBoth described as mediumThe retailers describe the same depth
Finish & visual result25% of overall · 3 of 4 compared79
Finish35%100NaturalNaturalSameSame natural finish
Coverage30%80FullMediumCloseMedium coverage rather than full (buildable: one step of tolerance)
Skin-like finish20%40Not listedClaimedSome differenceThe match claims a skin-like finish; your product does not list it
Blurring15%—not comparableNot listedNot listedNot claimed by eitherNeither product lists a blurring or smoothing effect
Wear & performance15% of overall · 4 of 5 compared63
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%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 overall60
Skin type100%60Normal, dry, oilyNormal, dry, combinationBoth marketed for normal/dry skin
Overall match 84/100Shade 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.
Benefit Cosmetics The POREfessional Blurring & Smoothing Foundation in 22N Outstanding, against Clinique Beyond Perfecting Foundation + Concealer in CN 90 Sand. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shadeCN 90 SandClosest overall alternative22N OutstandingHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall89
Colour60%89#c1926f#c79870Very close colourColour difference 2.4 (0 is identical)
Depth15%95MediumMediumSameDepth difference: 3.1
Retailer descriptionMediumMediumBoth described as mediumThe retailers describe the same depth
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%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 overall60
Skin type100%60Normal, dry, oilyNormal, combination, oilyBoth marketed for normal/oily skin
Overall match 85/100Shade match 89/100Medium 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.
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.
SephoraCosts $7 more
