Stretch Concealer for Dewy Buildable Coverage Light 4 dupes and alternatives Glossier
4.2 (666)·Fair · Cool · pink 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.
The closest shade to Glossier Stretch Concealer for Dewy Buildable Coverage Light 4 (Fair · Cool · 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
NYX Professional Makeup Bare With Me Hydrating Face & Body Concealer Serum in Fair, against Glossier Stretch Concealer for Dewy Buildable Coverage in Light 4. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shadeLight 4Closest shade matchFairHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall82
Colour60%84#f7cba5#ffd2b3Close colourColour difference 3.1 (0 is identical)
Depth15%92FairVery fairCloseDepth difference: 3.8
Retailer descriptionNot statedNot statedNo depth word in one descriptionNot compared
Finish & visual result25% of overall · 3 of 4 compared68
Finish35%56RadiantNaturalSome differenceNatural finish rather than radiant
Coverage30%100BuildableMediumCloseMedium coverage rather than buildable (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 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%50Not publishedNot publishedSkin-type suitability not published for one product
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.
Armani Beauty Luminous Silk Hydrating Face and Under-Eye Concealer in 5.4, against Glossier Stretch Concealer for Dewy Buildable Coverage in Light 4. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shadeLight 4Closest overall alternative5.4How they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall79
Colour60%96#f7cba5#f6cba2Looks identicalColour difference 1.1 (0 is identical)
Depth15%100FairFairSameDepth difference: 0.2
Retailer descriptionNot statedMediumNo depth word in one descriptionNot compared
Coverage30%100BuildableMediumCloseMedium coverage rather than buildable (buildable: one step of tolerance)
Skin-like finish20%40Not listedClaimedSome differenceThe match claims a skin-like finish; your product does not list it
Blurring15%40Not listedClaimedSome differenceThe match claims a blurring or smoothing effect; your product does not list it
Wear & performance15% of overall · 3 of 5 compared82
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%100ClaimedClaimedSameBoth products claim a comfortable, lightweight feel
Skin suitability5% of overall50
Skin type100%50Not publishedNot publishedSkin-type suitability not published for one product
Overall match 78/100Shade match 79/100Medium 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
SephoraCosts $20 more
