Light Reflecting Foundation Ambato dupes and alternatives NARS
4.3 (6,795)·Rich deep · Neutral undertone
Closest shade match is the equivalent shade, scored on colour, depth and undertone only. Closest overall alternative is the most similar foundation 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 foundation 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 foundation on shade, finish, wear and skin suitability together. Each row leads with its overall match; the shade match is beneath it.
Matches: Very close colour· Same natural finish· Both claim long-wearing
Differences: Slightly cooler undertone· Full rather than medium coverage· No blurring effect claimed
Score details
Shade match
84
Finish & visual result
81
Wear & performance
80
Skin suitability
84
Very close colour · Natural · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 11% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly cooler undertone · Full rather than medium coverage · No blurring effect claimed · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Contains listed fragrance
Retailer shade note: deepest cool with red undertones
The closest shade to NARS Light Reflecting Foundation Ambato (Rich deep · Neutral undertone) in each concealer range, compared on measured colour, depth and undertone. Price never changes the order.
Concealer shade colours are sampled from retailer swatch images, so check the shade on the retailer page before buying.
Why the closest shade match works
LIXR Beauty Multi-Use Cream-to-Powder Concealer & Foundation Stick in Nutmeg 9N, against NARS Light Reflecting Foundation in Ambato. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shadeAmbatoClosest shade matchNutmeg 9NHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall90
Colour60%84#44291d#492716Close colourColour difference 3.2 (0 is identical)
Finish & visual result25% of overall · 3 of 4 compared68
Finish35%—not comparableNaturalNot listedNot comparedFinish not listed for one product
Coverage30%100MediumMediumSameSame medium coverage
Skin-like finish20%40Not listedClaimedSome differenceThe match claims a skin-like finish; your product does not list it
Blurring15%40ClaimedNot listedSome differenceOnly your product claims a blurring or smoothing effect; the match does not list it
Wear & performance15% of overall · 2 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%—not comparableNot listedNot listedNot claimed by eitherNeither product lists 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 overall60
Skin type100%60Normal, dry, combinationDry, combination, oilyBoth marketed for dry/combination skin
Overall match 85/100Shade match 90/100Medium 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.
ILIA Skin Rewind Blurring Foundation and Concealer Complexion Stick in 41W Cocobolo, against NARS Light Reflecting Foundation in Ambato. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shadeAmbatoClosest overall alternative41W CocoboloHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall84
Colour60%90#44291d#4c3024Very close colourColour difference 2.3 (0 is identical)
Finish & visual result25% of overall · 3 of 4 compared100
Finish35%100NaturalNaturalSameSame natural finish
Coverage30%100MediumMediumSameSame medium coverage
Skin-like finish20%—not comparableNot listedNot listedNot claimed by eitherNeither product lists a skin-like finish
Blurring15%100ClaimedClaimedSameBoth products claim a blurring or smoothing effect
Wear & performance15% of overall · 2 of 5 compared80
Longevity30%70Long-wearing12-hour wearSome differenceThe match claims 12-hour wear; your product says long-wearing without hours
Transfer resistance20%—not comparableNot listedNot listedNot claimed by eitherNeither product lists transfer resistance
Settling20%—not comparableNot listedNot listedNot claimed by eitherNeither product lists 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 overall60
Skin type100%60Normal, dry, combinationNormal, combination, sensitiveBoth marketed for normal/combination skin
Overall match 86/100Shade 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.
31 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.