Twin Flames Liquid Eyeshadow Mystic Fire dupes and alternatives Danessa Myricks Beauty
4.1 (249)·Green · Cool · Medium
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: Very close colour· Same finish: metallic· Both claim crease resistance
Differences: Brown rather than green· Buildable rather than opaque (pigmentation)· Stick rather than liquid (format)
Score details
Shade match
66
Finish, pigmentation & format
85
Wear & performance
85
Comfort & skin suitability
50
Very close colour · Metallic · Buildable
Ingredients (not scored): 10% ingredient overlap
Differences: Brown rather than green · Buildable rather than opaque (pigmentation) · Stick rather than liquid (format) · 24-hour wear rather than long-wearing (longevity)
Matches: Very close colour· Same cool undertone· Same pigmentation: opaque
Differences: Rose rather than green· Powder rather than liquid (format)· Not listed rather than long-wearing (longevity)
Score details
Shade match
76
Finish, pigmentation & format
78
Wear & performance
40
Comfort & skin suitability
50
Very close colour · Shimmer · Opaque
Ingredients (not scored): 0% ingredient overlap
Differences: Rose rather than green · Powder rather than liquid (format) · Not listed rather than long-wearing (longevity) · Does not claim crease resistance · Does not claim waterproof
Matches: Very close colour· Same pigmentation: opaque
Differences: Warm rather than cool undertone· Pink rather than green· Powder rather than liquid (format)
Score details
Shade match
69
Finish, pigmentation & format
78
Wear & performance
55
Comfort & skin suitability
50
Very close colour · Shimmer · Opaque
Ingredients (not scored): 6% ingredient overlap
Differences: Warm rather than cool undertone · Pink rather than green · Powder rather than liquid (format) · 12-hour wear rather than long-wearing (longevity) · Does not claim crease resistance · Does not claim waterproof
Differences: Pink rather than green· Stick rather than liquid (format)· 12-hour wear rather than long-wearing (longevity)
Score details
Shade match
66
Finish, pigmentation & format
78
Wear & performance
67
Comfort & skin suitability
50
Very close colour · Shimmer
Ingredients (not scored): 17% ingredient overlap
Differences: Pink rather than green · Stick rather than liquid (format) · 12-hour wear rather than long-wearing (longevity) · Does not claim crease resistance
Matches: Very close colour· Same pigmentation: opaque· Claims comfort
Differences: Pink rather than green· Cream rather than liquid (format)· Not listed rather than long-wearing (longevity)
Score details
Shade match
68
Finish, pigmentation & format
83
Wear & performance
40
Comfort & skin suitability
40
Very close colour · Glitter · Opaque
Ingredients (not scored): 11% ingredient overlap
Differences: Pink rather than green · Cream rather than liquid (format) · Not listed rather than long-wearing (longevity) · Does not claim crease resistance · Does not claim waterproof
Matches: Same pigmentation: opaque· Both claim waterproof
Differences: Pink rather than green· Duochrome rather than metallic (finish)· Stick rather than liquid (format)
Score details
Shade match
65
Finish, pigmentation & format
76
Wear & performance
67
Comfort & skin suitability
50
Close colour · Duochrome · Opaque
Ingredients (not scored): 8% ingredient overlap
Differences: Pink rather than green · Duochrome rather than metallic (finish) · Stick rather than liquid (format) · 12-hour wear rather than long-wearing (longevity) · Does not claim crease resistance
Retailer shade note: sparkling flamingo pink with an opalescent shift
Matches: Very close colour· Same longevity: long-wearing
Differences: Pink rather than green· Sheer rather than opaque (pigmentation)· Powder rather than liquid (format)
Score details
Shade match
71
Finish, pigmentation & format
63
Wear & performance
70
Comfort & skin suitability
50
Very close colour · Glitter · Sheer
Ingredients (not scored): 10% ingredient overlap
Differences: Pink rather than green · Sheer rather than opaque (pigmentation) · Powder rather than liquid (format) · Does not claim crease resistance · Does not claim waterproof
Matches: Same pigmentation: opaque· Both claim crease resistance· Both claim waterproof
Differences: Warm rather than cool undertone· Terracotta rather than green· Stick rather than liquid (format)
Score details
Shade match
58
Finish, pigmentation & format
82
Wear & performance
85
Comfort & skin suitability
40
Slight colour difference · Shimmer · Opaque
Ingredients (not scored): 9% ingredient overlap
Differences: Warm rather than cool undertone · Terracotta rather than green · Stick rather than liquid (format) · 24-hour wear rather than long-wearing (longevity)
Matches: Same finish: metallic· Both claim crease resistance· Both claim waterproof
Differences: Pink rather than green· Buildable rather than opaque (pigmentation)· Stick rather than liquid (format)
Score details
Shade match
56
Finish, pigmentation & format
85
Wear & performance
85
Comfort & skin suitability
50
Close colour · Metallic · Buildable
Ingredients (not scored): 8% ingredient overlap
Differences: Pink rather than green · Buildable rather than opaque (pigmentation) · Stick rather than liquid (format) · 24-hour wear rather than long-wearing (longevity)
Retailer shade note: a shimmering medium pink / a blackened cherry
Matches: Same longevity: long-wearing· Claims comfort· Claims hydration
Differences: Neutral rather than cool undertone· Pink rather than green· Sheer rather than opaque (pigmentation)
Score details
Shade match
65
Finish, pigmentation & format
70
Wear & performance
70
Comfort & skin suitability
40
Close colour · Matte · Sheer
Ingredients (not scored): 0% ingredient overlap
Differences: Neutral rather than cool undertone · Pink rather than green · Sheer rather than opaque (pigmentation) · Cream rather than liquid (format) · Does not claim crease resistance · Does not claim waterproof
Sold as blush, rated here for use as eyeshadow (suited)
Matches: Same cool undertone· Same finish: metallic· Both claim crease resistance
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour· Mauve rather than green· Stick rather than liquid (format)
Score details
Shade match
51
Finish, pigmentation & format
90
Wear & performance
85
Comfort & skin suitability
40
Visibly different colour · Metallic
Ingredients (not scored): 23% ingredient overlap
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour · Mauve rather than green · Stick rather than liquid (format) · 8-hour wear rather than long-wearing (longevity)
Matches: Same cool undertone· Same longevity: long-wearing· Both claim waterproof
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour· Plum rather than green· Duochrome rather than metallic (finish)
Score details
Shade match
59
Finish, pigmentation & format
70
Wear & performance
82
Comfort & skin suitability
50
Slight colour difference · Duochrome
Ingredients (not scored): 2% ingredient overlap
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour · Plum rather than green · Duochrome rather than metallic (finish) · Stick rather than liquid (format) · Does not claim crease resistance
Retailer shade note: burgundy metallic with taupe shimmer/copper rose foil with shifts of pink and gold sparkle
Matches: Same cool undertone· Same pigmentation: opaque· Both claim crease resistance
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour· Purple rather than green· Stick rather than liquid (format)
Score details
Shade match
52
Finish, pigmentation & format
82
Wear & performance
85
Comfort & skin suitability
50
Slight colour difference · Shimmer · Opaque
Ingredients (not scored): 8% ingredient overlap
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour · Purple rather than green · Stick rather than liquid (format) · 12-hour wear rather than long-wearing (longevity)
$25Ulta Beauty(product price)$3 less (11%)4.6 (3,381)
Matches: Same cool undertone· Same finish: metallic· Both claim crease resistance
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour· Mauve rather than green· Buildable rather than opaque (pigmentation)
Score details
Shade match
51
Finish, pigmentation & format
85
Wear & performance
85
Comfort & skin suitability
40
Visibly different colour · Metallic · Buildable
Ingredients (not scored): 13% ingredient overlap
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour · Mauve rather than green · Buildable rather than opaque (pigmentation) · Stick rather than liquid (format) · 16-hour wear rather than long-wearing (longevity)
Matches: Same format: liquid· Both claim crease resistance· Claims comfort
Differences: Warm rather than cool undertone· Pink rather than green· Buildable rather than opaque (pigmentation)
Score details
Shade match
53
Finish, pigmentation & format
83
Wear & performance
73
Comfort & skin suitability
40
Slight colour difference · Shimmer · Buildable
Ingredients (not scored): 12% ingredient overlap
Differences: Warm rather than cool undertone · Pink rather than green · Buildable rather than opaque (pigmentation) · 16-hour wear rather than long-wearing (longevity) · Does not claim waterproof
Matches: Same cool undertone· Same pigmentation: opaque· Both claim crease resistance
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour· Deeper· Taupe rather than green
Score details
Shade match
50
Finish, pigmentation & format
82
Wear & performance
85
Comfort & skin suitability
50
Visibly different colour · Shimmer · Opaque
Ingredients (not scored): 8% ingredient overlap
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour · Deeper · Taupe rather than green · Stick rather than liquid (format) · 12-hour wear rather than long-wearing (longevity)
Matches: Same finish: metallic· Both claim crease resistance· Both claim waterproof
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour· Lighter· Warm rather than cool undertone
Score details
Shade match
46
Finish, pigmentation & format
90
Wear & performance
85
Comfort & skin suitability
40
Slight colour difference · Metallic
Ingredients (not scored): 23% ingredient overlap
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour · Lighter · Warm rather than cool undertone · Rose rather than green · Stick rather than liquid (format) · 8-hour wear rather than long-wearing (longevity)
Matches: Same cool undertone· Same finish: metallic· Claims hydration
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour· Mauve rather than green· Stick rather than liquid (format)
Score details
Shade match
51
Finish, pigmentation & format
90
Wear & performance
55
Comfort & skin suitability
40
Visibly different colour · Metallic
Ingredients (not scored): 0% ingredient overlap
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour · Mauve rather than green · Stick rather than liquid (format) · 8-hour wear rather than long-wearing (longevity) · Does not claim crease resistance · Does not claim waterproof
Matches: Same finish: metallic· Both claim crease resistance· Both claim waterproof
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour· Mauve rather than green· Buildable rather than opaque (pigmentation)
Score details
Shade match
47
Finish, pigmentation & format
85
Wear & performance
85
Comfort & skin suitability
50
Slight colour difference · Metallic · Buildable
Ingredients (not scored): 8% ingredient overlap
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour · Mauve rather than green · Buildable rather than opaque (pigmentation) · Stick rather than liquid (format) · 24-hour wear rather than long-wearing (longevity)
Retailer shade note: a shimmering taupe with silver, pink & gold sparkle / a neutral taupe
$7Ulta Beauty(product price)$21 less (75%)4.5 (2,019)
Matches: Same longevity: long-wearing
Differences: Lighter· Warm rather than cool undertone· Plum rather than green
Score details
Shade match
56
Finish, pigmentation & format
71
Wear & performance
70
Comfort & skin suitability
50
Close colour · Glitter
Ingredients (not scored): 13% ingredient overlap
Differences: Lighter · Warm rather than cool undertone · Plum rather than green · Powder rather than liquid (format) · Does not claim crease resistance · Does not claim waterproof
ColourPop Shadow Stix in Next Spot, against Danessa Myricks Beauty Twin Flames Liquid Eyeshadow in Mystic Fire. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shadeMystic FireClosest matchNext SpotHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall77
Colour60%88#c38690#c87f8aVery close colourColour difference 2.6 (0 is identical)
Depth15%97MediumMediumSameDepth difference 1.7 on the 0–100 scale
Overall match 80/100Shade match 77/100Medium 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.