16HR Camo Concealer Fair Warm dupes and alternatives e.l.f. Cosmetics
4.2 (5,664)·Fair · Warm · yellow 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 full coverage· Both claim not settling into lines
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour· Neutral rather than warm undertone· Natural rather than matte finish
Score details
Shade match
63
Finish & visual result
76
Wear & performance
72
Skin suitability
84
Slight colour difference · Natural · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 4% ingredient overlap
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour · Neutral rather than warm undertone · Natural rather than matte finish · Does not claim a lightweight feel
The closest shade to e.l.f. Cosmetics 16HR Camo Concealer Fair Warm (Fair · Warm · yellow 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
Charlotte Tilbury Airbrush Flawless Long-Wear Blur Concealer in 1.5 Fair, against e.l.f. Cosmetics 16HR Camo Concealer in Fair Warm. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shadeFair WarmClosest shade match1.5 FairHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall83
Colour60%78#dcd2c6#eee1d6Close colourColour difference 3.9 (0 is identical)
Finish & visual result25% of overall · 3 of 4 compared89
Finish35%100MatteMatteSameSame matte finish
Coverage30%100FullFullSameSame full coverage
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 compared61
Longevity30%6016-hour wear24-hour wearSome difference24-hour wear claimed against 16-hour wear
Transfer resistance20%40Not listedClaimedSome differenceThe match claims transfer resistance; your product does not list it
Settling20%100ClaimedClaimedSameBoth products claim 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%60Oily, combination, normalNormal, dry, oilyBoth marketed for oily/normal skin
Overall match 80/100Shade match 83/100Medium 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.
Tarte Shape Tape Full Coverage Matte Concealer in 12S fair, against e.l.f. Cosmetics 16HR Camo Concealer in Fair Warm. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shadeFair WarmClosest overall alternative12S fairHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall76
Colour60%62#dcd2c6#eed5c1Slight colour differenceColour difference 6.0 (0 is identical)
Depth15%95FairVery fairCloseDepth difference: 3.0
Retailer descriptionFairFairBoth described as fairThe retailers describe the same depth
Transfer resistance20%—not comparableNot listedNot listedNot claimed by eitherNeither product lists transfer resistance
Settling20%100ClaimedClaimedSameBoth products claim 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 overall100
Skin type100%100Oily, combination, normalNormal, combination, oilyBoth marketed for oily/combination/normal skin
Overall match 82/100Shade match 76/100Medium 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 $28 more
