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· Both claim a blurring effect
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone· Medium rather than full coverage· Does not claim not settling into lines
Score details
Shade match
84
Finish & visual result
93
Wear & performance
58
Skin suitability
100
Very close colour · Matte · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 9% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone · Medium rather than full coverage · Does not claim not settling into lines · Does not claim colour stability · Contains drying alcohol
Matches: Near-identical swatch colour· Same matte finish· Both claim 12-hour wear
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone· Medium rather than full coverage· No blurring effect claimed
Score details
Shade match
89
Finish & visual result
74
Wear & performance
74
Skin suitability
67
Looks identical · Matte · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 2% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone · Medium rather than full coverage · No blurring effect claimed · Does not claim not settling into lines · Does not claim colour stability · Not marketed for combination skin · Contains drying alcohol
$8Ulta Beauty(product price)$31 less (79%)4.5 (40,486)
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
87
Finish & visual result
62
Wear & performance
78
Skin suitability
90
Very close colour · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 9% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone · Natural rather than matte finish · Medium rather than full coverage · No blurring effect claimed · Does not claim colour stability
Matches: Near-identical swatch colour· Both claim a blurring effect· Claims transfer resistance
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone· Natural rather than matte finish· Medium rather than full coverage
Score details
Shade match
89
Finish & visual result
73
Wear & performance
60
Skin suitability
60
Looks identical · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 8% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone · Natural rather than matte finish · Medium rather than full coverage · Does not claim colour stability · Not marketed for combination skin · Contains listed fragrance · Contains drying alcohol
Matches: Very close colour· Same olive undertone· Both claim a blurring effect
Differences: Natural rather than matte finish· Medium rather than full coverage· Does not claim not settling into lines
Score details
Shade match
91
Finish & visual result
66
Wear & performance
63
Skin suitability
60
Very close colour · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 5% ingredient overlap
Differences: Natural rather than matte finish · Medium rather than full coverage · Does not claim not settling into lines · Does not claim colour stability · Not marketed for oily skin · Contains listed fragrance · Contains drying alcohol
Retailer shade note: for light to medium skin with warm olive undertones
Matches: Very close colour· Both claim a blurring effect· Claims transfer resistance
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone· Natural rather than matte finish· Medium rather than full coverage
Score details
Shade match
88
Finish & visual result
73
Wear & performance
60
Skin suitability
60
Very close colour · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 8% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone · Natural rather than matte finish · Medium rather than full coverage · Does not claim colour stability · Not marketed for combination skin · Contains listed fragrance · Contains drying alcohol
Matches: Very close colour· Both claim a blurring effect· Claims transfer resistance
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone· Natural rather than matte finish· Medium rather than full coverage
Score details
Shade match
88
Finish & visual result
73
Wear & performance
60
Skin suitability
60
Very close colour · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 8% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone · Natural rather than matte finish · Medium rather than full coverage · Does not claim colour stability · Not marketed for combination skin · Contains listed fragrance · Contains drying alcohol
The closest shade to MAC Cosmetics Studio Fix Powder Plus Foundation C40 (Light · Olive · neutral 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 match works
Tarte Amazonian Clay 16-Hour Full Coverage Foundation in 22G Light Golden, against MAC Cosmetics Studio Fix Powder Plus Foundation in C40. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shadeC40Closest match22G Light GoldenHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall96
Colour60%93#e8ba86#e6be8dVery close colourColour difference 1.8 (0 is identical)
Depth15%98LightLightSameDepth difference: 1.3
Retailer descriptionLightLightBoth described as lightThe retailers describe the same depth
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 compared81
Longevity30%8012-hour wear16-hour wearClose16-hour wear claimed against 12-hour 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%40ClaimedNot listedSome differenceOnly your product claims colour stability (no oxidation); the match does not list it
Comfort15%100ClaimedClaimedSameBoth products claim a comfortable, lightweight feel
Skin suitability5% of overall100
Skin type100%100Normal, combination, oilyNormal, combination, oilyBoth marketed for normal/combination/oily skin
Overall match 95/100Shade 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.
Ulta Beauty
SephoraCosts $16 more
