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 neutral undertone· Same natural finish· Claims a blurring effect
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour· Slightly lighter· Medium rather than buildable coverage
Score details
Shade match
60
Finish & visual result
79
Wear & performance
82
Skin suitability
50
Visibly different colour · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 9% ingredient overlap
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour · Slightly lighter · Medium rather than buildable coverage · No skin-like finish claimed · Does not claim not settling into lines
Matches: Same neutral undertone· Same natural finish· Claims a blurring effect
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour· Slightly lighter· Medium rather than buildable coverage
Score details
Shade match
58
Finish & visual result
79
Wear & performance
82
Skin suitability
50
Visibly different colour · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 9% ingredient overlap
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour · Slightly lighter · Medium rather than buildable coverage · No skin-like finish claimed · Does not claim not settling into lines
Matches: Same natural finish· Claims a blurring effect· Both claim long-wearing
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour· Slightly lighter· Slightly warmer undertone
Score details
Shade match
55
Finish & visual result
79
Wear & performance
82
Skin suitability
50
Slight colour difference · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 9% ingredient overlap
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour · Slightly lighter · Slightly warmer undertone · Medium rather than buildable coverage · No skin-like finish claimed · Does not claim not settling into lines
Matches: Same neutral undertone· Same natural finish· Claims a blurring effect
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour· Slightly lighter· Medium rather than buildable coverage
Score details
Shade match
52
Finish & visual result
79
Wear & performance
82
Skin suitability
50
Visibly different colour · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 9% ingredient overlap
Differences: Noticeably different swatch colour · Slightly lighter · Medium rather than buildable coverage · No skin-like finish claimed · Does not claim not settling into lines
The closest shade to Milk Makeup Future Fluid Longwear Hydrating Concealer 29N (Rich deep · Neutral 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
Laura Mercier Real Flawless Weightless Perfecting Serum Concealer in 6N1, against Milk Makeup Future Fluid Longwear Hydrating Concealer in 29N. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shade29NClosest match6N1How they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall88
Colour60%80#4c2520#48271cClose colourColour difference 3.6 (0 is identical)
Finish & visual result25% of overall · 3 of 4 compared86
Finish35%100NaturalNaturalSameSame natural finish
Coverage30%100BuildableMediumCloseMedium 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%—not comparableNot listedNot listedNot claimed by eitherNeither product lists a blurring or smoothing effect
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 publishedDry, normal, combination, oily, sensitiveSkin-type suitability not published for one product
Overall match 85/100Shade match 88/100Medium 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.
SephoraCosts $4 more
