Instant Age Rewind Eraser Dark Circle Treatment Concealer 122 dupes and alternatives Maybelline
4.2 (11,365)·Light · Warm 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.
The closest shade to Maybelline Instant Age Rewind Eraser Dark Circle Treatment Concealer 122 (Light · Warm 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
e.l.f. Cosmetics Hydrating Camo Concealer in Light Beige, against Maybelline Instant Age Rewind Eraser Dark Circle Treatment Concealer in 122. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shade122Closest shade matchLight BeigeHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall98
Colour60%98#eec192#eebf91Looks identicalColour difference 0.8 (0 is identical)
Depth15%99LightLightSameDepth difference: 0.7
Retailer descriptionNot statedLightNo depth word in one descriptionNot compared
Finish & visual result25% of overall · 1 of 4 compared78
Finish35%78RadiantSatinCloseSatin finish rather than radiant
Coverage30%—not comparableNot listedFullNot comparedCoverage not listed for one product
Skin-like finish20%—not comparableNot listedNot listedNot claimed by eitherNeither product lists a skin-like finish
Blurring15%—not comparableNot listedNot listedNot claimed by eitherNeither product lists a blurring or smoothing effect
Wear & performance15% of overall · 3 of 5 compared59
Longevity30%40Not listedLong-wearingSome differenceThe match claims long wear; your product does not list it
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%40Not listedClaimedSome differenceThe match claims a comfortable, lightweight feel; your product does not list it
Skin suitability5% of overall0
Skin type100%0SensitiveDry, combination, normalMarketed for different skin types
Overall match 82/100Shade 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.
bareMinerals ORIGINAL Liquid Mineral Brightening Concealer in Fair 1.5W, against Maybelline Instant Age Rewind Eraser Dark Circle Treatment Concealer in 122. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shade122Closest overall alternativeFair 1.5WHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall95
Colour60%92#eec192#edc69bVery close colourColour difference 1.9 (0 is identical)
Depth15%97LightFairCloseDepth difference: 1.8
Retailer descriptionNot statedFairNo depth word in one descriptionNot compared
Finish & visual result25% of overall · 1 of 4 compared78
Finish35%78RadiantLuminousCloseLuminous finish rather than radiant
Coverage30%—not comparableNot listedBuildableNot comparedCoverage not listed for one product
Skin-like finish20%—not comparableNot listedNot listedNot claimed by eitherNeither product lists a skin-like finish
Blurring15%—not comparableNot listedNot listedNot claimed by eitherNeither product lists a blurring or smoothing effect
Wear & performance15% of overall · 3 of 5 compared59
Longevity30%40Not listedLong-wearingSome differenceThe match claims long wear; your product does not list it
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%40Not listedClaimedSome differenceThe match claims a comfortable, lightweight feel; your product does not list it
Skin suitability5% of overall50
Skin type100%50SensitiveNot publishedSkin-type suitability not published for one product
Overall match 83/100Shade match 95/100Medium 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.
32 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 BeautyCosts $18.01 more
Sephora
View at Walmart
