Pro Filt'r Soft Matte Longwear Foundation 230 dupes and alternatives Fenty Beauty
4.4 (23,672)·Light medium · Neutral undertone
Closest shade match is the equivalent shade, scored on colour, depth and undertone only. Closest overall alternative is the most similar foundation 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 foundation 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 foundation on shade, finish, wear and skin suitability together. Each row leads with its overall match; the shade match is beneath it.
Matches: Near-identical swatch colour· Both claim long-wearing· Claims a lightweight feel
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone· Natural rather than matte finish· Medium rather than full coverage
Score details
Shade match
89
Finish & visual result
67
Wear & performance
68
Skin suitability
0
Looks identical · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 20% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone · Natural rather than matte finish · Medium rather than full coverage · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for normal/combination/oily skin
The closest shade to Fenty Beauty Pro Filt'r Soft Matte Longwear Foundation 230 (Light medium · Neutral undertone) in each concealer range, compared on measured colour, depth and undertone. Price never changes the order.
Concealer shade colours are sampled from retailer swatch images, so check the shade on the retailer page before buying.
Why the closest shade match works
Jung Saem Mool Essential Skin Nuder Long-Lasting Hydrating Compact Cushion Foundation in 28N Camel, against Fenty Beauty Pro Filt'r Soft Matte Longwear Foundation in 230. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shade230Closest shade match28N CamelHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall97
Colour60%95#dfae8d#d9ad8fLooks identicalColour difference 1.4 (0 is identical)
Finish & visual result25% of overall · 2 of 4 compared67
Finish35%56MatteNaturalSome differenceNatural finish rather than matte
Coverage30%80FullMediumCloseMedium coverage rather than full (buildable: one step of tolerance)
Skin-like finish20%—not comparableNot listedNot listedNot claimed by eitherNeither product lists a skin-like finish
Blurring15%—not comparableNot listedNot listedNot claimed by eitherNeither product lists a blurring or smoothing effect
Wear & performance15% of overall · 3 of 5 compared68
Longevity30%100Long-wearingLong-wearingSameBoth products claim long wear
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%40Not listedClaimedSome differenceThe match claims a comfortable, lightweight feel; your product does not list it
Skin suitability5% of overall0
Skin type100%0Normal, combination, oilyDryMarketed for different skin types
Overall match 80/100Shade match 97/100Medium 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.
NARS Natural Radiant Longwear Foundation in Lanai, against Fenty Beauty Pro Filt'r Soft Matte Longwear Foundation in 230. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shade230Closest overall alternativeLanaiHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall96
Colour60%94#dfae8d#e7b391Very close colourColour difference 1.6 (0 is identical)
Finish & visual result25% of overall · 2 of 4 compared76
Finish35%56MatteNaturalSome differenceNatural finish rather than matte
Coverage30%100FullFullSameSame full coverage
Skin-like finish20%—not comparableNot listedNot listedNot claimed by eitherNeither product lists a skin-like finish
Blurring15%—not comparableNot listedNot listedNot claimed by eitherNeither product lists a blurring or smoothing effect
Wear & performance15% of overall · 4 of 5 compared51
Longevity30%70Long-wearing16-hour wearSome differenceThe match claims 16-hour wear; your product says long-wearing without hours
Transfer resistance20%40Not listedClaimedSome differenceThe match claims transfer resistance; your product does not list it
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%40Not listedClaimedSome differenceThe match claims a comfortable, lightweight feel; your product does not list it
Skin suitability5% of overall60
Skin type100%60Normal, combination, oilyNormal, dry, combinationBoth marketed for normal/combination skin
Overall match 82/100Shade match 96/100Medium 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.
31 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 $13 more
