16HR Camo Concealer Medium 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: Very close colour· Claims a blurring effect· Both claim 16-hour wear
Differences: Neutral rather than warm undertone· Radiant rather than matte finish· Medium rather than full coverage
Score details
Shade match
82
Finish & visual result
43
Wear & performance
75
Skin suitability
60
Very close colour · Radiant · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 20% ingredient overlap
Differences: Neutral rather than warm undertone · Radiant rather than matte finish · Medium rather than full coverage · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Not marketed for oily skin
Retailer shade note: M1 - medium with neutral undertones
Matches: Same full coverage· Claims a blurring effect· Claims transfer resistance
Differences: Neutral rather than warm undertone· Natural rather than matte finish· Does not claim not settling into lines
Score details
Shade match
74
Finish & visual result
70
Wear & performance
58
Skin suitability
60
Close colour · Natural · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 21% ingredient overlap
Differences: Neutral rather than warm undertone · Natural rather than matte finish · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for combination skin
Retailer shade note: medium with neutral undertones
Matches: Same warm undertone· Claims a skin-like finish
Differences: Radiant rather than matte finish· Medium rather than full coverage· No long-wear claim
Score details
Shade match
89
Finish & visual result
43
Wear & performance
40
Skin suitability
60
Close colour · Radiant · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 5% ingredient overlap
Differences: Radiant rather than matte finish · Medium rather than full coverage · No long-wear claim · Does not claim not settling into lines · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Not marketed for oily skin
Retailer shade note: medium with golden undertones
Matches: Claims a blurring effect· Both claim a lightweight feel
Differences: Slightly cooler undertone· Natural rather than matte finish· Medium rather than full coverage
Score details
Shade match
76
Finish & visual result
55
Wear & performance
68
Skin suitability
60
Close colour · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 16% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly cooler 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: medium fair, cool-neutral undertones
Matches: Claims a blurring effect· Both claim a lightweight feel
Differences: Slightly cooler undertone· Natural rather than matte finish· Medium rather than full coverage
Score details
Shade match
73
Finish & visual result
55
Wear & performance
68
Skin suitability
60
Close colour · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 16% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly cooler 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: medium fair, cool-neutral undertones
Matches: Claims a blurring effect· Both claim a lightweight feel
Differences: Slightly cooler undertone· Natural rather than matte finish· Medium rather than full coverage
Score details
Shade match
72
Finish & visual result
55
Wear & performance
68
Skin suitability
60
Close colour · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 16% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly cooler 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: medium fair, cool-neutral undertones
Matches: Very close colour· Claims a skin-like finish
Differences: Olive rather than warm undertone· Radiant rather than matte finish· Medium rather than full coverage
Score details
Shade match
85
Finish & visual result
43
Wear & performance
40
Skin suitability
60
Very close colour · Radiant · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 5% ingredient overlap
Differences: Olive rather than warm undertone · Radiant rather than matte finish · Medium rather than full coverage · No long-wear claim · Does not claim not settling into lines · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Not marketed for oily skin
Retailer shade note: medium with subtle olive undertones
Differences: Olive rather than warm undertone· Radiant rather than matte finish· Medium rather than full coverage
Score details
Shade match
77
Finish & visual result
43
Wear & performance
40
Skin suitability
60
Close colour · Radiant · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 5% ingredient overlap
Differences: Olive rather than warm undertone · Radiant rather than matte finish · Medium rather than full coverage · No long-wear claim · Does not claim not settling into lines · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Not marketed for oily skin
Retailer shade note: medium tan with olive undertones
Differences: Slightly deeper· Neutral rather than warm undertone· Radiant rather than matte finish
Score details
Shade match
75
Finish & visual result
43
Wear & performance
40
Skin suitability
60
Close colour · Radiant · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 5% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly deeper · Neutral rather than warm undertone · Radiant rather than matte finish · Medium rather than full coverage · No long-wear claim · Does not claim not settling into lines · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Not marketed for oily skin
Retailer shade note: medium with neutral undertones
The closest shade to e.l.f. Cosmetics 16HR Camo Concealer Medium 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
IT Cosmetics Bye Bye Under Eye Full Coverage Anti-Aging Water-Resistant Concealer in 14.0 Light Tan, against e.l.f. Cosmetics 16HR Camo Concealer in Medium Beige. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shadeMedium BeigeClosest shade match14.0 Light TanHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall93
Colour60%88#dbbea0#e1bc99Very close colourColour difference 2.5 (0 is identical)
Depth15%100LightLightSameDepth difference: 0.2
Retailer descriptionMediumNot statedNo depth word in one descriptionNot compared
Overall match 85/100Shade match 93/100Medium 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 35H medium honey, against e.l.f. Cosmetics 16HR Camo Concealer in Medium Beige. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shadeMedium BeigeClosest overall alternative35H medium honeyHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall87
Colour60%79#dbbea0#e8bf9dClose colourColour difference 3.8 (0 is identical)
Depth15%97LightLightSameDepth difference: 2.0
Retailer descriptionMediumMediumBoth described as mediumThe 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 88/100Shade match 87/100Medium 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 $28 more
