Studio Fix 36HR Smooth Angles Hydrating Concealer NW65 dupes and alternatives MAC Cosmetics
4.5 (952)·Rich deep · Cool 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 full coverage· Both claim a blurring effect· Both claim transfer resistance
Differences: Neutral rather than cool undertone· Natural rather than matte finish· Does not claim not settling into lines
Score details
Shade match
77
Finish & visual result
81
Wear & performance
63
Skin suitability
75
Close colour · Natural · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 43% ingredient overlap
Differences: Neutral rather than cool undertone · Natural rather than matte finish · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for combination skin
Retailer shade note: deepest with rich neutral undertones
Matches: Same full coverage· Both claim not settling into lines· Both claim a lightweight feel
Differences: Neutral rather than cool undertone· Natural rather than matte finish· No blurring effect claimed
Score details
Shade match
76
Finish & visual result
70
Wear & performance
75
Skin suitability
75
Close colour · Natural · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 21% ingredient overlap
Differences: Neutral rather than cool undertone · Natural rather than matte finish · No blurring effect claimed · Does not claim transfer resistance · Not marketed for oily skin
Retailer shade note: richest with neutral undertones
Differences: Neutral rather than cool undertone· No blurring effect claimed· Does not claim transfer resistance
Score details
Shade match
72
Finish & visual result
89
Wear & performance
51
Skin suitability
50
Slight colour difference · Matte · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 20% ingredient overlap
Differences: Neutral rather than cool undertone · No blurring effect claimed · Does not claim transfer resistance · Does not claim not settling into lines · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Contains drying alcohol
Matches: Both claim not settling into lines· Both claim a lightweight feel
Differences: Neutral rather than cool undertone· Natural rather than matte finish· Medium rather than full coverage
Score details
Shade match
82
Finish & visual result
55
Wear & performance
58
Skin suitability
92
Close colour · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 8% ingredient overlap
Differences: Neutral rather than cool undertone · Natural rather than matte finish · Medium rather than full coverage · No blurring effect claimed · Does not claim transfer resistance
Retailer shade note: rich deep with neutral undertones
Matches: Similar undertone (neutral vs cool)· Same matte finish· Same full coverage
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour· Slightly lighter· Does not claim not settling into lines
Score details
Shade match
54
Finish & visual result
100
Wear & performance
86
Skin suitability
75
Visibly different colour · Matte · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 19% ingredient overlap
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour · Slightly lighter · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for dry skin · Contains drying alcohol
Retailer shade note: for very deep skin with neutral cool undertones
Differences: Neutral rather than cool undertone · Natural rather than matte finish · Buildable rather than full coverage · No blurring effect claimed · Does not claim transfer resistance
Retailer shade note: very deep with neutral undertones
Matches: Same cool undertone· Same full coverage· Both claim not settling into lines
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour· Slightly lighter· Natural rather than matte finish
Score details
Shade match
64
Finish & visual result
70
Wear & performance
75
Skin suitability
75
Visibly different colour · Natural · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 21% ingredient overlap
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour · Slightly lighter · Natural rather than matte finish · No blurring effect claimed · Does not claim transfer resistance · Not marketed for oily skin
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour · Natural rather than matte finish · Buildable rather than full coverage · No blurring effect claimed · Does not claim transfer resistance
Retailer shade note: very deep with cool undertones
Matches: Same full coverage· Both claim a blurring effect· Both claim transfer resistance
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour· Neutral rather than cool undertone· Natural rather than matte finish
Score details
Shade match
57
Finish & visual result
81
Wear & performance
63
Skin suitability
75
Visibly different colour · Natural · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 43% ingredient overlap
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour · Neutral rather than cool undertone · Natural rather than matte finish · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for combination skin
Retailer shade note: very deep with neutral rich-brown undertones
Matches: Same cool undertone· Same matte finish· Same full coverage
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour· Slightly lighter· Does not claim not settling into lines
Score details
Shade match
36
Finish & visual result
100
Wear & performance
86
Skin suitability
75
Visibly different colour · Matte · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 19% ingredient overlap
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour · Slightly lighter · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for dry skin · Contains drying alcohol
Retailer shade note: for very deep skin with cool undertones
Matches: Same cool undertone· Same full coverage· Both claim a blurring effect
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour· Slightly lighter· Natural rather than matte finish
Score details
Shade match
50
Finish & visual result
81
Wear & performance
63
Skin suitability
75
Visibly different colour · Natural · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 43% ingredient overlap
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour · Slightly lighter · Natural rather than matte finish · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for combination skin
Retailer shade note: very deep with cool brown undertones
Matches: Same matte finish· Same full coverage· Both claim a blurring effect
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour· Slightly lighter· Described as deep, yours as rich deep
Score details
Shade match
35
Finish & visual result
100
Wear & performance
86
Skin suitability
75
Visibly different colour · Matte · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 19% ingredient overlap
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour · Slightly lighter · Described as deep, yours as rich deep · Neutral rather than cool undertone · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for dry skin · Contains drying alcohol
Retailer shade note: for deep skin with neutral to golden undertones
Low confidence· Digital matchRetailer descriptions disagree: described as deep, yours as rich deep
Matches: Same matte finish· Same full coverage· Both claim a blurring effect
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour· Slightly lighter· Described as deep, yours as rich deep
Score details
Shade match
40
Finish & visual result
100
Wear & performance
67
Skin suitability
75
Slight colour difference · Matte · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 3% ingredient overlap
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour · Slightly lighter · Described as deep, yours as rich deep · Slightly warmer undertone · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Not marketed for combination skin
Retailer shade note: Deep with neutral warm undertones
Low confidence· Digital matchRetailer descriptions disagree: described as deep, yours as rich deep
Matches: Same matte finish· Same full coverage· Both claim a blurring effect
Differences: Described as deep, yours as rich deep· Neutral rather than cool undertone· Does not claim a lightweight feel
Score details
Shade match
40
Finish & visual result
100
Wear & performance
67
Skin suitability
75
Close colour · Matte · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 3% ingredient overlap
Differences: Described as deep, yours as rich deep · Neutral rather than cool undertone · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Not marketed for combination skin
Retailer shade note: Deep with neutral undertones
Low confidence· Digital matchRetailer descriptions disagree: described as deep, yours as rich deep
Matches: Same matte finish· Same full coverage· Both claim a blurring effect
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour· Slightly lighter· Described as deep, yours as rich deep
Score details
Shade match
40
Finish & visual result
100
Wear & performance
67
Skin suitability
75
Visibly different colour · Matte · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 3% ingredient overlap
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour · Slightly lighter · Described as deep, yours as rich deep · Neutral rather than cool undertone · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Not marketed for combination skin
Retailer shade note: Deep with neutral undertones
Low confidence· Digital matchRetailer descriptions disagree: described as deep, yours as rich deep
Matches: Same cool undertone· Same full coverage· Both claim a blurring effect
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour· Slightly lighter· Natural rather than matte finish
Score details
Shade match
45
Finish & visual result
81
Wear & performance
63
Skin suitability
75
Visibly different colour · Natural · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 43% ingredient overlap
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour · Slightly lighter · Natural rather than matte finish · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for combination skin
Retailer shade note: ultra deep with cool rich-red undertones
The closest shade to MAC Cosmetics Studio Fix 36HR Smooth Angles Hydrating Concealer NW65 (Rich deep · Cool 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
Milk Makeup Future Fluid Longwear Hydrating Concealer in 30NC, against MAC Cosmetics Studio Fix 36HR Smooth Angles Hydrating Concealer in NW65. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shadeNW65Closest shade match30NCHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall92
Colour60%92#3d241d#44271fVery close colourColour difference 2.0 (0 is identical)
Finish35%56MatteNaturalSome differenceNatural finish rather than matte
Coverage30%80FullBuildableCloseBuildable coverage rather than full (buildable: one step of tolerance)
Skin-like finish20%40Not listedClaimedSome differenceThe match claims a skin-like finish; your product does not list it
Blurring15%40ClaimedNot listedSome differenceOnly your product claims a blurring or smoothing effect; the match does not list it
Wear & performance15% of overall · 4 of 5 compared75
Longevity30%7036-hour wearLong-wearingSome differenceYour product claims 36-hour wear; the match says long-wearing without hours
Transfer resistance20%40ClaimedNot listedSome differenceOnly your product claims transfer resistance; the match 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 overall50
Skin type100%50Dry, normal, combination, oilyNot publishedSkin-type suitability not published for one product
Overall match 79/100Shade match 92/100Medium 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.
Huda Beauty #FauxFilter Matte Buildable Coverage Waterproof Concealer in Chocolate Chip 8.7 Red, against MAC Cosmetics Studio Fix 36HR Smooth Angles Hydrating Concealer in NW65. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shadeNW65Closest overall alternativeChocolate Chip 8.7 RedHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall90
Colour60%84#3d241d#432a1eClose colourColour difference 3.2 (0 is identical)
Overall match 87/100Shade 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.
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 $8 more
