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 full coverage· Both claim a blurring effect· Claims not settling into lines
Differences: Slightly lighter· Olive rather than neutral undertone· Matte rather than natural finish
Score details
Shade match
82
Finish & visual result
81
Wear & performance
47
Skin suitability
60
Close colour · Matte · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 15% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly lighter · Olive rather than neutral 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, golden or olive undertones
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
$31Ulta Beauty(product price)$7 less (18%)4.3 (1,273)
Matches: Same neutral undertone· Claims not settling into lines· Both claim a lightweight feel
Differences: Luminous rather than natural finish· Buildable rather than full coverage· No blurring effect claimed
Score details
Shade match
86
Finish & visual result
52
Wear & performance
61
Skin suitability
50
Close colour · Luminous · Buildable coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 5% ingredient overlap
Differences: Luminous rather than natural finish · Buildable rather than full coverage · No blurring effect claimed · Does not claim transfer resistance
Retailer shade note: for deep neutral skin with peach undertones
Matches: Same neutral undertone· Same full coverage
Differences: Matte rather than natural finish· No blurring effect claimed· Does not claim transfer resistance
Score details
Shade match
80
Finish & visual result
70
Wear & performance
54
Skin suitability
50
Slight colour difference · Matte · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 19% ingredient overlap
Differences: Matte rather than natural finish · No blurring effect claimed · Does not claim transfer resistance · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Contains drying alcohol
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
Maybelline Instant Age Rewind Eraser Dark Circle Treatment Concealer in 190, 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 match190How they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall90
Colour60%83#522913#45220bClose colourColour difference 3.2 (0 is identical)
Finish & visual result25% of overall · 2 of 4 compared51
Finish35%56NaturalRadiantSome differenceRadiant finish rather than natural
Coverage30%—not comparableFullNot listedNot comparedCoverage not listed for one product
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 compared40
Longevity30%4024-hour wearNot listedSome differenceOnly your product claims long wear; the match does not list it
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 overall0
Skin type100%0Normal, dry, oilySensitiveMarketed for different skin types
Overall match 68/100Shade 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.
Milk Makeup Future Fluid Longwear Hydrating Concealer in 27W, 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 alternative27WHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall87
Colour60%94#522913#532a18Very close colourColour difference 1.6 (0 is identical)
Coverage30%80FullBuildableCloseBuildable 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%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 overall50
Skin type100%50Normal, dry, oilyNot publishedSkin-type suitability not published for one product
Overall match 78/100Shade 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.
Ulta Beauty
Sephora$2 less (5%)
View at Walgreens
