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 natural finish· Same full coverage· Claims not settling into lines
Differences: Slightly lighter· Slightly cooler undertone· No blurring effect claimed
Score details
Shade match
75
Finish & visual result
89
Wear & performance
61
Skin suitability
60
Close colour · Natural · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 23% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly lighter · Slightly cooler undertone · No blurring effect claimed · Does not claim transfer resistance · Not marketed for oily skin
Matches: Same neutral undertone· Same natural finish· Same full coverage
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour· Slightly lighter· No blurring effect claimed
Score details
Shade match
69
Finish & visual result
89
Wear & performance
61
Skin suitability
60
Slight colour difference · Natural · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 23% ingredient overlap
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour · Slightly lighter · No blurring effect claimed · Does not claim transfer resistance · Not marketed for oily skin
Retailer shade note: deepest with neutral undertones
Matches: Same full coverage· Both claim a blurring effect· Claims not settling into lines
Differences: Slightly cooler undertone· Matte rather than natural finish· Does not claim transfer resistance
Score details
Shade match
69
Finish & visual result
81
Wear & performance
47
Skin suitability
60
Slight colour difference · Matte · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 15% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly cooler undertone · Matte rather than natural finish · Does not claim transfer resistance · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Not marketed for dry skin · Contains listed fragrance
Retailer shade note: very deep skin with a balance of warm & cool undertones
Matches: Same full coverage· Both claim a blurring effect· Claims not settling into lines
Differences: Slightly lighter· Slightly warmer undertone· Matte rather than natural finish
Score details
Shade match
69
Finish & visual result
81
Wear & performance
47
Skin suitability
60
Slight colour difference · Matte · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 15% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly lighter · Slightly warmer undertone · Matte rather than natural finish · Does not claim transfer resistance · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Not marketed for dry skin · Contains listed fragrance
Retailer shade note: very deep skin with very warm, rosy undertones
The closest shade to Estée Lauder Double Wear Stay-in-Place 24-Hour Concealer 8N (Rich 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
Tarte Shape Tape Full Coverage Matte Concealer in 61G espresso golden, against Estée Lauder Double Wear Stay-in-Place 24-Hour Concealer in 8N. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shade8NClosest shade match61G espresso goldenHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall82
Colour60%85#522913#57321fClose colourColour difference 3.0 (0 is identical)
Finish & visual result25% of overall · 3 of 4 compared81
Finish35%56NaturalMatteSome differenceMatte finish rather than natural
Coverage30%100FullFullSameSame full coverage
Skin-like finish20%—not comparableNot listedNot listedNot claimed by eitherNeither product lists a skin-like finish
Blurring15%100ClaimedClaimedSameBoth products claim a blurring or smoothing effect
Wear & performance15% of overall · 4 of 5 compared47
Longevity30%6024-hour wear16-hour wearSome difference16-hour wear claimed against 24-hour wear
Transfer resistance20%40ClaimedNot listedSome differenceOnly your product claims transfer resistance; the match does not list it
Settling20%40Not listedClaimedSome differenceThe match claims not settling into pores or fine lines; your product 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 overall60
Skin type100%60Normal, dry, oilyNormal, combination, oilyBoth marketed for normal/oily skin
Overall match 75/100Shade match 82/100Medium 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.
Too Faced Born This Way Super Coverage Multi-Use Concealer in Ganache, against Estée Lauder Double Wear Stay-in-Place 24-Hour Concealer in 8N. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shade8NClosest overall alternativeGanacheHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall77
Colour60%63#522913#3f1d11Slight colour differenceColour difference 5.9 (0 is identical)
Finish & visual result25% of overall · 3 of 4 compared89
Finish35%100NaturalNaturalSameSame natural finish
Coverage30%100FullFullSameSame full coverage
Skin-like finish20%—not comparableNot listedNot listedNot claimed by eitherNeither product lists a skin-like finish
Blurring15%40ClaimedNot listedSome differenceOnly your product claims a blurring or smoothing effect; the match does not list it
Wear & performance15% of overall · 4 of 5 compared61
Longevity30%7024-hour wearLong-wearingSome differenceYour product claims 24-hour wear; the match says long-wearing without hours
Transfer resistance20%40ClaimedNot listedSome differenceOnly your product claims transfer resistance; the match does not list it
Settling20%40Not listedClaimedSome differenceThe match claims not settling into pores or fine lines; your product 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%60Normal, dry, oilyNormal, dry, combinationBoth marketed for normal/dry skin
Overall match 77/100Shade match 77/100High 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.
Sephora$2 less (5%)
View at Walgreens
