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 skin-like finish
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone· Radiant rather than satin finish· Medium rather than full coverage
Score details
Shade match
81
Finish & visual result
70
Wear & performance
40
Skin suitability
100
Very close colour · Radiant · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 4% ingredient overlap
Differences: 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: Very close colour· Same full coverage· Claims a blurring effect
Differences: Olive rather than neutral undertone· Matte rather than satin finish· Does not claim a lightweight feel
Score details
Shade match
80
Finish & visual result
60
Wear & performance
72
Skin suitability
60
Very close colour · Matte · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 28% ingredient overlap
Differences: Olive rather than neutral undertone · Matte rather than satin finish · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Not marketed for dry skin · Contains listed fragrance
Retailer shade note: medium to tan skin with very warm, golden or olive undertones
Matches: Same neutral undertone· Claims a skin-like finish
Differences: Slightly deeper· Radiant rather than satin finish· Medium rather than full coverage
Score details
Shade match
79
Finish & visual result
70
Wear & performance
40
Skin suitability
100
Close colour · Radiant · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 4% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly deeper · 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 deep with neutral warm undertones
Matches: Same neutral undertone· Claims a skin-like finish
Differences: Slightly deeper· Radiant rather than satin finish· Medium rather than full coverage
Score details
Shade match
79
Finish & visual result
70
Wear & performance
40
Skin suitability
100
Close colour · Radiant · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 4% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly deeper · 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 deep with neutral peach undertones
Differences: Slightly deeper· Olive rather than neutral undertone· Radiant rather than satin finish
Score details
Shade match
77
Finish & visual result
70
Wear & performance
40
Skin suitability
100
Close colour · Radiant · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 4% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly deeper · Olive rather than neutral 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 neutral olive undertones
Matches: Same full coverage· Claims a blurring effect· Both claim not settling into lines
Differences: Slightly deeper· Slightly warmer undertone· Matte rather than satin finish
Score details
Shade match
73
Finish & visual result
60
Wear & performance
72
Skin suitability
60
Close colour · Matte · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 28% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly deeper · Slightly warmer undertone · Matte rather than satin finish · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Not marketed for dry skin · Contains listed fragrance
Retailer shade note: tan skin with warm, golden undertones
Matches: Same full coverage· Claims a blurring effect· Both claim not settling into lines
Differences: Slightly lighter· Slightly warmer undertone· Matte rather than satin finish
Score details
Shade match
72
Finish & visual result
60
Wear & performance
72
Skin suitability
60
Close colour · Matte · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 28% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly lighter · Slightly warmer undertone · Matte rather than satin finish · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Not marketed for dry skin · Contains listed fragrance
Retailer shade note: medium to tan skin with warm, golden undertones
The closest shade to e.l.f. Cosmetics Hydrating Camo Concealer Tan Walnut (Medium light · Neutral · neutral pink 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
Kosas Revealer Super Creamy + Brightening Concealer in Tone 6.2 N, against e.l.f. Cosmetics Hydrating Camo Concealer in Tan Walnut. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shadeTan WalnutClosest shade matchTone 6.2 NHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall86
Colour60%93#dfa57d#e3a985Very close colourColour difference 1.7 (0 is identical)
Finish & visual result25% of overall · 3 of 4 compared70
Finish35%78SatinRadiantCloseRadiant finish rather than satin
Coverage30%80FullMediumCloseMedium coverage rather than full (buildable: one step of tolerance)
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 compared40
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%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%40ClaimedNot listedSome differenceOnly your product claims a comfortable, lightweight feel; the match does not list it
Skin suitability5% of overall100
Skin type100%100Dry, combination, normalNormal, dry, combinationBoth marketed for dry/combination/normal skin
Overall match 76/100Shade match 86/100Medium 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.
IT Cosmetics Bye Bye Under Eye Full Coverage Anti-Aging Water-Resistant Concealer in 32.0 Tan Bronze, against e.l.f. Cosmetics Hydrating Camo Concealer in Tan Walnut. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shadeTan WalnutClosest overall alternative32.0 Tan BronzeHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall84
Colour60%79#dfa57d#d6a488Close colourColour difference 3.7 (0 is identical)
Overall match 85/100Shade match 84/100Medium 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
View at Walmart