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: Same warm undertone· Both claim long-wearing· Both claim not settling into lines
Differences: Slightly lighter· Matte rather than natural finish· Full rather than buildable coverage
Score details
Shade match
80
Finish & visual result
61
Wear & performance
86
Skin suitability
50
Slight colour difference · Matte · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 11% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly lighter · Matte rather than natural finish · Full rather than buildable coverage · No skin-like finish claimed · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Contains drying alcohol
Retailer shade note: for deep skin w/ warm golden undertones
Matches: Same warm undertone· Both claim long-wearing· Both claim not settling into lines
Differences: Slightly lighter· Matte rather than natural finish· Full rather than buildable coverage
Score details
Shade match
79
Finish & visual result
61
Wear & performance
86
Skin suitability
50
Slight colour difference · Matte · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 11% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly lighter · Matte rather than natural finish · Full rather than buildable coverage · No skin-like finish claimed · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Contains drying alcohol
Retailer shade note: for deep skin w/ warm undertones
Matches: Similar undertone (neutral vs warm)· Claims a blurring effect· Claims transfer resistance
Differences: Slightly deeper· Matte rather than natural finish· Full rather than buildable coverage
Score details
Shade match
85
Finish & visual result
58
Wear & performance
61
Skin suitability
50
Close colour · Matte · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 14% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly deeper · Matte rather than natural finish · Full rather than buildable coverage · No skin-like finish claimed · Does not claim not settling into lines · Contains drying alcohol
Retailer shade note: for very tan to deep skin with neutral warm undertones
The closest shade to Milk Makeup Future Fluid Longwear Hydrating Concealer 21W (Tan · 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 match works
Huda Beauty #FauxFilter Matte Buildable Coverage Waterproof Concealer in Salted Caramel 7.3 Golden, against Milk Makeup Future Fluid Longwear Hydrating Concealer in 21W. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shade21WClosest matchSalted Caramel 7.3 GoldenHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall93
Colour60%88#b6733c#b57346Very close colourColour difference 2.5 (0 is identical)
Depth15%100TanTanSameDepth difference: 0.0
Retailer descriptionDeep tanDeep tanBoth described as deep tanThe retailers describe the same depth
Finish35%56NaturalMatteSome differenceMatte finish rather than natural
Coverage30%80BuildableFullCloseFull coverage rather than buildable (buildable: one step of tolerance)
Skin-like finish20%100ClaimedClaimedSameBoth products claim a skin-like finish
Blurring15%40Not listedClaimedSome differenceThe match claims a blurring or smoothing effect; your product does not list it
Wear & performance15% of overall · 4 of 5 compared75
Longevity30%100Long-wearingLong-wearingSameBoth products claim long wear
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%40ClaimedNot listedSome differenceOnly your product claims a comfortable, lightweight feel; the match does not list it
Skin suitability5% of overall50
Skin type100%50Not publishedNormal, dry, oilySkin-type suitability not published for one product
Overall match 82/100Shade match 93/100Medium 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.
SephoraSame price
