Light Reflecting Foundation Lagos dupes and alternatives NARS
4.3 (6,795)·Medium tan · 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 neutral undertone· Same medium coverage
Differences: Radiant rather than natural finish· No blurring effect claimed· No long-wear claim
Score details
Shade match
95
Finish & visual result
70
Wear & performance
60
Skin suitability
60
Very close colour · Radiant · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 17% ingredient overlap
Differences: Radiant rather than natural finish · No blurring effect claimed · No long-wear claim · Not marketed for combination skin · Contains listed fragrance · Contains drying alcohol
Retailer shade note: medium skin with neutral undertones
The closest shade to NARS Light Reflecting Foundation Lagos (Medium tan · 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
Hourglass Illusion Luminous Glow Foundation SPF 30 in 19.5, against NARS Light Reflecting Foundation in Lagos. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shadeLagosClosest shade match19.5How they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall96
Colour60%94#ca854e#d1864fVery close colourColour difference 1.6 (0 is identical)
Finish & visual result25% of overall · 3 of 4 compared70
Finish35%56NaturalRadiantSome differenceRadiant finish rather than natural
Coverage30%100MediumMediumSameSame medium coverage
Skin-like finish20%—not comparableNot listedNot listedNot claimed by eitherNeither product lists a skin-like finish
Blurring15%40ClaimedNot listedSome differenceOnly your product claims a blurring or smoothing effect; the match does not list it
Wear & performance15% of overall · 4 of 5 compared51
Longevity30%70Long-wearing12-hour wearSome differenceThe match claims 12-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%40Not listedClaimedSome differenceThe match claims not settling into pores or fine lines; your product does not list it
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 overall100
Skin type100%100Normal, dry, combinationNormal, dry, combinationBoth marketed for normal/dry/combination skin
Overall match 83/100Shade match 96/100Medium 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.
Danessa Myricks Beauty Yummy Skin Soothing Serum Skin Tint Foundation in 9, against NARS Light Reflecting Foundation in Lagos. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shadeLagosClosest overall alternative9How they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall87
Colour60%93#ca854e#c6814fVery close colourColour difference 1.8 (0 is identical)
Finish & visual result25% of overall · 3 of 4 compared73
Finish35%56NaturalRadiantSome differenceRadiant finish rather than natural
Coverage30%80MediumLightCloseLight coverage rather than medium (buildable: one step of tolerance)
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 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, combinationNormal, dry, oilyBoth marketed for normal/dry skin
Overall match 84/100Shade match 87/100High 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 $14 more
