Closest shade match is the equivalent shade, scored on colour, depth, undertone and colour family only. Closest overall alternative is the most similar eyeshadow overall: shade match 55%, finish, pigmentation and format 30%, wear and performance 10%, comfort and skin suitability 5%.
Overall alternativesShade matchesRanked by the overall match: the most similar eyeshadow on shade, finish, wear and comfort 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 eyeshadow on shade, finish, wear and comfort and skin suitability together. Each row leads with its overall match; the shade match is beneath it.
Matches: Very close colour· Claims crease resistance
Differences: Glitter rather than shimmer (finish)· Powder rather than liquid (format)· Long-wearing rather than 16-hour wear (longevity)
Score details
Shade match
90
Finish, pigmentation & format
59
Wear & performance
59
Comfort & skin suitability
40
Very close colour · Glitter · Sheer
Ingredients (not scored): 7% ingredient overlap
Differences: Glitter rather than shimmer (finish) · Powder rather than liquid (format) · Long-wearing rather than 16-hour wear (longevity) · Does not claim comfort
Matches: Same finish: shimmer· Claims crease resistance
Differences: Lighter· Nude rather than golden· Powder rather than liquid (format)
Score details
Shade match
68
Finish, pigmentation & format
85
Wear & performance
59
Comfort & skin suitability
40
Close colour · Shimmer · Opaque
Ingredients (not scored): 7% ingredient overlap
Differences: Lighter · Nude rather than golden · Powder rather than liquid (format) · Long-wearing rather than 16-hour wear (longevity) · Does not claim comfort
Differences: Rose rather than golden· Glitter rather than shimmer (finish)· Cream rather than liquid (format)
Score details
Shade match
73
Finish, pigmentation & format
66
Wear & performance
70
Comfort & skin suitability
40
Looks identical · Glitter
Ingredients (not scored): 8% ingredient overlap
Differences: Rose rather than golden · Glitter rather than shimmer (finish) · Cream rather than liquid (format) · Long-wearing rather than 16-hour wear (longevity) · Does not claim comfort
Differences: Lighter· Nude rather than golden· Cream rather than liquid (format)
Score details
Shade match
62
Finish, pigmentation & format
93
Wear & performance
40
Comfort & skin suitability
40
Close colour · Shimmer
Ingredients (not scored): 23% ingredient overlap
Differences: Lighter · Nude rather than golden · Cream rather than liquid (format) · Not listed rather than 16-hour wear (longevity) · Does not claim comfort
Matches: Same finish: shimmer· Claims crease resistance
Differences: White rather than golden· Powder rather than liquid (format)· Long-wearing rather than 16-hour wear (longevity)
Score details
Shade match
60
Finish, pigmentation & format
85
Wear & performance
59
Comfort & skin suitability
40
Close colour · Shimmer
Ingredients (not scored): 7% ingredient overlap
Differences: White rather than golden · Powder rather than liquid (format) · Long-wearing rather than 16-hour wear (longevity) · Does not claim comfort
Differences: Glitter rather than shimmer (finish)· Powder rather than liquid (format)· Not listed rather than 16-hour wear (longevity)
Score details
Shade match
78
Finish, pigmentation & format
59
Wear & performance
40
Comfort & skin suitability
40
Slight colour difference · Glitter · Opaque
Ingredients (not scored): 9% ingredient overlap
Differences: Glitter rather than shimmer (finish) · Powder rather than liquid (format) · Not listed rather than 16-hour wear (longevity) · Does not claim comfort
Retailer shade note: white and gold metallic glitter
ColourPop Jelly Much Gel Eyeshadow in Field of Fairies, against Maybelline Shadow Drip Eye Tint Liquid Eye Shadow in Quartz Drip. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shadeQuartz DripClosest shade matchField of FairiesHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall96
Colour60%94#ecd0c9#f2d1c9Very close colourColour difference 1.6 (0 is identical)
Depth15%98LightLightSameDepth difference 1.1 on the 0–100 scale
Undertone—not comparableNot listedWarmUndertone unknown on one side
Colour family25%100GoldenGoldenSameSame colour family
Finish, pigmentation & format30% of overall · 1 of 3 compared68
Finish65%68ShimmerGlitterSome differenceGlitter finish rather than shimmer
Pigmentation20%—not comparableNot listedNot listedNot listed for eitherNeither product lists an opacity
Format15%—not comparableLiquidNot listedNot listed for eitherFormat not listed for one product
Wear & performance10% of overall · 2 of 3 compared59
Longevity50%7016-hour wearLong-wearingSome differenceYour product claims 16-hour wear; the match says long-wearing without hours
Crease resistance30%40Not listedClaimedSome differenceThe match claims crease resistance; your product does not list it
Overall match 81/100Shade match 96/100Medium 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.
Winky Lux Rose Petal Liquid Eyeshadow in Magnolia Shimmer, against Maybelline Shadow Drip Eye Tint Liquid Eye Shadow in Quartz Drip. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shadeQuartz DripClosest overall alternativeMagnolia ShimmerHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall84
Colour60%77#ecd0c9#f3ddd3Close colourColour difference 4.0 (0 is identical)
Depth15%86LightLightSameDepth difference 5.7 on the 0–100 scale
Undertone—not comparableNot listedNot listedUndertone unknown on one side
Colour family25%100GoldenGoldenSameSame colour family
Finish, pigmentation & format30% of overall · 2 of 3 compared100
Finish65%100ShimmerShimmerSameSame shimmer finish
Pigmentation20%—not comparableNot listedBuildableNot listed for eitherAn opacity not listed for one product
Format15%100LiquidLiquidSameBoth liquid
Wear & performance10% of overall · 2 of 3 compared65
Longevity50%8016-hour wear12-hour wearClose12-hour wear claimed against 16-hour wear
Crease resistance30%40Not listedClaimedSome differenceThe match claims crease resistance; your product does not list it
Overall match 87/100Shade match 84/100Medium 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, undertone and colour family; the overall match on shade match, finish, pigmentation and format, wear and performance and comfort and suitability. A pair with no swatch colour on one side or Low data confidence is listed without a score. 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
SephoraCosts $20.01 more
