Triclone Skin Tech Medium Coverage Foundation 210 Light Medium dupes and alternatives Haus Labs
4.0 (5,671)·Light medium · Warm · peach 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: Same natural finish· Claims a skin-like finish· Both claim long-wearing
Differences: Slightly lighter· Neutral rather than warm undertone· Buildable rather than medium coverage
Score details
Shade match
77
Finish & visual result
79
Wear & performance
100
Skin suitability
56
Colour not compared · Natural · Buildable coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 3% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly lighter · Neutral rather than warm undertone · Buildable rather than medium coverage · No blurring effect claimed · Not marketed for sensitive skin
The closest shade to Haus Labs Triclone Skin Tech Medium Coverage Foundation 210 Light Medium (Light medium · Warm · peach 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
Patrick Ta Major Skin Hydra-Luxe Luminous Skin Perfecting Foundation in 11 Golden, against Haus Labs Triclone Skin Tech Medium Coverage Foundation in 210 Light Medium. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shade210 Light MediumClosest shade match11 GoldenHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall94
Colour60%90#e2ac90#e6aa87Very close colourColour difference 2.3 (0 is identical)
Finish35%56NaturalRadiantSome differenceRadiant finish rather than natural
Coverage30%100MediumMediumSameSame medium coverage
Skin-like finish20%40Not listedClaimedSome differenceThe match claims a skin-like finish; your product does not list it
Blurring15%100ClaimedClaimedSameBoth products claim a blurring or smoothing effect
Wear & performance15% of overall · 2 of 5 compared60
Longevity30%70Long-wearing8-hour wearSome differenceThe match claims 8-hour wear; your product says long-wearing without hours
Transfer resistance20%—not comparableNot listedNot listedNot claimed by eitherNeither product lists transfer resistance
Settling20%—not comparableNot listedNot listedNot claimed by eitherNeither product lists not settling into pores or fine lines
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, sensitiveNormal, dry, combinationBoth marketed for normal/dry skin
Overall match 82/100Shade match 94/100Medium 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 Light Reflecting Foundation in Porto, against Haus Labs Triclone Skin Tech Medium Coverage Foundation in 210 Light Medium. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shade210 Light MediumClosest overall alternativePortoHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall74
Colour60%89#e2ac90#e5b08eVery close colourColour difference 2.4 (0 is identical)
Finish & visual result25% of overall · 3 of 4 compared100
Finish35%100NaturalNaturalSameSame natural finish
Coverage30%100MediumMediumSameSame medium 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 · 2 of 5 compared100
Longevity30%100Long-wearingLong-wearingSameBoth products claim long wear
Transfer resistance20%—not comparableNot listedNot listedNot claimed by eitherNeither product lists transfer resistance
Settling20%—not comparableNot listedNot listedNot claimed by eitherNeither product lists 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 overall60
Skin type100%60Normal, dry, sensitiveNormal, dry, combinationBoth marketed for normal/dry skin
Overall match 84/100Shade match 74/100Medium 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$16 less (31%)
Target
CVS
