Beyond Matte Liquid Foundation M12 dupes and alternatives Jane Iredale
4.2 (1,679)·Medium tan · 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: Very close colour· Same full coverage· Both claim long-wearing
Differences: Neutral rather than warm undertone· Natural rather than matte finish· No blurring effect claimed
Score details
Shade match
83
Finish & visual result
70
Wear & performance
80
Skin suitability
84
Very close colour · Natural · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 8% ingredient overlap
Differences: Neutral rather than warm undertone · Natural rather than matte finish · No blurring effect claimed · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Contains listed fragrance
The closest shade to Jane Iredale Beyond Matte Liquid Foundation M12 (Medium tan · 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
Maybelline Instant Age Rewind Eraser Treatment Foundation in 330, against Jane Iredale Beyond Matte Liquid Foundation in M12. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shadeM12Closest shade match330How they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall93
Colour60%95#c88149#c7854dVery close colourColour difference 1.5 (0 is identical)
Finish & visual result25% of overall · 3 of 4 compared73
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%100ClaimedClaimedSameBoth products claim a blurring or smoothing effect
Wear & performance15% of overall · 3 of 5 compared54
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%40Not listedClaimedSome differenceThe match claims not settling into pores or fine lines; your product 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 overall0
Skin type100%0Combination, normal, oilySensitiveMarketed for different skin types
Overall match 77/100Shade match 93/100Medium 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.
Bobbi Brown Weightless Skin Oil-Controlling Foundation SPF 15 in Golden (W-074), against Jane Iredale Beyond Matte Liquid Foundation in M12. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shadeM12Closest overall alternativeGolden (W-074)How they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall92
Colour60%93#c88149#c1824cVery close colourColour difference 1.9 (0 is identical)
Finish & visual result25% of overall · 3 of 4 compared81
Finish35%100MatteMatteSameSame matte finish
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%40ClaimedNot listedSome differenceOnly your product claims a blurring or smoothing effect; the match does not list it
Wear & performance15% of overall · 4 of 5 compared72
Longevity30%100Long-wearingLong-wearingSameBoth products claim long wear
Transfer resistance20%40Not listedClaimedSome differenceThe match claims transfer resistance; your product does not list it
Settling20%40Not listedClaimedSome differenceThe match claims not settling into pores or fine lines; your product 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 overall100
Skin type100%100Combination, normal, oilyNormal, combination, oilyBoth marketed for combination/normal/oily skin
Overall match 87/100Shade match 92/100Medium 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.
Walmart
SephoraCosts $4 more
Target
