16HR Camo Concealer Rich Cocoa dupes and alternatives e.l.f. Cosmetics
4.2 (5,664)·Deep · Neutral 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 neutral undertone· Same matte finish· Same full coverage
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour· Slightly deeper· Does not claim not settling into lines
Score details
Shade match
64
Finish & visual result
100
Wear & performance
54
Skin suitability
50
Slight colour difference · Matte · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 32% ingredient overlap
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour · Slightly deeper · Does not claim not settling into lines · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Contains drying alcohol
Matches: Same full coverage· Both claim not settling into lines
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour· Slightly lighter· Slightly warmer 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 · Slightly warmer undertone · Natural rather than matte finish · Does not claim a lightweight feel
Matches: Same neutral undertone· Claims a skin-like finish· Both claim 16-hour wear
Differences: Radiant rather than matte finish· Medium-full rather than full coverage· Does not claim not settling into lines
Score details
Shade match
79
Finish & visual result
43
Wear & performance
82
Skin suitability
30
Close colour · Radiant · Medium-full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 7% ingredient overlap
Differences: Radiant rather than matte finish · Medium-full rather than full coverage · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for oily/combination skin · Contains listed fragrance
Retailer shade note: deepest with neutral warm undertones
Matches: Same full coverage· Both claim not settling into lines· Both claim a lightweight feel
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour· Slightly lighter· Slightly cooler undertone
Score details
Shade match
60
Finish & visual result
76
Wear & performance
86
Skin suitability
60
Slight colour difference · Natural · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 35% ingredient overlap
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour · Slightly lighter · Slightly cooler undertone · Natural rather than matte finish · Not marketed for oily skin
Retailer shade note: rich tan with rosy undertones
Matches: Same neutral undertone· Same matte finish· Same full coverage
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour· Slightly lighter· Described as deep, yours as rich deep
Score details
Shade match
40
Finish & visual result
100
Wear & performance
72
Skin suitability
90
Slight colour difference · Matte · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 24% ingredient overlap
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour · Slightly lighter · Described as deep, yours as rich deep · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Contains drying alcohol
Retailer shade note: for deep skin w/ neutral undertones
Low confidence· Digital matchRetailer descriptions disagree: described as deep, yours as rich deep
Matches: Same matte finish· Same full coverage· Claims a blurring effect
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour· Slightly lighter· Described as deep tan, yours as rich deep
Score details
Shade match
40
Finish & visual result
89
Wear & performance
86
Skin suitability
100
Slight colour difference · Matte · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 39% ingredient overlap
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour · Slightly lighter · Described as deep tan, yours as rich deep · Slightly warmer undertone · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Contains listed fragrance
Retailer shade note: tan to deep skin with very warm, rosy undertones
Low confidence· Digital matchRetailer descriptions disagree: described as deep tan, yours as rich deep
Matches: Same matte finish· Same full coverage· Claims a blurring effect
Differences: Slightly deeper· Described as deep, yours as rich deep· Slightly warmer undertone
Score details
Shade match
40
Finish & visual result
89
Wear & performance
86
Skin suitability
100
Close colour · Matte · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 39% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly deeper · Described as deep, yours as rich deep · Slightly warmer undertone · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Contains listed fragrance
Retailer shade note: deep skin with warm, peach undertones
Low confidence· Digital matchRetailer descriptions disagree: described as deep, yours as rich deep
Matches: Same matte finish· Same full coverage· Claims a blurring effect
Differences: Described as deep, yours as rich deep· Olive rather than neutral undertone· Does not claim a lightweight feel
Score details
Shade match
40
Finish & visual result
89
Wear & performance
86
Skin suitability
100
Close colour · Matte · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 39% ingredient overlap
Differences: Described as deep, yours as rich deep · Olive rather than neutral undertone · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Contains listed fragrance
Retailer shade note: deep skin with very warm, golden or olive undertones
Low confidence· Digital matchRetailer descriptions disagree: described as deep, yours as rich deep
Matches: Same full coverage· Claims a blurring effect· Claims transfer resistance
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour· Slightly lighter· Slightly warmer undertone
Score details
Shade match
59
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 · Slightly lighter · Slightly warmer undertone · Natural rather than matte finish · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for combination skin
Retailer shade note: extra deep with warm golden undertones
Matches: Claims a skin-like finish· Claims a blurring effect· Both claim a lightweight feel
Differences: Slightly deeper· Olive rather than neutral undertone· Radiant rather than matte finish
Score details
Shade match
72
Finish & visual result
36
Wear & performance
68
Skin suitability
50
Slight colour difference · Radiant · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 4% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly deeper · Olive rather than neutral undertone · Radiant rather than matte finish · Medium rather than full coverage · Does not claim not settling into lines
Retailer shade note: very deep with an olive undertone
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour · Slightly deeper · Slightly cooler undertone · Luminous rather than matte finish · Buildable rather than full coverage
Retailer shade note: for very deep cool skin with a red hue
Matches: Same neutral undertone· Claims a skin-like finish
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour· Slightly deeper· Radiant rather than matte finish
Score details
Shade match
72
Finish & visual result
43
Wear & performance
40
Skin suitability
60
Slight colour difference · Radiant · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 5% ingredient overlap
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour · Slightly deeper · 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: rich deep with neutral undertones
The closest shade to e.l.f. Cosmetics 16HR Camo Concealer Rich Cocoa (Deep · Neutral 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
Estée Lauder Double Wear Stay-in-Place 24-Hour Concealer in 6C, against e.l.f. Cosmetics 16HR Camo Concealer in Rich Cocoa. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shadeRich CocoaClosest shade match6CHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall90
Colour60%84#945d48#94573bClose colourColour difference 3.1 (0 is identical)
Depth15%96DeepDeepSameDepth difference: 2.4
Retailer descriptionRich deepVery deepSome differenceRetailer descriptions one depth band apart
Finish & visual result25% of overall · 3 of 4 compared70
Finish35%56MatteNaturalSome differenceNatural finish rather than matte
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 compared58
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%40ClaimedNot listedSome differenceOnly your product claims not settling into pores or fine lines; the match does not list it
Colour stability15%—not comparableNot listedNot listedNot claimed by eitherNeither product lists colour stability (no oxidation)
Comfort15%100ClaimedClaimedSameBoth products claim a comfortable, lightweight feel
Skin suitability5% of overall60
Skin type100%60Oily, combination, normalNormal, dry, oilyBoth marketed for oily/normal skin
Overall match 78/100Shade match 90/100Medium 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.
Fenty Beauty Pro Filt'r Instant Retouch Longwear Liquid Concealer in 490, against e.l.f. Cosmetics 16HR Camo Concealer in Rich Cocoa. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shadeRich CocoaClosest overall alternative490How they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall87
Colour60%79#945d48#925c3dClose colourColour difference 3.8 (0 is identical)
Depth15%98DeepDeepSameDepth difference: 1.0
Retailer descriptionRich deepVery deepSome differenceRetailer descriptions one depth band apart
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 $22 more
