True Match Radiant Serum Concealer C10 dupes and alternatives L'Oréal Paris
4.4 (832)·Deep · Warm undertone
Closest shade match is the equivalent shade, scored on colour, depth and undertone only. Closest overall alternative is the most similar concealer 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 concealer 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 concealer on shade, finish, wear and skin suitability together. Each row leads with its overall match; the shade match is beneath it.
Matches: Same warm undertone· Claims a blurring effect· Both claim long-wearing
Differences: Natural rather than radiant finish· No skin-like finish claimed· Does not claim not settling into lines
Score details
Shade match
90
Finish & visual result
48
Wear & performance
82
Skin suitability
0
Close colour · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 20% ingredient overlap
Differences: Natural rather than radiant finish · No skin-like finish claimed · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for sensitive skin
Retailer shade note: medium deep with golden undertones
Matches: Same warm undertone· Same radiant finish· Both claim a skin-like finish
Differences: Slightly deeper· No long-wear claim· Does not claim not settling into lines
Score details
Shade match
76
Finish & visual result
100
Wear & performance
40
Skin suitability
0
Slight colour difference · Radiant · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 4% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly deeper · No long-wear claim · Does not claim not settling into lines · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Not marketed for sensitive skin
Retailer shade note: rich deep with golden undertones
Matches: Same radiant finish· Both claim a skin-like finish· No drying alcohol listed
Differences: Slightly lighter· Olive rather than warm undertone· No long-wear claim
Score details
Shade match
75
Finish & visual result
100
Wear & performance
40
Skin suitability
0
Close colour · Radiant · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 4% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly lighter · Olive rather than warm undertone · No long-wear claim · Does not claim not settling into lines · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Not marketed for sensitive skin
Retailer shade note: deep with neutral olive undertones
Matches: Same warm undertone· Same radiant finish· Both claim a skin-like finish
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour· Slightly lighter· No long-wear claim
Score details
Shade match
72
Finish & visual result
100
Wear & performance
40
Skin suitability
0
Slight colour difference · Radiant · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 4% ingredient overlap
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour · Slightly lighter · No long-wear claim · Does not claim not settling into lines · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Not marketed for sensitive skin
Matches: Near-identical swatch colour· Claims transfer resistance· No drying alcohol listed
Differences: Neutral rather than warm undertone· Natural rather than radiant finish· No skin-like finish claimed
Score details
Shade match
89
Finish & visual result
50
Wear & performance
51
Skin suitability
0
Looks identical · Natural · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 13% ingredient overlap
Differences: Neutral rather than warm undertone · Natural rather than radiant finish · No skin-like finish claimed · Does not claim not settling into lines · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Not marketed for sensitive skin · Contains listed fragrance
Retailer shade note: deep skin with neutral undertones
Matches: Both claim long-wearing· Both claim not settling into lines· Both claim a lightweight feel
Differences: Slightly deeper· Neutral rather than warm undertone· Natural rather than radiant finish
Score details
Shade match
75
Finish & visual result
50
Wear & performance
100
Skin suitability
0
Close colour · Natural · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 14% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly deeper · Neutral rather than warm undertone · Natural rather than radiant finish · No skin-like finish claimed · Not marketed for sensitive skin
Retailer shade note: deep with neutral to golden undertones
Matches: Same warm undertone· Claims a blurring effect· Both claim not settling into lines
Differences: Matte rather than radiant finish· No skin-like finish claimed· Does not claim a lightweight feel
Score details
Shade match
90
Finish & visual result
26
Wear & performance
72
Skin suitability
0
Close colour · Matte · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 13% ingredient overlap
Differences: Matte rather than radiant finish · No skin-like finish claimed · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Not marketed for sensitive skin · Contains listed fragrance
Retailer shade note: deep skin with warm, peach undertones
The closest shade to L'Oréal Paris True Match Radiant Serum Concealer C10 (Deep · Warm undertone) in each foundation range, compared on measured colour, depth and undertone. Price never changes the order.
Foundation shade colours are sampled from retailer swatch images, so check the shade on the retailer page before buying.
Why the closest shade match works
MAC Cosmetics Studio Fix 36HR Smooth Angles Hydrating Concealer in NC50, against L'Oréal Paris True Match Radiant Serum Concealer in C10. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shadeC10Closest shade matchNC50How they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall91
Colour60%85#945b36#965431Very close colourColour difference 2.9 (0 is identical)
Depth15%97DeepDeepSameDepth difference: 2.1
Retailer descriptionNot statedDeepNo depth word in one descriptionNot compared
Finish & visual result25% of overall · 3 of 4 compared26
Finish35%12RadiantMatteDifferentMatte finish rather than radiant
Coverage30%—not comparableNot listedFullNot comparedCoverage not listed for one product
Skin-like finish20%40ClaimedNot listedSome differenceOnly your product claims a skin-like finish; the match 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 · 4 of 5 compared75
Longevity30%70Long-wearing36-hour wearSome differenceThe match claims 36-hour wear; your product says long-wearing without hours
Transfer resistance20%40Not listedClaimedSome differenceThe match claims transfer resistance; your product does not list it
Settling20%100ClaimedClaimedSameBoth products claim 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%0SensitiveDry, normal, combination, oilyMarketed for different skin types
Overall match 68/100Shade 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.
Rare Beauty Liquid Touch Brightening Concealer in 530N, against L'Oréal Paris True Match Radiant Serum Concealer in C10. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shadeC10Closest overall alternative530NHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall85
Colour60%91#945b36#8d5838Very close colourColour difference 2.1 (0 is identical)
Depth15%96DeepDeepSameDepth difference: 2.3
Retailer descriptionNot statedDeepNo depth word in one descriptionNot compared
Finish & visual result25% of overall · 2 of 4 compared100
Finish35%100RadiantRadiantSameSame radiant finish
Coverage30%—not comparableNot listedMediumNot comparedCoverage not listed for one product
Skin-like finish20%100ClaimedClaimedSameBoth products claim a skin-like finish
Blurring15%—not comparableNot listedNot listedNot claimed by eitherNeither product lists a blurring or smoothing effect
Wear & performance15% of overall · 3 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%100ClaimedClaimedSameBoth products claim 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%0SensitiveOily, dry, combination, normalMarketed for different skin types
Overall match 87/100Shade match 85/100Medium 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.
32 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 $7.01 more
