Instant Age Rewind Eraser Treatment Foundation 300 dupes and alternatives Maybelline
4.2 (4,470)·Medium · Cool 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 cool undertone· Both claim a blurring effect
Differences: Matte rather than natural finish· Full rather than medium coverage· Does not claim not settling into lines
Score details
Shade match
97
Finish & visual result
73
Wear & performance
54
Skin suitability
0
Looks identical · Matte · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 1% ingredient overlap
Differences: Matte rather than natural finish · Full rather than medium coverage · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for sensitive skin · No SPF
Matches: Very close colour· Same natural finish· Both claim a blurring effect
Differences: Neutral rather than cool undertone· Buildable rather than medium coverage· Does not claim not settling into lines
Score details
Shade match
87
Finish & visual result
100
Wear & performance
40
Skin suitability
0
Very close colour · Natural · Buildable coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 4% ingredient overlap
Differences: Neutral rather than cool undertone · Buildable rather than medium coverage · Does not claim not settling into lines · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Not marketed for sensitive skin · Contains listed fragrance · No SPF
Retailer shade note: medium skin with neutral beige undertones
Matches: Near-identical swatch colour· Same medium coverage· Both claim a blurring effect
Differences: Neutral rather than cool undertone· Matte rather than natural finish· Does not claim not settling into lines
Score details
Shade match
88
Finish & visual result
81
Wear & performance
66
Skin suitability
0
Looks identical · Matte · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 9% ingredient overlap
Differences: Neutral rather than cool undertone · Matte rather than natural finish · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for sensitive skin · Contains drying alcohol · No SPF
$13.99Ulta Beauty(product price)$3 less (18%)4.3 (33,167)
Matches: Very close colour· Same natural finish· Same medium coverage
Differences: Neutral rather than cool undertone· No blurring effect claimed· Does not claim not settling into lines
Score details
Shade match
85
Finish & visual result
79
Wear & performance
40
Skin suitability
68
Very close colour · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 18% ingredient overlap
Differences: Neutral rather than cool undertone · No blurring effect claimed · Does not claim not settling into lines · Does not claim a lightweight feel · No SPF
The closest shade to Maybelline Instant Age Rewind Eraser Treatment Foundation 300 (Medium · Cool 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
Lancôme Teint Idole Ultra Wear Natural Matte Foundation in 425C, against Maybelline Instant Age Rewind Eraser Treatment Foundation in 300. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shade300Closest shade match425CHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall98
Colour60%96#d18d64#cf8f65Looks identicalColour difference 1.1 (0 is identical)
Depth15%99MediumMediumSameDepth difference: 0.4
Retailer descriptionMedium tanMedium tanBoth described as medium tanThe retailers describe the same depth
Finish35%56NaturalMatteSome differenceMatte finish rather than natural
Coverage30%80MediumFullCloseFull coverage rather than medium (buildable: one step of tolerance)
Skin-like finish20%40Not listedClaimedSome differenceThe match claims a skin-like finish; your product does not list it
Blurring15%100ClaimedClaimedSameBoth products claim a blurring or smoothing effect
Wear & performance15% of overall · 4 of 5 compared65
Longevity30%40Not listed24-hour wearSome differenceThe match claims long wear; your product does not list it
Transfer resistance20%40Not listedClaimedSome differenceThe match claims transfer resistance; your product 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 overall73
Skin type100%73SensitiveNormal, oily, sensitiveBoth marketed for sensitive skin
Overall match 84/100Shade match 98/100High 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.
Haus Labs Triclone Skin Tech Medium Coverage Foundation in 360 Medium, against Maybelline Instant Age Rewind Eraser Treatment Foundation in 300. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shade300Closest overall alternative360 MediumHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall94
Colour60%90#d18d64#cc8a68Very close colourColour difference 2.3 (0 is identical)
Finish & visual result25% of overall · 3 of 4 compared100
Finish35%100NaturalNaturalSameSame natural finish
Coverage30%100MediumMediumSameSame medium 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 · 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 overall73
Skin type100%73SensitiveNormal, dry, 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.
Sephora
Ulta Beauty$0.99 less (6%)
