Aquasurance Compact Foundation Caramel dupes and alternatives J.Cat Beauty
4.2 (324)·Deep tan · 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 neutral undertone· Both claim a blurring effect
Differences: Matte rather than natural finish· Buildable rather than full coverage· Does not claim not settling into lines
Score details
Shade match
95
Finish & visual result
73
Wear & performance
40
Skin suitability
50
Very close colour · Matte · Buildable coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 4% ingredient overlap
Differences: Matte rather than natural finish · Buildable rather than full coverage · Does not claim not settling into lines · Contains listed fragrance · Contains drying alcohol
Retailer shade note: medium to deep skin with neutral undertones
Matches: Near-identical swatch colour· Same natural finish· Claims 24-hour wear
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone· Medium rather than full coverage· No blurring effect claimed
Score details
Shade match
89
Finish & visual result
81
Wear & performance
40
Skin suitability
50
Looks identical · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 7% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone · Medium rather than full coverage · No blurring effect claimed · Does not claim not settling into lines · Contains listed fragrance · Contains drying alcohol
Retailer shade note: deep with warm golden undertones
Matches: Very close colour· Same neutral undertone· Both claim a blurring effect
Differences: Matte rather than natural finish· Buildable rather than full coverage· Does not claim not settling into lines
Score details
Shade match
93
Finish & visual result
73
Wear & performance
40
Skin suitability
50
Very close colour · Matte · Buildable coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 4% ingredient overlap
Differences: Matte rather than natural finish · Buildable rather than full coverage · Does not claim not settling into lines · Contains listed fragrance · Contains drying alcohol
Retailer shade note: medium to deep skin with neutral undertones
Matches: Near-identical swatch colour· Same neutral undertone· Claims long-wearing
Differences: Radiant rather than natural finish· Medium rather than full coverage· No blurring effect claimed
Score details
Shade match
98
Finish & visual result
55
Wear & performance
40
Skin suitability
50
Looks identical · Radiant · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 2% ingredient overlap
Differences: Radiant rather than natural finish · Medium rather than full coverage · No blurring effect claimed · Does not claim not settling into lines · Contains listed fragrance
The closest shade to J.Cat Beauty Aquasurance Compact Foundation Caramel (Deep tan · 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
Laura Mercier Real Flawless Weightless Perfecting Waterproof Foundation in 5N1 Cinnamon, against J.Cat Beauty Aquasurance Compact Foundation in Caramel. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shadeCaramelClosest shade match5N1 CinnamonHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall98
Colour60%97#a86338#aa6137Looks identicalColour difference 1.1 (0 is identical)
Finish & visual result25% of overall · 3 of 4 compared85
Finish35%100NaturalNaturalSameSame natural finish
Coverage30%60FullMediumSome differenceMedium coverage rather than full
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 · 4 of 5 compared55
Longevity30%40Not listed12-hour wearSome differenceThe match claims long wear; your product 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%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 overall50
Skin type100%50Not publishedCombination, dry, normal, oily, sensitiveSkin-type suitability not published for one product
Overall match 86/100Shade match 98/100Medium 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.
J.Cat Beauty Perfextion Long Wearing Foundation in Mocha, against J.Cat Beauty Aquasurance Compact Foundation in Caramel. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shadeCaramelClosest overall alternativeMochaHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall97
Colour60%96#a86338#a36238Looks identicalColour difference 1.2 (0 is identical)
Finish & visual result25% of overall · 3 of 4 compared100
Finish35%100NaturalNaturalSameSame natural finish
Coverage30%100FullFullSameSame full 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 · 4 of 5 compared54
Longevity30%40Not listedLong-wearingSome differenceThe match claims long wear; your product does not list it
Transfer resistance20%40Not listedClaimedSome differenceThe match claims transfer resistance; your product 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%40Not listedClaimedSome differenceThe match claims a comfortable, lightweight feel; your product does not list it
Skin suitability5% of overall50
Skin type100%50Not publishedCombination, dry, normal, oily, sensitiveSkin-type suitability not published for one product
Overall match 89/100Shade 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.
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.