Essential Skin Nuder Long-Lasting Hydrating Compact Cushion Foundation 37N Golden Tan dupes and alternatives Jung Saem Mool
4.6 (18)·Tan · Neutral · neutral golden 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 37N Golden Tan (Tan · Neutral · neutral golden 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
Tower 28 Beauty Swipe Serum Non-Acnegenic Foundation in 13P Oceanside, against Jung Saem Mool Essential Skin Nuder Long-Lasting Hydrating Compact Cushion Foundation in 37N Golden Tan. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shade37N Golden TanClosest shade match13P OceansideHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall95
Colour60%98#ae815f#af8360Looks identicalColour difference 0.8 (0 is identical)
Depth15%99TanTanSameDepth difference: 0.9
Retailer descriptionTanTanBoth described as tanThe retailers describe the same depth
Finish & visual result25% of overall · 2 of 4 compared76
Finish35%56NaturalRadiantSome differenceRadiant finish rather than natural
Coverage30%100MediumMediumSameSame medium coverage
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 · 2 of 5 compared80
Longevity30%70Long-wearing16-hour wearSome differenceThe match claims 16-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%100ClaimedClaimedSameBoth products claim a comfortable, lightweight feel
Skin suitability5% of overall0
Skin type100%0DrySensitiveMarketed for different skin types
Overall match 83/100Shade 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.
Hourglass Veil Hydrating Skin Tint Foundation in 13, against Jung Saem Mool Essential Skin Nuder Long-Lasting Hydrating Compact Cushion Foundation in 37N Golden Tan. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shade37N Golden TanClosest overall alternative13How they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall91
Colour60%92#ae815f#b5825bVery close colourColour difference 2.0 (0 is identical)
Depth15%98TanMedium tanCloseDepth difference: 1.4
Retailer descriptionTanMedium tanSome differenceRetailer descriptions one depth band apart
Finish & visual result25% of overall · 2 of 4 compared58
Finish35%56NaturalRadiantSome differenceRadiant finish rather than natural
Coverage30%60MediumLightSome differenceLight coverage rather than medium
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 · 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, combinationBoth marketed for dry skin
Overall match 83/100Shade 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.
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.
SephoraCosts $17 more
