Illusion Luminous Glow Foundation SPF 30 6 dupes and alternatives Hourglass
4.7 (820)·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: Very close colour· Same medium coverage· Claims a lightweight feel
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone· Natural rather than radiant finish· Does not claim transfer resistance
Score details
Shade match
88
Finish & visual result
76
Wear & performance
51
Skin suitability
33
Very close colour · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 10% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone · Natural rather than radiant finish · Does not claim transfer resistance · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for normal/combination skin · Contains listed fragrance · No SPF
The closest shade to Hourglass Illusion Luminous Glow Foundation SPF 30 6 (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
Fenty Beauty Pro Filt'r Soft Matte Longwear Foundation in 210, against Hourglass Illusion Luminous Glow Foundation SPF 30 in 6. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shade6Closest shade match210How they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall95
Colour60%98#e4ae86#e1ad85Looks identicalColour difference 0.7 (0 is identical)
Finish & visual result25% of overall · 2 of 4 compared43
Finish35%12RadiantMatteDifferentMatte finish rather than radiant
Coverage30%80MediumFullCloseFull coverage rather than medium (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 compared70
Longevity30%7012-hour wearLong-wearingSome differenceYour product claims 12-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%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%—not comparableNot listedNot listedNot claimed by eitherNeither product lists a comfortable, lightweight feel
Skin suitability5% of overall60
Skin type100%60Normal, dry, combinationNormal, combination, oilyBoth marketed for normal/combination skin
Overall match 77/100Shade match 95/100Medium 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.
Fenty Beauty Pro Filt'r Fluid Flex Natural Matte Longwear Foundation in 166N, against Hourglass Illusion Luminous Glow Foundation SPF 30 in 6. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shade6Closest overall alternative166NHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall93
Colour60%94#e4ae86#e0af8cVery close colourColour difference 1.6 (0 is identical)
Finish & visual result25% of overall · 3 of 4 compared68
Finish35%56RadiantNaturalSome differenceNatural finish rather than radiant
Coverage30%100MediumMediumSameSame medium coverage
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 overall73
Longevity30%7012-hour wearLong-wearingSome differenceYour product claims 12-hour wear; the match says long-wearing without hours
Transfer resistance20%100ClaimedClaimedSameBoth products claim transfer resistance
Settling20%100ClaimedClaimedSameBoth products claim not settling into pores or fine lines
Colour stability15%40Not listedClaimedSome differenceThe match claims colour stability (no oxidation); your product does not list it
Comfort15%40Not listedClaimedSome differenceThe match claims a comfortable, lightweight feel; your product does not list it
Skin suitability5% of overall60
Skin type100%60Normal, dry, combinationNormal, combination, oilyBoth marketed for normal/combination skin
Overall match 82/100Shade match 93/100High 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.
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.
Sephora$22 less (37%)
