16HR Camo Concealer Light Beige dupes and alternatives e.l.f. Cosmetics
4.2 (5,664)·Light · Warm · 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 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
65
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
Matches: Same warm undertone· Same full coverage· Claims a blurring effect
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour· Natural rather than matte finish· Does not claim not settling into lines
Score details
Shade match
73
Finish & visual result
70
Wear & performance
58
Skin suitability
60
Slight colour difference · Natural · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 21% ingredient overlap
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour · Natural rather than matte finish · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for combination skin
Matches: Same full coverage· Both claim not settling into lines
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour· Slightly lighter· Neutral rather than warm undertone
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 · Slightly lighter · Neutral rather than warm undertone · Natural rather than matte finish · Does not claim a lightweight feel
Matches: Same full coverage· Both claim not settling into lines
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour· Slightly lighter· Neutral rather than warm undertone
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 · Slightly lighter · Neutral rather than warm undertone · Natural rather than matte finish · Does not claim a lightweight feel
Matches: Claims a blurring effect· Both claim a lightweight feel
Differences: Slightly lighter· Olive rather than warm undertone· Natural rather than matte finish
Score details
Shade match
75
Finish & visual result
55
Wear & performance
68
Skin suitability
60
Close colour · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 9% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly lighter · Olive rather than warm undertone · Natural rather than matte finish · Medium rather than full coverage · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for combination skin
Retailer shade note: fair with golden-olive undertones
The closest shade to e.l.f. Cosmetics 16HR Camo Concealer Light Beige (Light · Warm · 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
Huda Beauty #FauxFilter Matte Buildable Coverage Waterproof Concealer in Marshmallow 1.3 Golden, against e.l.f. Cosmetics 16HR Camo Concealer in Light Beige. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shadeLight BeigeClosest shade matchMarshmallow 1.3 GoldenHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall76
Colour60%60#d5c5ab#e3c2a2Slight colour differenceColour difference 6.2 (0 is identical)
Depth15%99LightLightSameDepth difference: 0.4
Retailer descriptionLightFairSome differenceRetailer descriptions one depth band apart
Skin-like finish20%40Not listedClaimedSome differenceThe match claims a skin-like finish; your product does not list it
Blurring15%40Not listedClaimedSome differenceThe match claims a blurring or smoothing effect; your product does not list it
Wear & performance15% of overall · 4 of 5 compared65
Longevity30%7016-hour wearLong-wearingSome differenceYour product claims 16-hour wear; the match says long-wearing without hours
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 74/100Shade 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.
NARS Soft Matte Complete Concealer in Café Con Leche, against e.l.f. Cosmetics 16HR Camo Concealer in Light Beige. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shadeLight BeigeClosest overall alternativeCafé Con LecheHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall71
Colour60%57#d5c5ab#f2d4b2Slight colour differenceColour difference 6.5 (0 is identical)
Finish & visual result25% of overall · 3 of 4 compared81
Finish35%100MatteMatteSameSame matte finish
Coverage30%80FullMediumCloseMedium coverage rather than full (buildable: one step of tolerance)
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 · 3 of 5 compared77
Longevity30%8016-hour wear12-hour wearClose12-hour wear claimed against 16-hour wear
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 76/100Shade match 71/100Medium 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 $23 more
View at Target
