A Really Good Foundation 118M dupes and alternatives KimChi Chic Beauty
4.6 (558)·Tan · Cool 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 cool undertone· Claims a blurring effect
Differences: Natural rather than natural matte finish· Medium rather than full coverage· Does not claim not settling into lines
Score details
Shade match
92
Finish & visual result
72
Wear & performance
68
Skin suitability
75
Very close colour · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 29% ingredient overlap
Differences: Natural rather than natural matte finish · Medium rather than full coverage · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for dry skin
Matches: Near-identical swatch colour· Claims a skin-like finish· Claims a blurring effect
Differences: Neutral rather than cool undertone· Natural rather than natural matte finish· Medium rather than full coverage
Score details
Shade match
88
Finish & visual result
65
Wear & performance
82
Skin suitability
75
Looks identical · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 15% ingredient overlap
Differences: Neutral rather than cool undertone · Natural rather than natural matte finish · Medium rather than full coverage · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for dry skin · Contains drying alcohol
Retailer shade note: medium with neutral undertone
Matches: Very close colour· Claims a blurring effect· Both claim a lightweight feel
Differences: Neutral rather than cool undertone· Natural rather than natural matte finish· Medium rather than full coverage
Score details
Shade match
87
Finish & visual result
72
Wear & performance
68
Skin suitability
75
Very close colour · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 10% ingredient overlap
Differences: Neutral rather than cool undertone · Natural rather than natural matte finish · Medium rather than full coverage · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for oily skin
Matches: Very close colour· Claims a skin-like finish· Claims a blurring effect
Differences: Neutral rather than cool undertone· Natural rather than natural matte finish· Medium rather than full coverage
Score details
Shade match
86
Finish & visual result
65
Wear & performance
82
Skin suitability
75
Very close colour · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 15% ingredient overlap
Differences: Neutral rather than cool undertone · Natural rather than natural matte finish · Medium rather than full coverage · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for dry skin · Contains drying alcohol
Retailer shade note: medium with neutral undertone
Matches: Very close colour· Same full coverage· Claims a skin-like finish
Differences: Neutral rather than cool undertone· Matte rather than natural matte finish· Does not claim not settling into lines
Score details
Shade match
83
Finish & visual result
77
Wear & performance
61
Skin suitability
92
Very close colour · Matte · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 17% ingredient overlap
Differences: Neutral rather than cool undertone · Matte rather than natural matte finish · Does not claim not settling into lines · Contains drying alcohol
Retailer shade note: for medium deep rich neutral skin with a subtle golden hue
Matches: Very close colour· Same full coverage· Both claim long-wearing
Differences: Radiant rather than natural matte finish· Does not claim not settling into lines· Does not claim a lightweight feel
Score details
Shade match
84
Finish & visual result
65
Wear & performance
68
Skin suitability
100
Very close colour · Radiant · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 18% ingredient overlap
Differences: Radiant rather than natural matte finish · Does not claim not settling into lines · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Contains listed fragrance
Matches: Near-identical swatch colour· Same cool undertone· Both claim long-wearing
Differences: Radiant rather than natural matte finish· Light rather than full coverage· Does not claim not settling into lines
Score details
Shade match
97
Finish & visual result
37
Wear & performance
68
Skin suitability
92
Looks identical · Radiant · Light coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 14% ingredient overlap
Differences: Radiant rather than natural matte finish · Light rather than full coverage · Does not claim not settling into lines · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Contains listed fragrance
Retailer shade note: medium light-deep shade, rosy undertone
Matches: Very close colour· Both claim long-wearing· Claims colour stability
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone· Natural rather than natural matte finish· Medium rather than full coverage
Score details
Shade match
77
Finish & visual result
79
Wear & performance
74
Skin suitability
75
Very close colour · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 10% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone · Natural rather than natural matte finish · Medium rather than full coverage · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for oily skin
Matches: Very close colour· Claims a blurring effect· Both claim long-wearing
Differences: Olive rather than cool undertone· Matte rather than natural matte finish· Medium rather than full coverage
Score details
Shade match
80
Finish & visual result
72
Wear & performance
72
Skin suitability
75
Very close colour · Matte · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 13% ingredient overlap
Differences: Olive rather than cool undertone · Matte rather than natural matte finish · Medium rather than full coverage · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for dry skin · Contains drying alcohol
Matches: Very close colour· Claims a blurring effect· Both claim long-wearing
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone· Natural rather than natural matte finish· Medium rather than full coverage
Score details
Shade match
78
Finish & visual result
72
Wear & performance
82
Skin suitability
46
Very close colour · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 9% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone · Natural rather than natural matte finish · Medium rather than full coverage · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for combination/oily skin · Contains drying alcohol
Matches: Very close colour· Claims a blurring effect· Both claim long-wearing
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone· Matte rather than natural matte finish· Medium rather than full coverage
Score details
Shade match
78
Finish & visual result
72
Wear & performance
72
Skin suitability
75
Very close colour · Matte · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 13% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone · Matte rather than natural matte finish · Medium rather than full coverage · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for dry skin · Contains drying alcohol
The closest shade to KimChi Chic Beauty A Really Good Foundation 118M (Tan · Cool 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
Jane Iredale Skintuition SPF 30 Radiance-Boosting Liquid Foundation in 52 Medium Dark, against KimChi Chic Beauty A Really Good Foundation in 118M. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shade118MClosest shade match52 Medium DarkHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall97
Colour60%96#b97e5e#bb7f5bLooks identicalColour difference 1.3 (0 is identical)
Depth15%99TanTanSameDepth difference: 0.6
Retailer descriptionMediumMedium tanSome differenceRetailer descriptions one depth band apart
Overall match 82/100Shade 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.
Makeup By Mario SurrealSkin Luminous Hydrating Foundation in 17N, against KimChi Chic Beauty A Really Good Foundation in 118M. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shade118MClosest overall alternative17NHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall87
Colour60%94#b97e5e#c0805dVery close colourColour difference 1.6 (0 is identical)
Depth15%97TanMedium tanCloseDepth difference: 1.9
Retailer descriptionMediumMediumBoth described as mediumThe retailers describe the same depth
Overall match 82/100Shade match 87/100Medium 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.
Ulta Beauty
SephoraCosts $18 more
