Pure Radiant Tinted Moisturizer SPF 30 Marrakesh dupes and alternatives NARS
4.3 (1,131)·Tan · 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.
The closest shade to NARS Pure Radiant Tinted Moisturizer SPF 30 Marrakesh (Tan · 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
Urban Decay Face Bond Self Setting Waterproof Foundation in 28, against NARS Pure Radiant Tinted Moisturizer SPF 30 in Marrakesh. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shadeMarrakeshClosest shade match28How they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall98
Colour60%98#b87a51#b87850Looks identicalColour difference 0.8 (0 is identical)
Depth15%99TanTanSameDepth difference: 0.8
Retailer descriptionMedium tanMedium tanBoth described as medium tanThe retailers describe the same depth
Finish & visual result25% of overall · 3 of 4 compared62
Finish35%56NaturalMatteSome differenceMatte finish rather than natural
Coverage30%80LightMediumCloseMedium coverage rather than light (buildable: one step of tolerance)
Skin-like finish20%—not comparableNot listedNot listedNot claimed by eitherNeither product lists 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 compared54
Longevity30%40Not listedLong-wearingSome differenceThe match claims long wear; your product does not list it
Transfer resistance20%40Not listedClaimedSome differenceThe match claims transfer resistance; your product 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 overall40
Skin type100%40Dry, normalNormal, combination, oilyBoth marketed for normal skin
Overall match 80/100Shade match 98/100Medium 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.
Makeup By Mario SurrealSkin Luminous Hydrating Foundation in 18W, against NARS Pure Radiant Tinted Moisturizer SPF 30 in Marrakesh. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shadeMarrakeshClosest overall alternative18WHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall97
Colour60%96#b87a51#b97b56Looks identicalColour difference 1.3 (0 is identical)
Depth15%99TanTanSameDepth difference: 0.6
Retailer descriptionMedium tanMediumSome differenceRetailer descriptions one depth band apart
Finish & visual result25% of overall · 2 of 4 compared91
Finish35%100NaturalNaturalSameSame natural finish
Coverage30%80LightMediumCloseMedium coverage rather than light (buildable: one step of tolerance)
Skin-like finish20%—not comparableNot listedNot listedNot claimed by eitherNeither product lists a skin-like finish
Blurring15%—not comparableNot listedNot listedNot claimed by eitherNeither product lists a blurring or smoothing effect
Wear & performance15% of overall · 3 of 5 compared55
Longevity30%40Not listedLong-wearingSome differenceThe match claims long wear; your product does not list it
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%40Not listedClaimedSome differenceThe match claims colour stability (no oxidation); your product does not list it
Comfort15%100ClaimedClaimedSameBoth products claim a comfortable, lightweight feel
Skin suitability5% of overall87
Skin type100%87Dry, normalNormal, dry, combinationBoth marketed for dry/normal skin
Overall match 89/100Shade 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.
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 $2 more
