Hydrating Camo Concealer Tan Sand dupes and alternatives e.l.f. Cosmetics
4.3 (8,153)·Light · 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%).
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.
Differences: Slightly deeper· Slightly warmer undertone· Radiant rather than satin finish
Score details
Shade match
76
Finish & visual result
70
Wear & performance
40
Skin suitability
100
Close colour · Radiant · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 4% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly deeper · Slightly warmer undertone · Radiant rather than satin finish · Medium rather than full coverage · No long-wear claim · Does not claim not settling into lines · Does not claim a lightweight feel
Retailer shade note: medium tan with warm peach undertones
Matches: Claims a skin-like finish· Both claim long-wearing· Both claim not settling into lines
Differences: Slightly deeper· Described as medium, yours as tan· Slightly warmer undertone
Score details
Shade match
40
Finish & visual result
70
Wear & performance
100
Skin suitability
90
Close colour · Radiant · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 19% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly deeper · Described as medium, yours as tan · Slightly warmer undertone · Radiant rather than satin finish · Medium rather than full coverage
Retailer shade note: medium with neutral peach undertones
Low confidence· Digital matchRetailer descriptions disagree: described as medium, yours as tan
Matches: Very close colour· Claims a skin-like finish· Both claim long-wearing
Differences: Described as medium, yours as tan· Neutral rather than olive undertone· Radiant rather than satin finish
Score details
Shade match
40
Finish & visual result
70
Wear & performance
100
Skin suitability
90
Very close colour · Radiant · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 19% ingredient overlap
Differences: Described as medium, yours as tan · Neutral rather than olive undertone · Radiant rather than satin finish · Medium rather than full coverage
Retailer shade note: medium with neutral beige undertones
Low confidence· Digital matchRetailer descriptions disagree: described as medium, yours as tan
The closest shade to e.l.f. Cosmetics Hydrating Camo Concealer Tan Sand (Light · 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 match works
NYX Professional Makeup Bare With Me Hydrating Face & Body Concealer Serum in Golden, against e.l.f. Cosmetics Hydrating Camo Concealer in Tan Sand. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shadeTan SandClosest matchGoldenHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall85
Colour60%91#f4b786#efb27bVery close colourColour difference 2.1 (0 is identical)
Depth15%96LightLightSameDepth difference: 2.7
Retailer descriptionTanNot statedNo depth word in one descriptionNot compared
Finish & visual result25% of overall · 3 of 4 compared63
Finish35%78SatinNaturalCloseNatural finish rather than satin
Coverage30%60FullMediumSome differenceMedium coverage rather than full
Skin-like finish20%40Not listedClaimedSome differenceThe match claims a skin-like finish; your product does not list it
Blurring15%—not comparableNot listedNot listedNot claimed by eitherNeither product lists a blurring or smoothing effect
Wear & performance15% of overall · 3 of 5 compared72
Longevity30%40Long-wearingNot listedSome differenceOnly your product claims long wear; the match does not list it
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%100ClaimedClaimedSameBoth products claim a comfortable, lightweight feel
Skin suitability5% of overall50
Skin type100%50Dry, combination, normalNot publishedSkin-type suitability not published for one product
Overall match 76/100Shade match 85/100Medium 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.
Ulta Beauty(product price)Costs $4 more
Sephora
View at Walmart
