Even Better All-Over Concealer + Eraser WN 01 Flax dupes and alternatives Clinique
4.0 (1,308)·Very fair · 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 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 neutral undertone· Same medium coverage· Claims a skin-like finish
Differences: Radiant rather than natural finish· No blurring effect claimed· No long-wear claim
Score details
Shade match
88
Finish & visual result
64
Wear & performance
40
Skin suitability
60
Close colour · Radiant · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 7% ingredient overlap
Differences: Radiant rather than natural finish · No blurring effect claimed · No long-wear claim · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Not marketed for oily skin
Retailer shade note: very light with neutral peach undertones
Matches: Both claim a blurring effect· Claims transfer resistance· Claims not settling into lines
Differences: Slightly deeper· Slightly cooler undertone· Matte rather than natural finish
Score details
Shade match
74
Finish & visual result
66
Wear & performance
51
Skin suitability
100
Close colour · Matte · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 5% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly deeper · Slightly cooler undertone · Matte rather than natural finish · Full rather than medium coverage · Does not claim a lightweight feel
Matches: Same neutral undertone· Same natural finish· Both claim long-wearing
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour· Slightly deeper· Full rather than medium coverage
Score details
Shade match
67
Finish & visual result
74
Wear & performance
68
Skin suitability
84
Slight colour difference · Natural · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 7% ingredient overlap
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour · Slightly deeper · Full rather than medium coverage · No blurring effect claimed · Does not claim a lightweight feel
Matches: Same natural finish· Both claim long-wearing· Claims not settling into lines
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour· Slightly cooler undertone· Full rather than medium coverage
Score details
Shade match
62
Finish & visual result
81
Wear & performance
82
Skin suitability
60
Slight colour difference · Natural · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 19% ingredient overlap
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour · Slightly cooler undertone · Full rather than medium coverage · No blurring effect claimed · Not marketed for oily skin
The closest shade to Clinique Even Better All-Over Concealer + Eraser WN 01 Flax (Very fair · Neutral · neutral golden 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
Kosas Revealer Super Creamy + Brightening Concealer in Tone 0.5 N, against Clinique Even Better All-Over Concealer + Eraser in WN 01 Flax. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shadeWN 01 FlaxClosest shade matchTone 0.5 NHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall92
Colour60%92#f3e2d8#f4dfd1Very close colourColour difference 2.0 (0 is identical)
Finish35%56NaturalRadiantSome differenceRadiant finish rather than natural
Coverage30%100MediumMediumSameSame medium coverage
Skin-like finish20%40Not listedClaimedSome differenceThe match claims a skin-like finish; your product does not list it
Blurring15%40ClaimedNot listedSome differenceOnly your product claims a blurring or smoothing effect; the match does not list it
Wear & performance15% of overall · 2 of 5 compared40
Longevity30%40Long-wearingNot 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%—not comparableNot listedNot listedNot claimed by eitherNeither product lists not settling into pores or fine lines
Colour stability15%—not comparableNot listedNot listedNot claimed by eitherNeither product lists colour stability (no oxidation)
Comfort15%40ClaimedNot listedSome differenceOnly your product claims a comfortable, lightweight feel; the match does not list it
Skin suitability5% of overall60
Skin type100%60Normal, dry, oilyNormal, dry, combinationBoth marketed for normal/dry skin
Overall match 75/100Shade 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.
Charlotte Tilbury Airbrush Flawless Long-Wear Blur Concealer in 1.5 Fair, against Clinique Even Better All-Over Concealer + Eraser in WN 01 Flax. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shadeWN 01 FlaxClosest overall alternative1.5 FairHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall91
Colour60%92#f3e2d8#eee1d6Very close colourColour difference 2.0 (0 is identical)
Finish & visual result25% of overall · 3 of 4 compared66
Finish35%56NaturalMatteSome differenceMatte finish rather than natural
Coverage30%60MediumFullSome differenceFull coverage rather than medium
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 · 4 of 5 compared51
Longevity30%70Long-wearing24-hour wearSome differenceThe match claims 24-hour wear; your product says long-wearing without hours
Transfer resistance20%40Not listedClaimedSome differenceThe match claims transfer resistance; your product 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%—not comparableNot listedNot listedNot claimed by eitherNeither product lists colour stability (no oxidation)
Comfort15%40ClaimedNot listedSome differenceOnly your product claims a comfortable, lightweight feel; the match does not list it
Skin suitability5% of overall100
Skin type100%100Normal, dry, oilyNormal, dry, oilyBoth marketed for normal/dry/oily skin
Overall match 79/100Shade match 91/100Medium 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.
SephoraCosts $10 more
View at Walmart
