Triple Fix Blurring and Hydrating Skin Tint Foundation Stick MN1 dupes and alternatives LYS Beauty
4.4 (504)·Light medium · Neutral 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 neutral undertone· Same medium coverage
Differences: Natural rather than radiant finish· No skin-like finish claimed· Does not claim not settling into lines
Score details
Shade match
94
Finish & visual result
73
Wear & performance
82
Skin suitability
28
Very close colour · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 0% ingredient overlap
Differences: Natural rather than radiant finish · No skin-like finish claimed · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for combination/oily skin · Contains drying alcohol
Matches: Near-identical swatch colour· Same neutral undertone· Both claim a blurring effect
Differences: Matte rather than radiant finish· Full rather than medium coverage· No skin-like finish claimed
Score details
Shade match
97
Finish & visual result
51
Wear & performance
82
Skin suitability
84
Looks identical · Matte · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 2% ingredient overlap
Differences: Matte rather than radiant finish · Full rather than medium coverage · No skin-like finish claimed · Does not claim not settling into lines
Matches: Near-identical swatch colour· Same radiant finish· Both claim not settling into lines
Differences: Slightly cooler undertone· Light rather than medium coverage· No skin-like finish claimed
Score details
Shade match
90
Finish & visual result
73
Wear & performance
86
Skin suitability
28
Looks identical · Radiant · Light coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 5% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly cooler undertone · Light rather than medium coverage · No skin-like finish claimed · No blurring effect claimed · Not marketed for combination/oily skin
Matches: Very close colour· Same neutral undertone· Same medium coverage
Differences: Natural rather than radiant finish· No skin-like finish claimed· No blurring effect claimed
Score details
Shade match
94
Finish & visual result
64
Wear & performance
82
Skin suitability
33
Very close colour · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 2% ingredient overlap
Differences: Natural rather than radiant finish · No skin-like finish claimed · No blurring effect claimed · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for combination/oily skin · Contains listed fragrance
Matches: Very close colour· Same neutral undertone· Same medium coverage
Differences: Natural rather than radiant finish· No skin-like finish claimed· No blurring effect claimed
Score details
Shade match
93
Finish & visual result
64
Wear & performance
82
Skin suitability
33
Very close colour · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 2% ingredient overlap
Differences: Natural rather than radiant finish · No skin-like finish claimed · No blurring effect claimed · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for combination/oily skin · Contains listed fragrance
Matches: Near-identical swatch colour· Same neutral undertone· Same medium coverage
Differences: Natural rather than radiant finish· No skin-like finish claimed· No blurring effect claimed
Score details
Shade match
95
Finish & visual result
64
Wear & performance
54
Skin suitability
84
Looks identical · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 4% ingredient overlap
Differences: Natural rather than radiant finish · No skin-like finish claimed · No blurring effect claimed · No long-wear claim · Does not claim not settling into lines
Matches: Near-identical swatch colour· Both claim long-wearing· Claims transfer resistance
Differences: Luminous rather than radiant finish· Full rather than medium coverage· No skin-like finish claimed
Score details
Shade match
89
Finish & visual result
65
Wear & performance
72
Skin suitability
84
Looks identical · Luminous · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): no ingredient list for one product
Differences: Luminous rather than radiant finish · Full rather than medium coverage · No skin-like finish claimed · No blurring effect claimed · Does not claim not settling into lines
Matches: Very close colour· Same medium coverage· Both claim a blurring effect
Differences: Olive rather than neutral undertone· Natural rather than radiant finish· No skin-like finish claimed
Score details
Shade match
88
Finish & visual result
73
Wear & performance
82
Skin suitability
28
Very close colour · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 0% ingredient overlap
Differences: Olive rather than neutral undertone · Natural rather than radiant finish · No skin-like finish claimed · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for combination/oily skin · Contains drying alcohol
Matches: Near-identical swatch colour· Same neutral undertone· Same medium coverage
Differences: Natural rather than radiant finish· No skin-like finish claimed· No blurring effect claimed
Score details
Shade match
94
Finish & visual result
64
Wear & performance
54
Skin suitability
84
Looks identical · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 4% ingredient overlap
Differences: Natural rather than radiant finish · No skin-like finish claimed · No blurring effect claimed · No long-wear claim · Does not claim not settling into lines
Matches: Very close colour· Same neutral undertone· Same medium coverage
Differences: Natural rather than radiant finish· No skin-like finish claimed· No blurring effect claimed
Score details
Shade match
94
Finish & visual result
64
Wear & performance
61
Skin suitability
60
Very close colour · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 1% ingredient overlap
Differences: Natural rather than radiant finish · No skin-like finish claimed · No blurring effect claimed · Does not claim not settling into lines · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Not marketed for oily skin
Matches: Same neutral undertone· Both claim a skin-like finish· Both claim long-wearing
Differences: Slightly lighter· Natural rather than radiant finish· Buildable rather than medium coverage
Score details
Shade match
80
Finish & visual result
76
Wear & performance
82
Skin suitability
90
Colour not compared · Natural · Buildable coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 8% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly lighter · Natural rather than radiant finish · Buildable rather than medium coverage · No blurring effect claimed · Does not claim not settling into lines
Matches: Same neutral undertone· Both claim a skin-like finish· Both claim long-wearing
Differences: Natural rather than radiant finish· Buildable rather than medium coverage· No blurring effect claimed
Score details
Shade match
80
Finish & visual result
76
Wear & performance
82
Skin suitability
90
Colour not compared · Natural · Buildable coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 8% ingredient overlap
Differences: Natural rather than radiant finish · Buildable rather than medium coverage · No blurring effect claimed · Does not claim not settling into lines
Matches: Very close colour· Same neutral undertone· Same medium coverage
Differences: Natural rather than radiant finish· No skin-like finish claimed· No blurring effect claimed
Score details
Shade match
92
Finish & visual result
64
Wear & performance
61
Skin suitability
60
Very close colour · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 1% ingredient overlap
Differences: Natural rather than radiant finish · No skin-like finish claimed · No blurring effect claimed · Does not claim not settling into lines · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Not marketed for oily skin
Matches: Very close colour· Same neutral undertone· Same medium coverage
Differences: Natural rather than radiant finish· No skin-like finish claimed· No blurring effect claimed
Score details
Shade match
92
Finish & visual result
64
Wear & performance
54
Skin suitability
84
Very close colour · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 4% ingredient overlap
Differences: Natural rather than radiant finish · No skin-like finish claimed · No blurring effect claimed · No long-wear claim · Does not claim not settling into lines
Matches: Very close colour· Same medium coverage· Both claim a blurring effect
Differences: Olive rather than neutral undertone· Natural rather than radiant finish· No skin-like finish claimed
Score details
Shade match
85
Finish & visual result
73
Wear & performance
82
Skin suitability
28
Very close colour · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 0% ingredient overlap
Differences: Olive rather than neutral undertone · Natural rather than radiant finish · No skin-like finish claimed · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for combination/oily skin · Contains drying alcohol
Matches: Very close colour· Same neutral undertone· Same medium coverage
Differences: Slightly lighter· Natural rather than radiant finish· No skin-like finish claimed
Score details
Shade match
92
Finish & visual result
64
Wear & performance
61
Skin suitability
60
Very close colour · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 1% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly lighter · Natural rather than radiant finish · No skin-like finish claimed · No blurring effect claimed · Does not claim not settling into lines · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Not marketed for oily skin
Matches: Very close colour· Same neutral undertone· Same medium coverage
Differences: Slightly lighter· Natural rather than radiant finish· No skin-like finish claimed
Score details
Shade match
91
Finish & visual result
64
Wear & performance
61
Skin suitability
60
Very close colour · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 1% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly lighter · Natural rather than radiant finish · No skin-like finish claimed · No blurring effect claimed · Does not claim not settling into lines · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Not marketed for oily skin
Matches: Very close colour· Same neutral undertone· Same medium coverage
Differences: Natural rather than radiant finish· No skin-like finish claimed· No blurring effect claimed
Score details
Shade match
92
Finish & visual result
64
Wear & performance
40
Skin suitability
90
Very close colour · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 1% ingredient overlap
Differences: Natural rather than radiant finish · No skin-like finish claimed · No blurring effect claimed · No long-wear claim · Does not claim not settling into lines · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Contains listed fragrance
Matches: Very close colour· Same neutral undertone· Claims colour stability
Differences: Natural rather than radiant finish· Full rather than medium coverage· No skin-like finish claimed
Score details
Shade match
92
Finish & visual result
58
Wear & performance
63
Skin suitability
60
Very close colour · Natural · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 2% ingredient overlap
Differences: Natural rather than radiant finish · Full rather than medium coverage · No skin-like finish claimed · No blurring effect claimed · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for combination skin
Retailer shade note: very fair, cool-neutral undertones
Matches: Very close colour· Same neutral undertone· Claims colour stability
Differences: Natural rather than radiant finish· Full rather than medium coverage· No skin-like finish claimed
Score details
Shade match
91
Finish & visual result
58
Wear & performance
63
Skin suitability
60
Very close colour · Natural · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 2% ingredient overlap
Differences: Natural rather than radiant finish · Full rather than medium coverage · No skin-like finish claimed · No blurring effect claimed · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for combination skin
Retailer shade note: very fair, cool-neutral undertones
Matches: Very close colour· Same neutral undertone· Claims colour stability
Differences: Natural rather than radiant finish· Full rather than medium coverage· No skin-like finish claimed
Score details
Shade match
91
Finish & visual result
58
Wear & performance
63
Skin suitability
60
Very close colour · Natural · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 2% ingredient overlap
Differences: Natural rather than radiant finish · Full rather than medium coverage · No skin-like finish claimed · No blurring effect claimed · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for combination skin
Retailer shade note: very fair, cool-neutral undertones
Matches: Near-identical swatch colour· Same medium coverage
Differences: Natural rather than radiant finish· No skin-like finish claimed· No blurring effect claimed
Score details
Shade match
91
Finish & visual result
64
Wear & performance
40
Skin suitability
90
Looks identical · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 1% ingredient overlap
Differences: Natural rather than radiant finish · No skin-like finish claimed · No blurring effect claimed · No long-wear claim · Does not claim not settling into lines · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Contains listed fragrance
The closest shade to LYS Beauty Triple Fix Blurring and Hydrating Skin Tint Foundation Stick MN1 (Light medium · Neutral 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 1N, against LYS Beauty Triple Fix Blurring and Hydrating Skin Tint Foundation Stick in MN1. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shadeMN1Closest shade match1NHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall98
Colour60%97#d2ae94#d0ab90Looks identicalColour difference 0.9 (0 is identical)
Finish35%12RadiantMatteDifferentMatte finish rather than radiant
Coverage30%80MediumFullCloseFull coverage rather than medium (buildable: one step of tolerance)
Skin-like finish20%100ClaimedClaimedSameBoth products claim a skin-like finish
Blurring15%100ClaimedClaimedSameBoth products claim a blurring or smoothing effect
Wear & performance15% of overall · 3 of 5 compared86
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%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 overall60
Skin type100%60Dry, combination, oilyNormal, combination, oilyBoth marketed for combination/oily skin
Overall match 86/100Shade match 98/100Medium 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.
m.ph by Mary Phillips Le Skin Weightless Serum Foundation in Fair 30 N, against LYS Beauty Triple Fix Blurring and Hydrating Skin Tint Foundation Stick in MN1. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shadeMN1Closest overall alternativeFair 30 NHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall96
Colour60%94#d2ae94#d1aa8cVery close colourColour difference 1.7 (0 is identical)
Finish35%56RadiantNaturalSome differenceNatural finish rather than radiant
Coverage30%100MediumMediumSameSame medium coverage
Skin-like finish20%100ClaimedClaimedSameBoth products claim 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 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 overall60
Skin type100%60Dry, combination, oilyNormal, dry, combinationBoth marketed for dry/combination skin
Overall match 90/100Shade match 96/100Medium 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 $25 more
Target
Walmart
