Studio Radiance Serum Powered Foundation NC47 dupes and alternatives MAC Cosmetics
4.3 (1,197)·Medium tan · 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.
$24Ulta Beauty(product price)$22 less (48%)3.9 (396)
Matches: Very close colour· Same neutral undertone· Same radiant finish
Differences: Medium rather than full coverage· No blurring effect claimed· Does not claim transfer resistance
Score details
Shade match
88
Finish & visual result
81
Wear & performance
51
Skin suitability
100
Very close colour · Radiant · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 11% ingredient overlap
Differences: Medium rather than full coverage · No blurring effect claimed · Does not claim transfer resistance · Does not claim not settling into lines · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Contains listed fragrance
Matches: Very close colour· Same radiant finish· Same full coverage
Differences: No blurring effect claimed· Does not claim transfer resistance· Does not claim not settling into lines
Score details
Shade match
86
Finish & visual result
89
Wear & performance
51
Skin suitability
80
Very close colour · Radiant · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 14% ingredient overlap
Differences: No blurring effect claimed · Does not claim transfer resistance · Does not claim not settling into lines · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Not marketed for sensitive skin · Contains listed fragrance
Matches: Very close colour· Same radiant finish· Both claim 12-hour wear
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone· Light rather than full coverage· No blurring effect claimed
Score details
Shade match
86
Finish & visual result
66
Wear & performance
79
Skin suitability
100
Very close colour · Radiant · Light coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 12% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone · Light rather than full coverage · No blurring effect claimed · Does not claim transfer resistance · Contains listed fragrance
Matches: Very close colour· Same radiant finish· Both claim 12-hour wear
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone· Light rather than full coverage· No blurring effect claimed
Score details
Shade match
86
Finish & visual result
66
Wear & performance
79
Skin suitability
100
Very close colour · Radiant · Light coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 12% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone · Light rather than full coverage · No blurring effect claimed · Does not claim transfer resistance · Contains listed fragrance
Matches: Very close colour· Same full coverage· Both claim transfer resistance
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone· Natural rather than radiant finish· No blurring effect claimed
Score details
Shade match
86
Finish & visual result
70
Wear & performance
55
Skin suitability
100
Very close colour · Natural · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 7% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone · Natural rather than radiant finish · No blurring effect claimed · Does not claim not settling into lines · Contains listed fragrance · Contains drying alcohol
Matches: Very close colour· Same radiant finish· Claims a skin-like finish
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone· Light rather than full coverage· No long-wear claim
Score details
Shade match
83
Finish & visual result
70
Wear & performance
51
Skin suitability
100
Very close colour · Radiant · Light coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 14% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone · Light rather than full coverage · No long-wear claim · Does not claim transfer resistance · Does not claim not settling into lines
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone· Natural rather than radiant finish· Buildable rather than full coverage
Score details
Shade match
89
Finish & visual result
62
Wear & performance
40
Skin suitability
100
Looks identical · Natural · Buildable coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 4% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone · Natural rather than radiant finish · Buildable rather than full coverage · No blurring effect claimed · No long-wear claim · Does not claim transfer resistance · Does not claim not settling into lines · Does not claim a lightweight feel
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone· Light rather than full coverage· No blurring effect claimed
Score details
Shade match
83
Finish & visual result
66
Wear & performance
51
Skin suitability
100
Very close colour · Radiant · Light coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 17% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone · Light rather than full coverage · No blurring effect claimed · Does not claim transfer resistance · Does not claim not settling into lines · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Contains listed fragrance
Matches: Very close colour· Claims a skin-like finish· Both claim 12-hour wear
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone· Natural rather than radiant finish· Medium rather than full coverage
Score details
Shade match
84
Finish & visual result
58
Wear & performance
86
Skin suitability
20
Very close colour · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 9% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone · Natural rather than radiant finish · Medium rather than full coverage · No blurring effect claimed · Does not claim transfer resistance · Not marketed for combination/dry/normal/oily skin
Matches: Very close colour· Claims a skin-like finish· Both claim a blurring effect
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone· Matte rather than radiant finish· Medium rather than full coverage
Score details
Shade match
85
Finish & visual result
51
Wear & performance
73
Skin suitability
80
Very close colour · Matte · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 8% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone · Matte rather than radiant finish · Medium rather than full coverage · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for dry skin
Matches: Very close colour· Both claim transfer resistance
Differences: Slightly deeper· Slightly warmer undertone· Natural rather than radiant finish
Score details
Shade match
82
Finish & visual result
62
Wear & performance
65
Skin suitability
60
Very close colour · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 15% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly deeper · Slightly warmer undertone · Natural rather than radiant finish · Medium rather than full coverage · No blurring effect claimed · Does not claim not settling into lines · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Not marketed for oily/sensitive skin
Matches: Very close colour· Claims a skin-like finish· Both claim a lightweight feel
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone· Natural rather than radiant finish· Medium rather than full coverage
Score details
Shade match
84
Finish & visual result
58
Wear & performance
61
Skin suitability
60
Very close colour · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 2% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone · Natural rather than radiant finish · Medium rather than full coverage · No blurring effect claimed · Does not claim transfer resistance · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for combination/oily skin
Retailer shade note: deep with golden olive undertones
Matches: Very close colour· Claims a skin-like finish· Both claim a lightweight feel
Differences: Olive rather than neutral undertone· Natural rather than radiant finish· Light rather than full coverage
Score details
Shade match
89
Finish & visual result
46
Wear & performance
51
Skin suitability
100
Very close colour · Natural · Light coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 10% ingredient overlap
Differences: Olive rather than neutral undertone · Natural rather than radiant finish · Light rather than full coverage · No blurring effect claimed · No long-wear claim · Does not claim transfer resistance · Does not claim not settling into lines
Matches: Very close colour· Both claim a lightweight feel
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone· Natural rather than radiant finish· Light rather than full coverage
Score details
Shade match
87
Finish & visual result
47
Wear & performance
51
Skin suitability
100
Very close colour · Natural · Light coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 2% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone · Natural rather than radiant finish · Light rather than full coverage · No blurring effect claimed · No long-wear claim · Does not claim transfer resistance · Does not claim not settling into lines
Matches: Very close colour· Both claim not settling into lines· Both claim a lightweight feel
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone· Natural rather than radiant finish· Medium rather than full coverage
Score details
Shade match
84
Finish & visual result
62
Wear & performance
65
Skin suitability
20
Very close colour · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 5% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone · Natural rather than radiant finish · Medium rather than full coverage · No blurring effect claimed · No long-wear claim · Does not claim transfer resistance · Not marketed for combination/dry/normal/oily skin · Contains drying alcohol
Matches: Same full coverage· Both claim a blurring effect· Adds SPF 15
Differences: Slightly lighter· Matte rather than radiant finish· Does not claim transfer resistance
Score details
Shade match
80
Finish & visual result
62
Wear & performance
51
Skin suitability
100
Colour not compared · Matte · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 3% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly lighter · Matte rather than radiant finish · Does not claim transfer resistance · Does not claim not settling into lines · Does not claim a lightweight feel
$16Ulta Beauty(product price)$30 less (65%)4.0 (94)
Matches: Very close colour· Claims a skin-like finish· Both claim a blurring effect
Differences: Olive rather than neutral undertone· Matte rather than radiant finish· Medium rather than full coverage
Score details
Shade match
85
Finish & visual result
51
Wear & performance
51
Skin suitability
100
Very close colour · Matte · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 17% ingredient overlap
Differences: Olive rather than neutral undertone · Matte rather than radiant finish · Medium rather than full coverage · No long-wear claim · Does not claim transfer resistance · Does not claim not settling into lines
$39Ulta Beauty(product price)$7 less (15%)4.3 (1,754)
Matches: Very close colour· Both claim a blurring effect· Both claim a lightweight feel
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone· Matte rather than radiant finish· Medium rather than full coverage
Score details
Shade match
86
Finish & visual result
54
Wear & performance
51
Skin suitability
60
Very close colour · Matte · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 15% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone · Matte rather than radiant finish · Medium rather than full coverage · No long-wear claim · Does not claim transfer resistance · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for normal/sensitive skin · Contains drying alcohol
Matches: Claims a skin-like finish· Both claim a lightweight feel
Differences: Slightly lighter· Slightly warmer undertone· Natural rather than radiant finish
Score details
Shade match
80
Finish & visual result
58
Wear & performance
61
Skin suitability
80
Colour not compared · Natural · Buildable coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 6% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly lighter · Slightly warmer undertone · Natural rather than radiant 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
$16Ulta Beauty(product price)$30 less (65%)4.0 (94)
Matches: Very close colour· Claims a skin-like finish· Both claim a blurring effect
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone· Matte rather than radiant finish· Medium rather than full coverage
Score details
Shade match
83
Finish & visual result
51
Wear & performance
51
Skin suitability
100
Very close colour · Matte · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 17% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone · Matte rather than radiant finish · Medium rather than full coverage · No long-wear claim · Does not claim transfer resistance · Does not claim not settling into lines
Matches: Very close colour· Both claim not settling into lines· Both claim a lightweight feel
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone· Matte rather than radiant finish· Light rather than full coverage
Score details
Shade match
82
Finish & visual result
28
Wear & performance
65
Skin suitability
100
Very close colour · Matte · Light coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 1% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone · Matte rather than radiant finish · Light rather than full coverage · No blurring effect claimed · No long-wear claim · Does not claim transfer resistance
Retailer shade note: rich tan w/warm peach undertones
Matches: Same neutral undertone· Claims a skin-like finish· Both claim a lightweight feel
Differences: Slightly lighter· Natural rather than radiant finish· Buildable rather than full coverage
Score details
Shade match
64
Finish & visual result
58
Wear & performance
61
Skin suitability
80
Colour not compared · Natural · Buildable coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 6% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly lighter · Natural rather than radiant 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
$42Ulta Beauty(product price)$4 less (9%)4.4 (2,174)
Matches: Very close colour· Same radiant finish· Both claim 12-hour wear
Differences: Described as deep tan, yours as very deep· Slightly warmer undertone· Buildable rather than full coverage
Score details
Shade match
40
Finish & visual result
81
Wear & performance
86
Skin suitability
100
Very close colour · Radiant · Buildable coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 15% ingredient overlap
Differences: Described as deep tan, yours as very deep · Slightly warmer undertone · Buildable rather than full coverage · No blurring effect claimed · Does not claim transfer resistance
Retailer shade note: tan to deep skin with warm, golden undertones
Low confidence· Digital matchRetailer descriptions disagree: described as deep tan, yours as very deep
Matches: Near-identical swatch colour· Same radiant finish· Both claim a blurring effect
Differences: Described as medium tan, yours as very deep· Slightly warmer undertone· Medium rather than full coverage
Score details
Shade match
40
Finish & visual result
93
Wear & performance
65
Skin suitability
100
Looks identical · Radiant · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 11% ingredient overlap
Differences: Described as medium tan, yours as very deep · Slightly warmer undertone · Medium rather than full coverage · Does not claim transfer resistance · Does not claim not settling into lines
Retailer shade note: medium to tan skin with warm, golden undertones
Low confidence· Digital matchRetailer descriptions disagree: described as medium tan, yours as very deep
The closest shade to MAC Cosmetics Studio Radiance Serum Powered Foundation NC47 (Medium tan · 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
Maybelline Instant Age Rewind Eraser Treatment Foundation in 330, against MAC Cosmetics Studio Radiance Serum Powered Foundation in NC47. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shadeNC47Closest shade match330How they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall90
Colour60%90#c88b50#c7854dVery close colourColour difference 2.3 (0 is identical)
Finish & visual result25% of overall · 3 of 4 compared73
Finish35%56RadiantNaturalSome differenceNatural finish rather than radiant
Coverage30%80FullMediumCloseMedium coverage rather than full (buildable: one step of tolerance)
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 compared65
Longevity30%4012-hour wearNot 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%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 overall20
Skin type100%20Combination, dry, normal, oily, sensitiveSensitiveBoth marketed for sensitive skin
Overall match 78/100Shade 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.
Natasha Denona Hy-Glam Foundation Hydrating & Blurring Luminous Longwear Serum Foundation in YP11, against MAC Cosmetics Studio Radiance Serum Powered Foundation in NC47. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shadeNC47Closest overall alternativeYP11How they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall85
Colour60%90#c88b50#ce8747Very close colourColour difference 2.3 (0 is identical)
Overall match 83/100Shade 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.
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.
Walmart
Sephora
Ulta Beauty(product price)$22 less (48%)
Target
