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 natural finish· Claims a blurring effect· Claims transfer resistance
Differences: Neutral rather than warm undertone· Full rather than buildable coverage· No skin-like finish claimed
Score details
Shade match
78
Finish & visual result
73
Wear & performance
61
Skin suitability
50
Close colour · Natural · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 14% ingredient overlap
Differences: Neutral rather than warm undertone · Full rather than buildable coverage · No skin-like finish claimed · Does not claim not settling into lines
Retailer shade note: extra deep with neutral undertones
The closest shade to Milk Makeup Future Fluid Longwear Hydrating Concealer 23W (Deep · 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 shade match works
Estée Lauder Double Wear Stay-in-Place 24-Hour Concealer in 6N, against Milk Makeup Future Fluid Longwear Hydrating Concealer in 23W. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shade23WClosest shade match6NHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall89
Colour60%96#995b34#9b5e39Looks identicalColour difference 1.2 (0 is identical)
Depth15%98DeepDeep tanCloseDepth difference: 1.5
Retailer descriptionDeepVery deepSome differenceRetailer descriptions one depth band apart
Coverage30%80BuildableFullCloseFull coverage rather than buildable (buildable: one step of tolerance)
Skin-like finish20%40ClaimedNot listedSome differenceOnly your product claims a skin-like finish; the match does not list it
Blurring15%40Not listedClaimedSome differenceThe match claims a blurring or smoothing effect; your product does not list it
Wear & performance15% of overall · 4 of 5 compared61
Longevity30%70Long-wearing24-hour wearSome differenceThe match claims 24-hour wear; your product says long-wearing without hours
Transfer resistance20%40Not listedClaimedSome differenceThe match claims transfer resistance; your product does not list it
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 overall50
Skin type100%50Not publishedNormal, dry, oilySkin-type suitability not published for one product
Overall match 79/100Shade match 89/100Medium 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.
Hourglass Vanish Airbrush Full Coverage Longwear Concealer in Mocha 11, against Milk Makeup Future Fluid Longwear Hydrating Concealer in 23W. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shade23WClosest overall alternativeMocha 11How they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall83
Colour60%82#995b34#8f5529Close colourColour difference 3.3 (0 is identical)
Depth15%91DeepDeepSameDepth difference: 4.2
Retailer descriptionDeepDeepBoth described as deepThe retailers describe the same depth
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 · 3 of 5 compared86
Longevity30%70Long-wearing16-hour wearSome differenceThe match claims 16-hour wear; your product says long-wearing without hours
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 publishedNormal, dry, combinationSkin-type suitability not published for one product
Overall match 82/100Shade match 83/100High 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.
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.
SephoraCosts $6 more
