Instant Age Rewind Eraser Treatment Foundation 190 dupes and alternatives Maybelline
4.2 (4,470)·Light · Warm 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: Near-identical swatch colour· Same warm undertone· Same natural finish
Differences: Buildable rather than medium coverage· No blurring effect claimed· Does not claim not settling into lines
Score details
Shade match
97
Finish & visual result
89
Wear & performance
40
Skin suitability
68
Looks identical · Natural · Buildable coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 1% ingredient overlap
Differences: Buildable rather than medium coverage · No blurring effect claimed · Does not claim not settling into lines · Does not claim a lightweight feel · No SPF
Matches: Near-identical swatch colour· Same warm undertone· Same medium coverage
Differences: Radiant rather than natural finish· Does not claim not settling into lines· Not marketed for sensitive skin
Score details
Shade match
98
Finish & visual result
81
Wear & performance
66
Skin suitability
0
Looks identical · Radiant · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 6% ingredient overlap
Differences: Radiant rather than natural finish · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for sensitive skin · Contains drying alcohol · No SPF
Retailer shade note: light medium with peach undertones
Matches: Near-identical swatch colour· Same warm undertone· Both claim a blurring effect
Differences: Radiant rather than natural finish· Light rather than medium coverage· Does not claim not settling into lines
Score details
Shade match
98
Finish & visual result
73
Wear & performance
40
Skin suitability
73
Looks identical · Radiant · Light coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 4% ingredient overlap
Differences: Radiant rather than natural finish · Light rather than medium coverage · Does not claim not settling into lines · Does not claim a lightweight feel
Matches: Very close colour· Same natural finish· Both claim a blurring effect
Differences: Neutral rather than warm undertone· Buildable rather than medium coverage· Does not claim not settling into lines
Score details
Shade match
87
Finish & visual result
100
Wear & performance
54
Skin suitability
0
Very close colour · Natural · Buildable coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 9% ingredient overlap
Differences: Neutral rather than warm undertone · Buildable rather than medium coverage · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for sensitive skin · No SPF
Retailer shade note: Light-Medium skin with a neutral undertone
Matches: Very close colour· Same natural finish· Same medium coverage
Differences: Neutral rather than warm undertone· Does not claim not settling into lines· Not marketed for sensitive skin
Score details
Shade match
85
Finish & visual result
100
Wear & performance
54
Skin suitability
0
Very close colour · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 9% ingredient overlap
Differences: Neutral rather than warm undertone · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for sensitive skin · Contains listed fragrance · Contains drying alcohol · No SPF
Retailer shade note: for light to medium skin with neutral undertones
Matches: Very close colour· Both claim a blurring effect· Claims long-wearing
Differences: Matte rather than natural finish· Buildable rather than medium coverage· Does not claim not settling into lines
Score details
Shade match
87
Finish & visual result
81
Wear & performance
54
Skin suitability
68
Very close colour · Matte · Buildable coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 12% ingredient overlap
Differences: Matte rather than natural finish · Buildable rather than medium coverage · Does not claim not settling into lines · Contains drying alcohol · No SPF
Matches: Very close colour· Same warm undertone· Both claim a blurring effect
Differences: Matte rather than natural finish· Full rather than medium coverage· Not marketed for sensitive skin
Score details
Shade match
94
Finish & visual result
73
Wear & performance
65
Skin suitability
0
Very close colour · Matte · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 10% ingredient overlap
Differences: Matte rather than natural finish · Full rather than medium coverage · Not marketed for sensitive skin · Contains listed fragrance · No SPF
Retailer shade note: light to medium skin with warm, golden undertones
Matches: Very close colour· Same natural finish· Claims long-wearing
Differences: Neutral rather than warm undertone· Light rather than medium coverage· No blurring effect claimed
Score details
Shade match
86
Finish & visual result
81
Wear & performance
54
Skin suitability
68
Very close colour · Natural · Light coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 6% ingredient overlap
Differences: Neutral rather than warm undertone · Light rather than medium coverage · No blurring effect claimed · Does not claim not settling into lines
Retailer shade note: light-medium with a neutral undertone
Matches: Very close colour· Same warm undertone· Same medium coverage
Differences: Matte rather than natural finish· Does not claim not settling into lines· Not marketed for sensitive skin
Score details
Shade match
93
Finish & visual result
81
Wear & performance
51
Skin suitability
0
Very close colour · Matte · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 6% ingredient overlap
Differences: Matte rather than natural finish · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for sensitive skin · Contains drying alcohol · No SPF
$11.99Ulta Beauty(product price)$5 less (29%)4.4 (182,841)
Matches: Very close colour· Same warm undertone· Same medium coverage
Differences: Matte rather than natural finish· No blurring effect claimed· Does not claim not settling into lines
Score details
Shade match
96
Finish & visual result
70
Wear & performance
54
Skin suitability
0
Very close colour · Matte · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 17% ingredient overlap
Differences: Matte rather than natural finish · No blurring effect claimed · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for sensitive skin · Contains drying alcohol · No SPF
Matches: Very close colour· Similar undertone (neutral vs warm)· Both claim a blurring effect
Differences: Radiant rather than natural finish· Light rather than medium coverage· Does not claim not settling into lines
Score details
Shade match
91
Finish & visual result
73
Wear & performance
40
Skin suitability
73
Very close colour · Radiant · Light coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 4% ingredient overlap
Differences: Radiant rather than natural finish · Light rather than medium coverage · Does not claim not settling into lines · Does not claim a lightweight feel
Retailer shade note: Light-medium with neutral warm undertones
$11.99Ulta Beauty(product price)$5 less (29%)4.4 (182,841)
Matches: Very close colour· Same warm undertone· Same medium coverage
Differences: Matte rather than natural finish· No blurring effect claimed· Does not claim not settling into lines
Score details
Shade match
95
Finish & visual result
70
Wear & performance
54
Skin suitability
0
Very close colour · Matte · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 17% ingredient overlap
Differences: Matte rather than natural finish · No blurring effect claimed · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for sensitive skin · Contains drying alcohol · No SPF
Matches: Near-identical swatch colour· Both claim a blurring effect· Claims 12-hour wear
Differences: Neutral rather than warm undertone· Matte rather than natural finish· Full rather than medium coverage
Score details
Shade match
90
Finish & visual result
73
Wear & performance
66
Skin suitability
0
Looks identical · Matte · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 2% ingredient overlap
Differences: Neutral rather than warm undertone · Matte rather than natural finish · Full rather than medium coverage · Not marketed for sensitive skin · No SPF
Retailer shade note: tawny beige with neutral undertone for medium skin
Matches: Near-identical swatch colour· Both claim a blurring effect· Claims 12-hour wear
Differences: Neutral rather than warm undertone· Matte rather than natural finish· Full rather than medium coverage
Score details
Shade match
90
Finish & visual result
73
Wear & performance
66
Skin suitability
0
Looks identical · Matte · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 2% ingredient overlap
Differences: Neutral rather than warm undertone · Matte rather than natural finish · Full rather than medium coverage · Not marketed for sensitive skin · No SPF
Retailer shade note: light beige with neutral undertone for light skin
The closest shade to Maybelline Instant Age Rewind Eraser Treatment Foundation 190 (Light · Warm 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
LORAC PRO Soft Focus Longwear Foundation in 05, against Maybelline Instant Age Rewind Eraser Treatment Foundation in 190. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shade190Closest shade match05How they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall98
Colour60%98#edb27d#ecb481Looks identicalColour difference 0.8 (0 is identical)
Depth15%99LightLightSameDepth difference: 0.6
Retailer descriptionLight mediumLightSome differenceRetailer descriptions one depth band apart
Finish & visual result25% of overall · 3 of 4 compared73
Finish35%56NaturalMatteSome differenceMatte finish rather than natural
Coverage30%80MediumFullCloseFull coverage rather than medium (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 · 3 of 5 compared54
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%40ClaimedNot listedSome differenceOnly your product claims not settling into pores or fine lines; the match does not list it
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 overall68
Skin type100%68SensitiveCombination, dry, normal, oily, sensitiveBoth marketed for sensitive skin
Overall match 84/100Shade 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.
Tarte Timeless Hydrating Foundation in 35H Medium Honey, against Maybelline Instant Age Rewind Eraser Treatment Foundation in 190. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shade190Closest overall alternative35H Medium HoneyHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall94
Colour60%90#edb27d#f2b282Very close colourColour difference 2.3 (0 is identical)
Depth15%99LightLightSameDepth difference: 0.8
Retailer descriptionLight mediumNot statedNo depth word in one descriptionNot compared
Finish & visual result25% of overall · 3 of 4 compared100
Finish35%100NaturalNaturalSameSame natural finish
Coverage30%100MediumBuildableCloseBuildable coverage rather than medium (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 · 3 of 5 compared54
Longevity30%40Not listed12-hour wearSome 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%40ClaimedNot listedSome differenceOnly your product claims not settling into pores or fine lines; the match does not list it
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 overall68
Skin type100%68SensitiveCombination, dry, normal, oily, sensitiveBoth marketed for sensitive skin
Overall match 88/100Shade match 94/100Medium 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(product price)Costs $42.01 more
Sephora
