Essential Skin Nuder Long-Lasting Hydrating Compact Cushion Foundation 34W Hazelnut dupes and alternatives Jung Saem Mool
4.6 (18)·Tan · Warm 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.
The closest shade to Jung Saem Mool Essential Skin Nuder Long-Lasting Hydrating Compact Cushion Foundation 34W Hazelnut (Tan · Warm 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
Anastasia Beverly Hills Impeccable Blurring Second-Skin Matte Foundation in 4.5W, against Jung Saem Mool Essential Skin Nuder Long-Lasting Hydrating Compact Cushion Foundation in 34W Hazelnut. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shade34W HazelnutClosest shade match4.5WHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall98
Colour60%97#ab7d5a#aa7b5aLooks identicalColour difference 1.0 (0 is identical)
Depth15%99TanTanSameDepth difference: 0.8
Retailer descriptionNot statedTanNo depth word in one descriptionNot compared
Finish35%56NaturalMatteSome differenceMatte finish rather than natural
Coverage30%60MediumFullSome differenceFull coverage rather than medium
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 compared68
Longevity30%70Long-wearing12-hour wearSome differenceThe match claims 12-hour wear; your product says long-wearing without hours
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%0DryNormal, combination, oilyMarketed for different skin types
Overall match 77/100Shade match 98/100High 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.
Haus Labs Triclone Skin Tech Medium Coverage Foundation in 340 Medium, against Jung Saem Mool Essential Skin Nuder Long-Lasting Hydrating Compact Cushion Foundation in 34W Hazelnut. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shade34W HazelnutClosest overall alternative340 MediumHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall91
Colour60%86#ab7d5a#b78059Very close colourColour difference 2.9 (0 is identical)
Depth15%95TanTanSameDepth difference: 3.0
Retailer descriptionNot statedNot statedNo depth word in one descriptionNot compared
Finish & visual result25% of overall · 3 of 4 compared89
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%40Not listedClaimedSome differenceThe match claims a blurring or smoothing effect; your product does not list it
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 overall73
Skin type100%73DryNormal, dry, sensitiveBoth marketed for dry skin
Overall match 91/100Shade match 91/100Medium 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.
34 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.
SephoraCosts $7 more
Walmart
