Double Take Baked Full Coverage Foundation Sand dupes and alternatives Laura Geller
4.2 (872)·Medium light · Olive 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 matte finish· Same full coverage
Differences: Slightly deeper· Neutral rather than olive undertone· No long-wear claim
Score details
Shade match
85
Finish & visual result
100
Wear & performance
40
Skin suitability
30
Very close colour · Matte · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 11% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly deeper · Neutral rather than olive undertone · No long-wear claim · Does not claim transfer resistance · Does not claim not settling into lines · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Not marketed for normal/sensitive skin
Matches: Very close colour· Both claim a blurring effect· Both claim transfer resistance
Differences: Neutral rather than olive undertone· Natural rather than matte finish· Medium rather than full coverage
Score details
Shade match
85
Finish & visual result
73
Wear & performance
70
Skin suitability
60
Very close colour · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 10% ingredient overlap
Differences: Neutral rather than olive undertone · Natural rather than matte finish · Medium rather than full coverage · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for sensitive skin
Retailer shade note: medium-deep skin with neutral/peachy undertones
Matches: Very close colour· Same full coverage· Claims a skin-like finish
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone· Natural rather than matte finish· No blurring effect claimed
Score details
Shade match
88
Finish & visual result
64
Wear & performance
67
Skin suitability
60
Very close colour · Natural · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 2% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone · Natural rather than matte finish · No blurring effect claimed · Does not claim transfer resistance · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for sensitive skin
Retailer shade note: tan skin with warm neutral undertones
Matches: Very close colour· Same full coverage· Claims a skin-like finish
Differences: Neutral rather than olive undertone· Natural rather than matte finish· No blurring effect claimed
Score details
Shade match
87
Finish & visual result
64
Wear & performance
67
Skin suitability
60
Very close colour · Natural · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 2% ingredient overlap
Differences: Neutral rather than olive undertone · Natural rather than matte finish · No blurring effect claimed · Does not claim transfer resistance · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for sensitive skin
Retailer shade note: tan skin with neutral undertones
Matches: Very close colour· Same full coverage· Claims a skin-like finish
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone· Natural rather than matte finish· No blurring effect claimed
Score details
Shade match
84
Finish & visual result
64
Wear & performance
67
Skin suitability
60
Very close colour · Natural · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 2% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone · Natural rather than matte finish · No blurring effect claimed · Does not claim transfer resistance · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for sensitive skin
Retailer shade note: tan skin with warm golden undertones
Matches: Very close colour· Same matte finish· Both claim transfer resistance
Differences: Slightly cooler undertone· Medium rather than full coverage· No blurring effect claimed
Score details
Shade match
76
Finish & visual result
81
Wear & performance
75
Skin suitability
28
Very close colour · Matte · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 10% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly cooler undertone · Medium rather than full coverage · No blurring effect claimed · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for normal/sensitive skin
Retailer shade note: medium tan with cool rosy-beige undertones
Matches: Very close colour· Claims a skin-like finish· Both claim a blurring effect
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone· Natural rather than matte finish· Medium rather than full coverage
Score details
Shade match
83
Finish & visual result
67
Wear & performance
65
Skin suitability
50
Very close colour · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 15% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone · Natural rather than matte finish · Medium rather than full coverage · No long-wear claim · Does not claim transfer resistance
Retailer shade note: Tan with strong golden undertones
Matches: Very close colour· Both claim long-wearing· Both claim not settling into lines
Differences: Neutral rather than olive undertone· Radiant rather than matte finish· Buildable rather than full coverage
Score details
Shade match
88
Finish & visual result
43
Wear & performance
75
Skin suitability
84
Very close colour · Radiant · Buildable coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 8% ingredient overlap
Differences: Neutral rather than olive undertone · Radiant rather than matte finish · Buildable rather than full coverage · No blurring effect claimed · Does not claim transfer resistance · Does not claim a lightweight feel
Matches: Very close colour· Both claim not settling into lines· Both claim a lightweight feel
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone· Natural rather than matte finish· Medium rather than full coverage
Score details
Shade match
82
Finish & visual result
62
Wear & performance
65
Skin suitability
33
Very close colour · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 5% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone · Natural rather than matte finish · Medium rather than full coverage · No blurring effect claimed · No long-wear claim · Does not claim transfer resistance · Not marketed for normal/oily skin · Contains drying alcohol
Matches: Claims a skin-like finish· Both claim long-wearing· Both claim a lightweight feel
Differences: Slightly lighter· Neutral rather than olive undertone· Natural rather than matte finish
Score details
Shade match
80
Finish & visual result
58
Wear & performance
72
Skin suitability
56
Colour not compared · Natural · Buildable coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 4% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly lighter · Neutral rather than olive undertone · Natural rather than matte finish · Buildable rather than full coverage · No blurring effect claimed · Does not claim transfer resistance · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for sensitive skin
Matches: Near-identical swatch colour· Both claim a blurring effect· Both claim not settling into lines
Differences: Slightly cooler undertone· Radiant rather than matte finish· Medium rather than full coverage
Score details
Shade match
82
Finish & visual result
54
Wear & performance
65
Skin suitability
60
Looks identical · Radiant · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 4% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly cooler undertone · Radiant rather than matte finish · Medium rather than full coverage · Does not claim transfer resistance · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Not marketed for oily skin · Contains drying alcohol
Matches: Very close colour· Same full coverage· Claims a skin-like finish
Differences: Slightly cooler undertone· Natural rather than matte finish· No blurring effect claimed
Score details
Shade match
77
Finish & visual result
64
Wear & performance
67
Skin suitability
60
Very close colour · Natural · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 2% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly cooler undertone · Natural rather than matte finish · No blurring effect claimed · Does not claim transfer resistance · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for sensitive skin
Retailer shade note: tan skin with cool undertones
The closest shade to Laura Geller Double Take Baked Full Coverage Foundation Sand (Medium light · Olive 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
IT Cosmetics CC+ Cream Natural Matte Foundation in Neut Medium, against Laura Geller Double Take Baked Full Coverage Foundation in Sand. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shadeSandClosest shade matchNeut MediumHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall90
Colour60%96#e29e7a#e6a07eLooks identicalColour difference 1.2 (0 is identical)
Finish & visual result25% of overall · 3 of 4 compared100
Finish35%100MatteMatteSameSame matte 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 compared40
Longevity30%40Long-wearingNot listedSome differenceOnly your product claims long wear; the match does not list it
Transfer resistance20%40ClaimedNot listedSome differenceOnly your product claims transfer resistance; the match does not list it
Settling20%40ClaimedNot listedSome differenceOnly your product claims not settling into pores or fine lines; the match does not list it
Colour stability15%—not comparableNot listedNot listedNot claimed by eitherNeither product lists colour stability (no oxidation)
Comfort15%40ClaimedNot listedSome differenceOnly your product claims a comfortable, lightweight feel; the match does not list it
Skin suitability5% of overall30
Skin type100%30Normal, oily, sensitiveCombination, oilyBoth marketed for oily skin
Overall match 82/100Shade match 90/100Medium 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.
MAC Cosmetics Studio Fix Fluid SPF 15 Foundation in C5, against Laura Geller Double Take Baked Full Coverage Foundation in Sand. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shadeSandClosest overall alternativeC5How they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall86
Colour60%90#e29e7a#e29c70Very close colourColour difference 2.4 (0 is identical)
Finish & visual result25% of overall · 3 of 4 compared89
Finish35%100MatteMatteSameSame matte finish
Coverage30%100FullFullSameSame full coverage
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 overall82
Longevity30%70Long-wearing24-hour wearSome differenceThe match claims 24-hour wear; your product says long-wearing without hours
Transfer resistance20%100ClaimedClaimedSameBoth products claim 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%100ClaimedClaimedSameBoth products claim a comfortable, lightweight feel
Skin suitability5% of overall67
Skin type100%67Normal, oily, sensitiveNormal, oilyBoth marketed for normal/oily skin
Overall match 85/100Shade match 86/100Medium 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 $1 more
Target
