Even Better All-Over Concealer + Eraser WN 56 Cashew dupes and alternatives Clinique
4.0 (1,308)·Light · 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: Similar undertone (warm vs neutral)· Both claim a blurring effect· Claims transfer resistance
Differences: Slightly deeper· Matte rather than natural finish· Full rather than medium coverage
Score details
Shade match
79
Finish & visual result
66
Wear & performance
68
Skin suitability
60
Close colour · Matte · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 14% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly deeper · Matte rather than natural finish · Full rather than medium coverage · Not marketed for dry skin · Contains drying alcohol
Retailer shade note: for medium skin with golden undertones
Matches: Similar undertone (warm vs neutral)· Both claim a blurring effect· Claims not settling into lines
Differences: Matte rather than natural finish· Full rather than medium coverage· Does not claim a lightweight feel
Score details
Shade match
83
Finish & visual result
66
Wear & performance
54
Skin suitability
60
Close colour · Matte · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 13% ingredient overlap
Differences: Matte rather than natural finish · Full rather than medium coverage · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Not marketed for dry skin · Contains listed fragrance
Retailer shade note: medium skin with warm, golden undertones
Matches: Similar undertone (warm vs neutral)· Both claim a blurring effect· Claims not settling into lines
Differences: Slightly deeper· Matte rather than natural finish· Full rather than medium coverage
Score details
Shade match
81
Finish & visual result
66
Wear & performance
54
Skin suitability
60
Close colour · Matte · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 13% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly deeper · Matte rather than natural finish · Full rather than medium coverage · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Not marketed for dry skin · Contains listed fragrance
Retailer shade note: medium to tan skin with warm, golden undertones
Matches: Both claim long-wearing· Claims not settling into lines· Both claim a lightweight feel
Differences: Slightly deeper· Slightly cooler undertone· Radiant rather than natural finish
Score details
Shade match
72
Finish & visual result
70
Wear & performance
82
Skin suitability
50
Close colour · Radiant · Buildable coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 2% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly deeper · Slightly cooler undertone · Radiant rather than natural finish · Buildable rather than medium coverage · No blurring effect claimed
Matches: Similar undertone (warm vs neutral)· Both claim a blurring effect· Claims not settling into lines
Differences: Matte rather than natural finish· Full rather than medium coverage· Does not claim a lightweight feel
Score details
Shade match
80
Finish & visual result
66
Wear & performance
54
Skin suitability
60
Close colour · Matte · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 13% ingredient overlap
Differences: Matte rather than natural finish · Full rather than medium coverage · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Not marketed for dry skin · Contains listed fragrance
Retailer shade note: medium skin with warm, peach undertones
$12.99Ulta Beauty(product price)$9.01 less (41%)4.2 (11,365)
Matches: Very close colour· Similar undertone (warm vs neutral)· Claims not settling into lines
Differences: Radiant rather than natural finish· No blurring effect claimed· No long-wear claim
Score details
Shade match
91
Finish & visual result
51
Wear & performance
40
Skin suitability
0
Very close colour · Radiant finish
Ingredients (not scored): 14% 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 normal/dry/oily skin
The closest shade to Clinique Even Better All-Over Concealer + Eraser WN 56 Cashew (Light · 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
NARS Soft Matte Complete Concealer in Praline, against Clinique Even Better All-Over Concealer + Eraser in WN 56 Cashew. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shadeWN 56 CashewClosest shade matchPralineHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall94
Colour60%97#e7bb8a#ebbc8cLooks identicalColour difference 1.1 (0 is identical)
Depth15%98LightLightSameDepth difference: 1.0
Retailer descriptionMediumMediumBoth described as mediumThe retailers describe the same depth
Finish & visual result25% of overall · 3 of 4 compared81
Finish35%56NaturalMatteSome differenceMatte finish rather than natural
Coverage30%100MediumMediumSameSame medium coverage
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 · 3 of 5 compared54
Longevity30%70Long-wearing12-hour wearSome differenceThe match claims 12-hour wear; your product 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%—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, combination, oilyBoth marketed for normal/oily skin
Overall match 83/100Shade match 94/100Medium 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.
Estée Lauder Double Wear Stay-in-Place 24-Hour Concealer in 3N, against Clinique Even Better All-Over Concealer + Eraser in WN 56 Cashew. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shadeWN 56 CashewClosest overall alternative3NHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall86
Colour60%84#e7bb8a#e0b58eClose colourColour difference 3.1 (0 is identical)
Finish & visual result25% of overall · 3 of 4 compared93
Finish35%100NaturalNaturalSameSame natural finish
Coverage30%80MediumFullCloseFull coverage rather than medium (buildable: one step of tolerance)
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 · 3 of 5 compared68
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%—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%100ClaimedClaimedSameBoth products claim a comfortable, lightweight feel
Skin suitability5% of overall100
Skin type100%100Normal, dry, oilyNormal, dry, oilyBoth marketed for normal/dry/oily skin
Overall match 86/100Shade match 86/100Medium 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 $16 more
