Natural Matte Longwear Foundation SIBERIA dupes and alternatives NARS
4.5 (1,143)·Very fair · Warm 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 warm undertone· Both claim a blurring effect
Differences: Radiant rather than matte finish· Light rather than full coverage· Does not claim transfer resistance
Score details
Shade match
96
Finish & visual result
39
Wear & performance
68
Skin suitability
60
Very close colour · Radiant · Light coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 9% ingredient overlap
Differences: Radiant rather than matte finish · Light rather than full coverage · Does not claim transfer resistance · Not marketed for combination skin
The closest shade to NARS Natural Matte Longwear Foundation SIBERIA (Very fair · Warm 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
NARS Pure Radiant Tinted Moisturizer SPF 30 in Finland, against NARS Natural Matte Longwear Foundation in SIBERIA. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shadeSIBERIAClosest shade matchFinlandHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall97
Colour60%95#fce8c8#fde6c7Looks identicalColour difference 1.5 (0 is identical)
Finish & visual result25% of overall · 3 of 4 compared47
Finish35%56MatteNaturalSome differenceNatural finish rather than matte
Coverage30%40FullLightDifferentLight coverage rather than full (buildable: one step of tolerance)
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 · 3 of 5 compared54
Longevity30%4024-hour wearNot listedSome differenceOnly your product claims long wear; the match does not list it
Transfer resistance20%40ClaimedNot listedSome differenceOnly your product claims transfer resistance; the match does not list it
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 overall30
Skin type100%30Normal, combination, oilyDry, normalBoth marketed for normal skin
Overall match 75/100Shade match 97/100Medium 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 Blurring Balm Powder in Universal Radiant, against NARS Natural Matte Longwear Foundation in SIBERIA. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shadeSIBERIAClosest overall alternativeUniversal RadiantHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall85
Colour60%90#fce8c8#f2dfbdVery close colourColour difference 2.2 (0 is identical)
Finish & visual result25% of overall · 3 of 4 compared78
Finish35%100MatteMatteSameSame matte finish
Coverage30%40FullLightDifferentLight coverage rather than full (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 · 3 of 5 compared54
Longevity30%4024-hour wearNot listedSome differenceOnly your product claims long wear; the match does not list it
Transfer resistance20%40ClaimedNot listedSome differenceOnly your product claims transfer resistance; the match does not list it
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 overall100
Skin type100%100Normal, combination, oilyNormal, combination, oilyBoth marketed for normal/combination/oily skin
Overall match 79/100Shade match 85/100Medium 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.
Ulta Beauty
Sephora$16 less (29%)
