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.
Matches: Both claim a skin-like finish· Both claim long-wearing· Both claim not settling into lines
Differences: Slightly lighter· Described as medium tan, yours as light medium· Slightly warmer undertone
Score details
Shade match
40
Finish & visual result
82
Wear & performance
100
Skin suitability
50
Close colour · Radiant · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 11% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly lighter · Described as medium tan, yours as light medium · Slightly warmer undertone · Radiant rather than natural finish · Medium rather than buildable coverage
Retailer shade note: medium tan with warm golden undertones
Low confidence· Digital matchRetailer descriptions disagree: described as medium tan, yours as light medium
Matches: Very close colour· Both claim a skin-like finish· Both claim long-wearing
Differences: Described as medium tan, yours as light medium· Slightly warmer undertone· Radiant rather than natural finish
Score details
Shade match
40
Finish & visual result
82
Wear & performance
100
Skin suitability
50
Very close colour · Radiant · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 11% ingredient overlap
Differences: Described as medium tan, yours as light medium · Slightly warmer undertone · Radiant rather than natural finish · Medium rather than buildable coverage
Retailer shade note: medium tan with neutral peach undertones
Low confidence· Digital matchRetailer descriptions disagree: described as medium tan, yours as light medium
Matches: Very close colour· Both claim a skin-like finish· Both claim long-wearing
Differences: Described as medium tan, yours as light medium· Slightly warmer undertone· Radiant rather than natural finish
Score details
Shade match
40
Finish & visual result
82
Wear & performance
100
Skin suitability
50
Very close colour · Radiant · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 11% ingredient overlap
Differences: Described as medium tan, yours as light medium · Slightly warmer undertone · Radiant rather than natural finish · Medium rather than buildable coverage
Retailer shade note: medium tan with warm neutral undertones
Low confidence· Digital matchRetailer descriptions disagree: described as medium tan, yours as light medium
The closest shade to Milk Makeup Future Fluid Longwear Hydrating Concealer 11C (Medium tan · Cool 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
Maybelline Instant Age Rewind Eraser Dark Circle Treatment Concealer in 144, against Milk Makeup Future Fluid Longwear Hydrating Concealer in 11C. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shade11CClosest shade match144How they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall73
Colour60%78#c68b61#ce8b51Close colourColour difference 3.9 (0 is identical)
Finish & visual result25% of overall · 2 of 4 compared50
Finish35%56NaturalRadiantSome differenceRadiant finish rather than natural
Coverage30%—not comparableBuildableNot listedNot comparedCoverage not listed for one product
Skin-like finish20%40ClaimedNot listedSome differenceOnly your product claims a skin-like finish; the match does not list it
Blurring15%—not comparableNot listedNot listedNot claimed by eitherNeither product lists a blurring or smoothing effect
Wear & performance15% of overall · 3 of 5 compared59
Longevity30%40Long-wearingNot listedSome differenceOnly your product claims long wear; the match 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%40ClaimedNot listedSome differenceOnly your product claims a comfortable, lightweight feel; the match does not list it
Skin suitability5% of overall50
Skin type100%50Not publishedSensitiveSkin-type suitability not published for one product
Overall match 64/100Shade match 73/100Medium 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.
Glossier Stretch Concealer for Dewy Buildable Coverage in Medium Tan 3, against Milk Makeup Future Fluid Longwear Hydrating Concealer in 11C. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shade11CClosest overall alternativeMedium Tan 3How they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall70
Colour60%82#c68b61#c58a54Close colourColour difference 3.4 (0 is identical)
Skin-like finish20%40ClaimedNot listedSome differenceOnly your product claims a skin-like finish; the match does not list it
Blurring15%—not comparableNot listedNot listedNot claimed by eitherNeither product lists a blurring or smoothing effect
Wear & performance15% of overall · 3 of 5 compared100
Longevity30%100Long-wearingLong-wearingSameBoth products claim long wear
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%100ClaimedClaimedSameBoth products claim a comfortable, lightweight feel
Skin suitability5% of overall50
Skin type100%50Not publishedNot publishedSkin-type suitability not published for one product
Overall match 73/100Shade match 70/100Medium 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
Sephora$8 less (27%)
