Studio Radiance Skin Tint Stick DEEP 2 dupes and alternatives MAC Cosmetics
4.7 (607)·Deep tan · Cool · rosy 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· Both claim transfer resistance· Claims a lightweight feel
Differences: Luminous rather than radiant finish· Full rather than light coverage· No skin-like finish claimed
Score details
Shade match
88
Finish & visual result
56
Wear & performance
65
Skin suitability
76
Very close colour · Luminous · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): no ingredient list for one product
Differences: Luminous rather than radiant finish · Full rather than light coverage · No skin-like finish claimed · Does not claim not settling into lines
Matches: Near-identical swatch colour· Both claim a skin-like finish· Both claim 24-hour wear
Differences: Neutral rather than cool undertone· Matte rather than radiant finish· Full rather than light coverage
Score details
Shade match
88
Finish & visual result
36
Wear & performance
75
Skin suitability
76
Looks identical · Matte · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 1% ingredient overlap
Differences: Neutral rather than cool undertone · Matte rather than radiant finish · Full rather than light coverage · Does not claim not settling into lines · Contains drying alcohol
Retailer shade note: for deep neutral skin with a subtle red hue
Matches: Same cool undertone· Both claim a skin-like finish· Claims a blurring effect
Differences: Slightly lighter· Matte rather than radiant finish· Medium rather than light coverage
Score details
Shade match
89
Finish & visual result
54
Wear & performance
46
Skin suitability
38
Close colour · Matte · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 1% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly lighter · Matte rather than radiant finish · Medium rather than light coverage · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for dry skin
Matches: Same radiant finish· Same light coverage· Claims a blurring effect
Differences: Olive rather than cool undertone· No skin-like finish claimed· No long-wear claim
Score details
Shade match
74
Finish & visual result
79
Wear & performance
40
Skin suitability
87
Close colour · Radiant · Light coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 0% ingredient overlap
Differences: Olive rather than cool undertone · No skin-like finish claimed · No long-wear claim · Does not claim transfer resistance · Does not claim not settling into lines
Matches: Very close colour· Same radiant finish· Adds SPF 50
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone· Full rather than light coverage· No skin-like finish claimed
Score details
Shade match
76
Finish & visual result
58
Wear & performance
40
Skin suitability
100
Very close colour · Radiant · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 1% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone · Full rather than light coverage · No skin-like finish claimed · No long-wear claim · Does not claim transfer resistance · Does not claim not settling into lines · Contains listed fragrance
Retailer shade note: caramel brown shade with warm undertones
Matches: Very close colour· Both claim a skin-like finish· Claims a blurring effect
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone· Matte rather than radiant finish· Medium rather than light coverage
Score details
Shade match
80
Finish & visual result
54
Wear & performance
46
Skin suitability
38
Very close colour · Matte · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 1% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone · Matte rather than radiant finish · Medium rather than light coverage · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for dry skin
Matches: Claims a blurring effect· Claims a lightweight feel
Differences: Matte rather than radiant finish· Buildable rather than light coverage· No skin-like finish claimed
Score details
Shade match
77
Finish & visual result
42
Wear & performance
51
Skin suitability
76
Close colour · Matte · Buildable coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 1% ingredient overlap
Differences: Matte rather than radiant finish · Buildable rather than light coverage · No skin-like finish claimed · Does not claim transfer resistance · Does not claim not settling into lines · Contains drying alcohol
Matches: Same light coverage· Both claim not settling into lines· Claims colour stability
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone· Natural rather than radiant finish· No skin-like finish claimed
Score details
Shade match
68
Finish & visual result
68
Wear & performance
51
Skin suitability
40
Close colour · Natural · Light coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 1% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone · Natural rather than radiant finish · No skin-like finish claimed · Does not claim transfer resistance · Not marketed for normal skin
Matches: Both claim a skin-like finish· Claims a blurring effect· Both claim transfer resistance
Differences: Slightly lighter· Slightly warmer undertone· Matte rather than radiant finish
Score details
Shade match
74
Finish & visual result
54
Wear & performance
46
Skin suitability
38
Close colour · Matte · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 1% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly lighter · Slightly warmer undertone · Matte rather than radiant finish · Medium rather than light coverage · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for dry skin
Matches: Both claim a skin-like finish· Claims a blurring effect· Claims a lightweight feel
Differences: Slightly deeper· Slightly warmer undertone· Natural rather than radiant finish
Score details
Shade match
69
Finish & visual result
70
Wear & performance
40
Skin suitability
40
Close colour · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 0% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly deeper · Slightly warmer undertone · Natural rather than radiant finish · Medium rather than light coverage · No long-wear claim · Does not claim transfer resistance · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for dry skin
Matches: Claims a blurring effect· Claims a lightweight feel
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone· Natural rather than radiant finish· Medium rather than light coverage
Score details
Shade match
68
Finish & visual result
52
Wear & performance
51
Skin suitability
87
Close colour · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 1% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone · Natural rather than radiant finish · Medium rather than light coverage · No skin-like finish claimed · Does not claim transfer resistance · Does not claim not settling into lines · Contains drying alcohol
The closest shade to MAC Cosmetics Studio Radiance Skin Tint Stick DEEP 2 (Deep tan · Cool · rosy 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
Natasha Denona Hy-Glam Foundation Hydrating & Blurring Luminous Longwear Serum Foundation in RP8, against MAC Cosmetics Studio Radiance Skin Tint Stick in DEEP 2. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shadeDEEP 2Closest matchRP8How they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall91
Colour60%86#b96535#b35e33Very close colourColour difference 2.8 (0 is identical)
Coverage30%60LightMediumSome differenceMedium coverage rather than light
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 · 3 of 5 compared70
Longevity30%7024-hour wear18-hour wearSome difference18-hour wear claimed against 24-hour wear
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%—not comparableNot listedNot listedNot claimed by eitherNeither product lists a comfortable, lightweight feel
Skin suitability5% of overall87
Skin type100%87Normal, dryNormal, dry, sensitiveBoth marketed for normal/dry skin
Overall match 82/100Shade 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.
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 $10 more
