Beyond Perfecting Foundation + Concealer WN 112 Ginger dupes and alternatives Clinique
3.9 (7,312)·Tan · Neutral · neutral golden 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.
The closest shade to Clinique Beyond Perfecting Foundation + Concealer WN 112 Ginger (Tan · Neutral · neutral golden 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
Maybelline Instant Age Rewind Eraser Treatment Foundation in 340, against Clinique Beyond Perfecting Foundation + Concealer in WN 112 Ginger. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shadeWN 112 GingerClosest shade match340How they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall93
Colour60%89#be783d#bc7e4aVery close colourColour difference 2.4 (0 is identical)
Depth15%97TanTanSameDepth difference: 1.9
Retailer descriptionMediumNot statedNo depth word in one descriptionNot compared
Finish & visual result25% of overall · 3 of 4 compared81
Finish35%100NaturalNaturalSameSame natural finish
Coverage30%80FullMediumCloseMedium 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%40Not listedClaimedSome differenceThe match claims a blurring or smoothing effect; your product does not list it
Wear & performance15% of overall · 4 of 5 compared51
Longevity30%4024-hour wearNot listedSome differenceOnly your product claims long wear; the match does not list it
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 overall0
Skin type100%0Normal, dry, oilySensitiveMarketed for different skin types
Overall match 79/100Shade match 93/100Medium 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 Light Reflecting Foundation in Caracas, against Clinique Beyond Perfecting Foundation + Concealer in WN 112 Ginger. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shadeWN 112 GingerClosest overall alternativeCaracasHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall92
Colour60%93#be783d#be7641Very close colourColour difference 1.8 (0 is identical)
Depth15%99TanTanSameDepth difference: 0.6
Retailer descriptionMediumMedium tanSome differenceRetailer descriptions one depth band apart
Finish & visual result25% of overall · 3 of 4 compared81
Finish35%100NaturalNaturalSameSame natural finish
Coverage30%80FullMediumCloseMedium 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%40Not listedClaimedSome differenceThe match claims a blurring or smoothing effect; your product does not list it
Wear & performance15% of overall · 3 of 5 compared70
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%—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, dry, combinationBoth marketed for normal/dry skin
Overall match 84/100Shade match 92/100Medium 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.
Walmart
SephoraCosts $14 more
