Closest shade match is the equivalent shade, scored on colour, depth, undertone and colour family only. Closest overall alternative is the most similar eyeshadow overall: shade match 55%, finish, pigmentation and format 30%, wear and performance 10%, comfort and skin suitability 5%.
Overall alternativesShade matchesRanked by the overall match: the most similar eyeshadow 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 eyeshadow on shade, finish, wear and comfort and skin suitability together. Each row leads with its overall match; the shade match is beneath it.
Matches: Same pigmentation: opaque· Same longevity: long-wearing
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour· Metallic rather than duochrome (finish)· Powder rather than liquid (format)
Score details
Shade match
72
Finish, pigmentation & format
73
Wear & performance
70
Comfort & skin suitability
50
Slight colour difference · Metallic · Opaque
Ingredients (not scored): 3% ingredient overlap
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour · Metallic rather than duochrome (finish) · Powder rather than liquid (format) · Does not claim crease resistance · Does not claim waterproof
Matches: Same format: liquid· Both claim crease resistance· Claims comfort
Differences: Pink rather than rose· Shimmer rather than duochrome (finish)· Buildable rather than opaque (pigmentation)
Score details
Shade match
71
Finish, pigmentation & format
68
Wear & performance
73
Comfort & skin suitability
40
Slight colour difference · Shimmer · Buildable
Ingredients (not scored): 13% ingredient overlap
Differences: Pink rather than rose · Shimmer rather than duochrome (finish) · Buildable rather than opaque (pigmentation) · 12-hour wear rather than long-wearing (longevity) · Does not claim waterproof
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour· Deeper· Pink rather than rose
Score details
A reliable match cannot be determined for this pair (low data confidence), so no score is shown.
Slight colour difference · Glitter
Ingredients (not scored): 7% ingredient overlap
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour · Deeper · Pink rather than rose · Not listed rather than long-wearing (longevity) · Does not claim crease resistance · Does not claim waterproof
Differences: Deeper· Pink rather than rose· Sheer rather than opaque (pigmentation)
Score details
A reliable match cannot be determined for this pair (low data confidence), so no score is shown.
Slight colour difference · Glitter · Sheer
Ingredients (not scored): 6% ingredient overlap
Differences: Deeper · Pink rather than rose · Sheer rather than opaque (pigmentation) · Stick rather than liquid (format) · Not listed rather than long-wearing (longevity) · Does not claim crease resistance · Does not claim waterproof
Retailer shade note: sheer silvery baby pink with silver and pink sparkle
Matches: Same pigmentation: opaque· Both claim crease resistance
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour· Nude rather than rose· Shimmer rather than duochrome (finish)
Score details
Shade match
66
Finish, pigmentation & format
63
Wear & performance
73
Comfort & skin suitability
50
Slight colour difference · Shimmer · Opaque
Ingredients (not scored): 6% ingredient overlap
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour · Nude rather than rose · Shimmer rather than duochrome (finish) · Powder rather than liquid (format) · 8-hour wear rather than long-wearing (longevity) · Does not claim waterproof
Matches: Same format: liquid· Same longevity: long-wearing· Both claim crease resistance
Differences: Deeper· White rather than rose· Shimmer rather than duochrome (finish)
Score details
Shade match
57
Finish, pigmentation & format
68
Wear & performance
88
Comfort & skin suitability
40
Close colour · Shimmer · Buildable
Ingredients (not scored): 7% ingredient overlap
Differences: Deeper · White rather than rose · Shimmer rather than duochrome (finish) · Buildable rather than opaque (pigmentation) · Does not claim waterproof
Retailer shade note: opalescent white with blue, pink, and purple pearl
$26Ulta Beauty(product price)$2 less (7%)4.7 (163)
Matches: Both claim crease resistance
Differences: White rather than rose· Metallic rather than duochrome (finish)· Cream rather than liquid (format)
Score details
Shade match
54
Finish, pigmentation & format
73
Wear & performance
73
Comfort & skin suitability
50
Slight colour difference · Metallic
Ingredients (not scored): no ingredient list for one product
Differences: White rather than rose · Metallic rather than duochrome (finish) · Cream rather than liquid (format) · 10-hour wear rather than long-wearing (longevity) · Does not claim waterproof
Matches: Same pigmentation: opaque· Same longevity: long-wearing· Both claim crease resistance
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour· Nude rather than rose· Shimmer rather than duochrome (finish)
Score details
Shade match
56
Finish, pigmentation & format
63
Wear & performance
88
Comfort & skin suitability
50
Slight colour difference · Shimmer · Opaque
Ingredients (not scored): 2% ingredient overlap
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour · Nude rather than rose · Shimmer rather than duochrome (finish) · Powder rather than liquid (format) · Does not claim waterproof
Differences: Deeper· Silver rather than rose· Sheer rather than opaque (pigmentation)
Score details
Shade match
55
Finish, pigmentation & format
70
Wear & performance
70
Comfort & skin suitability
50
Close colour · Glitter · Sheer
Ingredients (not scored): 10% ingredient overlap
Differences: Deeper · Silver rather than rose · Sheer rather than opaque (pigmentation) · Powder rather than liquid (format) · Does not claim crease resistance · Does not claim waterproof
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour· Shimmer rather than duochrome (finish)· Buildable rather than opaque (pigmentation)
Score details
Shade match
68
Finish, pigmentation & format
56
Wear & performance
40
Comfort & skin suitability
50
Slight colour difference · Shimmer · Buildable
Ingredients (not scored): 8% ingredient overlap
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour · Shimmer rather than duochrome (finish) · Buildable rather than opaque (pigmentation) · Powder rather than liquid (format) · Not listed rather than long-wearing (longevity) · Does not claim crease resistance · Does not claim waterproof
Matches: Same longevity: long-wearing· Both claim crease resistance
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour· Nude rather than rose· Shimmer rather than duochrome (finish)
Score details
Shade match
60
Finish, pigmentation & format
54
Wear & performance
88
Comfort & skin suitability
50
Slight colour difference · Shimmer
Ingredients (not scored): 10% ingredient overlap
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour · Nude rather than rose · Shimmer rather than duochrome (finish) · Powder rather than liquid (format) · Does not claim waterproof
Matches: Same finish: duochrome· Same format: liquid
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour· Copper rather than rose· Not listed rather than long-wearing (longevity)
Score details
Shade match
43
Finish, pigmentation & format
100
Wear & performance
40
Comfort & skin suitability
50
Slight colour difference · Duochrome
Ingredients (not scored): 42% ingredient overlap
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour · Copper rather than rose · Not listed rather than long-wearing (longevity) · Does not claim crease resistance · Does not claim waterproof
Matches: Same longevity: long-wearing· Claims comfort· Claims hydration
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour· Deeper· Silver rather than rose
Score details
Shade match
46
Finish, pigmentation & format
85
Wear & performance
70
Comfort & skin suitability
40
Slight colour difference · Glitter
Ingredients (not scored): 6% ingredient overlap
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour · Deeper · Silver rather than rose · Stick rather than liquid (format) · Does not claim crease resistance · Does not claim waterproof
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour· Pink rather than rose· Metallic rather than duochrome (finish)
Score details
Shade match
56
Finish, pigmentation & format
70
Wear & performance
55
Comfort & skin suitability
40
Slight colour difference · Metallic
Ingredients (not scored): 0% ingredient overlap
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour · Pink rather than rose · Metallic rather than duochrome (finish) · Stick rather than liquid (format) · 8-hour wear rather than long-wearing (longevity) · Does not claim crease resistance · Does not claim waterproof
Differences: Silver rather than rose· Shimmer rather than duochrome (finish)· Powder rather than liquid (format)
Score details
Shade match
62
Finish, pigmentation & format
63
Wear & performance
40
Comfort & skin suitability
50
Close colour · Shimmer · Opaque
Ingredients (not scored): 0% ingredient overlap
Differences: Silver rather than rose · Shimmer rather than duochrome (finish) · Powder rather than liquid (format) · Not listed rather than long-wearing (longevity) · Does not claim crease resistance · Does not claim waterproof
Matches: Both claim crease resistance· Both claim waterproof
Differences: Purple rather than rose· Shimmer rather than duochrome (finish)· Buildable rather than opaque (pigmentation)
Score details
Shade match
54
Finish, pigmentation & format
62
Wear & performance
85
Comfort & skin suitability
50
Slight colour difference · Shimmer · Buildable
Ingredients (not scored): 9% ingredient overlap
Differences: Purple rather than rose · Shimmer rather than duochrome (finish) · Buildable rather than opaque (pigmentation) · Cream rather than liquid (format) · 16-hour wear rather than long-wearing (longevity)
Matches: Same finish: duochrome· Same pigmentation: opaque
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour· Blue rather than rose· Powder rather than liquid (format)
Score details
Shade match
47
Finish, pigmentation & format
88
Wear & performance
40
Comfort & skin suitability
50
Slight colour difference · Duochrome · Opaque
Ingredients (not scored): 9% ingredient overlap
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour · Blue rather than rose · Powder rather than liquid (format) · Not listed rather than long-wearing (longevity) · Does not claim crease resistance · Does not claim waterproof
Differences: Blue rather than rose· Sheer rather than opaque (pigmentation)· Stick rather than liquid (format)
Score details
A reliable match cannot be determined for this pair (low data confidence), so no score is shown.
Slight colour difference · Glitter · Sheer
Ingredients (not scored): 6% ingredient overlap
Differences: Blue rather than rose · Sheer rather than opaque (pigmentation) · Stick rather than liquid (format) · Not listed rather than long-wearing (longevity) · Does not claim crease resistance · Does not claim waterproof
Retailer shade note: sheer opal with silver, pink, violet and blue sparkle
Matches: Same longevity: long-wearing· Both claim crease resistance
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour· Nude rather than rose· Shimmer rather than duochrome (finish)
Score details
Shade match
56
Finish, pigmentation & format
54
Wear & performance
88
Comfort & skin suitability
50
Visibly different colour · Shimmer
Ingredients (not scored): 9% ingredient overlap
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour · Nude rather than rose · Shimmer rather than duochrome (finish) · Powder rather than liquid (format) · Does not claim waterproof
$7Ulta Beauty(product price)$21 less (75%)4.5 (2,019)
Matches: Same longevity: long-wearing
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour· Deeper· Purple rather than rose
Score details
Shade match
44
Finish, pigmentation & format
80
Wear & performance
70
Comfort & skin suitability
50
Slight colour difference · Glitter
Ingredients (not scored): 13% ingredient overlap
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour · Deeper · Purple rather than rose · Powder rather than liquid (format) · Does not claim crease resistance · Does not claim waterproof
Retailer shade note: cool-toned lavender with silver and pink pinpoints
Differences: White rather than rose· Sheer rather than opaque (pigmentation)· Powder rather than liquid (format)
Score details
Shade match
52
Finish, pigmentation & format
70
Wear & performance
55
Comfort & skin suitability
50
Slight colour difference · Glitter · Sheer
Ingredients (not scored): 7% ingredient overlap
Differences: White rather than rose · Sheer rather than opaque (pigmentation) · Powder rather than liquid (format) · 16-hour wear rather than long-wearing (longevity) · Does not claim crease resistance · Does not claim waterproof
Maybelline Shadow Drip Eye Tint Liquid Eye Shadow in Amethyst Drip, against Danessa Myricks Beauty Twin Flames Liquid Eyeshadow in Angel Heart. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shadeAngel HeartClosest matchAmethyst DripHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall84
Colour60%92#e5d8de#ecdfe2Very close colourColour difference 2.1 (0 is identical)
Depth15%93LightLightSameDepth difference 3.5 on the 0–100 scale
Undertone—not comparableNot listedCoolUndertone unknown on one side
Overall match 74/100Shade match 84/100Medium 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.