16HR Camo Concealer Tan Sand dupes and alternatives e.l.f. Cosmetics
4.2 (5,664)·Deep tan · Olive 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%).
No match is close enough in colour to recommend as an overall alternative (shade match under 70).
More matches
Show
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 matte finish· Same full coverage· Claims a blurring effect
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour· Described as deep, yours as tan· Slightly warmer undertone
Score details
Shade match
31
Finish & visual result
89
Wear & performance
86
Skin suitability
100
Visibly different colour · Matte · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 39% ingredient overlap
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour · Described as deep, yours as tan · 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 tan
Matches: Same matte finish· Same full coverage· Claims a blurring effect
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour· Slightly lighter· Described as deep, yours as tan
Score details
Shade match
25
Finish & visual result
89
Wear & performance
86
Skin suitability
100
Visibly different colour · Matte · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 39% ingredient overlap
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour · Slightly lighter · Described as deep, yours as tan · Slightly warmer undertone · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Contains listed fragrance
Retailer shade note: deep skin with warm, golden undertones
Low confidence· Digital matchRetailer descriptions disagree: described as deep, yours as tan
Matches: Same matte finish· Same full coverage· Claims a blurring effect
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour· Slightly lighter· Described as deep, yours as tan
Score details
Shade match
24
Finish & visual result
89
Wear & performance
86
Skin suitability
100
Visibly different colour · Matte · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 39% ingredient overlap
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour · Slightly lighter · Described as deep, yours as tan · 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 tan
Matches: Same full coverage· Both claim not settling into lines
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour· Slightly deeper· Neutral rather than olive undertone
Score details
Shade match
34
Finish & visual result
76
Wear & performance
72
Skin suitability
84
Visibly different colour · Natural · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 4% ingredient overlap
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour · Slightly deeper · Neutral rather than olive undertone · Natural rather than matte finish · Does not claim a lightweight feel
Matches: Same matte finish· Same full coverage· Claims a blurring effect
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour· Slightly lighter· Described as deep, yours as tan
Score details
Shade match
23
Finish & visual result
89
Wear & performance
86
Skin suitability
100
Visibly different colour · Matte · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 39% ingredient overlap
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour · Slightly lighter · Described as deep, yours as tan · Slightly cooler undertone · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Contains listed fragrance
Retailer shade note: deep skin with a balance of warm & cool undertones
Low confidence· Digital matchRetailer descriptions disagree: described as deep, yours as tan
Matches: Same full coverage· Both claim not settling into lines· Both claim a lightweight feel
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour· Described as deep, yours as tan· Neutral rather than olive undertone
Score details
Shade match
32
Finish & visual result
76
Wear & performance
86
Skin suitability
60
Visibly different colour · Natural · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 35% ingredient overlap
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour · Described as deep, yours as tan · Neutral rather than olive undertone · Natural rather than matte finish · Not marketed for oily skin
Retailer shade note: deep with neutral undertones
Low confidence· Digital matchRetailer descriptions disagree: described as deep, yours as tan
Matches: Same full coverage· Both claim not settling into lines· Both claim a lightweight feel
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour· Described as rich deep, yours as tan· Neutral rather than olive undertone
Score details
Shade match
32
Finish & visual result
76
Wear & performance
86
Skin suitability
60
Visibly different colour · Natural · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 35% ingredient overlap
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour · Described as rich deep, yours as tan · Neutral rather than olive undertone · Natural rather than matte finish · Not marketed for oily skin
Retailer shade note: rich tan with neutral undertones
Low confidence· Digital matchRetailer descriptions disagree: described as rich deep, yours as tan
Matches: Same full coverage· Both claim not settling into lines· Both claim a lightweight feel
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour· Slightly deeper· Described as deep, yours as tan
Score details
Shade match
30
Finish & visual result
76
Wear & performance
86
Skin suitability
60
Visibly different colour · Natural · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 35% ingredient overlap
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour · Slightly deeper · Described as deep, yours as tan · Neutral rather than olive undertone · Natural rather than matte finish · Not marketed for oily skin
Retailer shade note: deep with neutral to golden undertones
Low confidence· Digital matchRetailer descriptions disagree: described as deep, yours as tan
Matches: Same matte finish· Same full coverage· Claims a blurring effect
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour· Slightly deeper· Described as deep, yours as tan
Score details
Shade match
29
Finish & visual result
89
Wear & performance
61
Skin suitability
60
Visibly different colour · Matte · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 7% ingredient overlap
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour · Slightly deeper · Described as deep, yours as tan · Neutral rather than olive undertone · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Not marketed for combination skin
Retailer shade note: Deep with neutral undertones
Low confidence· Digital matchRetailer descriptions disagree: described as deep, yours as tan
Matches: Same full coverage· Both claim not settling into lines
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour· Slightly lighter· Slightly warmer undertone
Score details
Shade match
29
Finish & visual result
76
Wear & performance
72
Skin suitability
84
Visibly different colour · 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 matte finish· Same full coverage· Claims a blurring effect
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour· Slightly deeper· Described as very deep, yours as tan
Score details
Shade match
17
Finish & visual result
89
Wear & performance
86
Skin suitability
100
Visibly different colour · Matte · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 39% ingredient overlap
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour · Slightly deeper · Described as very deep, yours as tan · Slightly cooler undertone · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Contains listed fragrance
Retailer shade note: very deep skin with a balance of warm & cool undertones
Low confidence· Digital matchRetailer descriptions disagree: described as very deep, yours as tan
Matches: Same matte finish· Same full coverage· Claims a blurring effect
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour· Slightly deeper· Described as deep, yours as tan
Score details
Shade match
25
Finish & visual result
89
Wear & performance
61
Skin suitability
60
Visibly different colour · Matte · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 7% ingredient overlap
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour · Slightly deeper · Described as deep, yours as tan · Slightly warmer undertone · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Not marketed for combination skin
Retailer shade note: Deep with neutral warm undertones
Low confidence· Digital matchRetailer descriptions disagree: described as deep, yours as tan
Matches: Same full coverage· Both claim not settling into lines· Both claim a lightweight feel
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour· Slightly lighter· Described as rich deep, yours as tan
Score details
Shade match
29
Finish & visual result
65
Wear & performance
86
Skin suitability
60
Visibly different colour · Satin · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 41% ingredient overlap
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour · Slightly lighter · Described as rich deep, yours as tan · Neutral rather than olive undertone · Satin rather than matte finish · Not marketed for oily skin
Retailer shade note: rich with neutral undertones
Low confidence· Digital matchRetailer descriptions disagree: described as rich deep, yours as tan
The closest shade to e.l.f. Cosmetics 16HR Camo Concealer Tan Sand (Deep tan · Olive 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
Tarte Shape Tape Full Coverage Matte Concealer in 57G rich golden, against e.l.f. Cosmetics 16HR Camo Concealer in Tan Sand. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shadeTan SandClosest shade match57G rich goldenHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall36
Colour60%0#6e6e6e#874f35Visibly different colourColour difference 21.6 (0 is identical)
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 60/100Shade match 36/100Medium 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.
33 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 $24 more
