Radiant Creamy Concealer Affogato dupes and alternatives NARS
4.5 (22,453)·Very fair · Cool undertone
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: Very close colour· Same cool undertone· Both claim a blurring effect
Differences: Natural rather than radiant finish· Full rather than medium coverage· Does not claim not settling into lines
Score details
Shade match
93
Finish & visual result
73
Wear & performance
61
Skin suitability
60
Very close colour · Natural · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 17% ingredient overlap
Differences: Natural rather than radiant finish · Full rather than medium coverage · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for combination skin
Retailer shade note: ultra light with cool undertones
Matches: Very close colour· Same cool undertone· Both claim a blurring effect
Differences: Matte rather than radiant finish· Full rather than medium coverage· Does not claim transfer resistance
Score details
Shade match
92
Finish & visual result
54
Wear & performance
83
Skin suitability
60
Very close colour · Matte · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 19% ingredient overlap
Differences: Matte rather than radiant finish · Full rather than medium coverage · Does not claim transfer resistance · Not marketed for dry skin · Contains listed fragrance
Retailer shade note: very fair skin with cool, pink undertones
Matches: Very close colour· Same cool undertone· Both claim a blurring effect
Differences: Slightly deeper· Matte rather than radiant finish· Full rather than medium coverage
Score details
Shade match
91
Finish & visual result
54
Wear & performance
83
Skin suitability
60
Very close colour · Matte · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 19% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly deeper · Matte rather than radiant finish · Full rather than medium coverage · Does not claim transfer resistance · Not marketed for dry skin · Contains listed fragrance
Retailer shade note: fair to light skin with a balance of warm & cool undertones
Matches: Very close colour· Similar undertone (neutral vs cool)· Same medium coverage
Differences: Natural rather than radiant finish· Does not claim transfer resistance· Does not claim not settling into lines
Score details
Shade match
87
Finish & visual result
81
Wear & performance
51
Skin suitability
60
Very close colour · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 16% ingredient overlap
Differences: Natural rather than radiant finish · Does not claim transfer resistance · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for combination skin
Retailer shade note: very fair, cool-neutral undertones
Matches: Similar undertone (neutral vs cool)· Same medium coverage· Both claim a blurring effect
Differences: Natural rather than radiant finish· Does not claim transfer resistance· Does not claim not settling into lines
Score details
Shade match
87
Finish & visual result
81
Wear & performance
51
Skin suitability
60
Close colour · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 16% ingredient overlap
Differences: Natural rather than radiant finish · Does not claim transfer resistance · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for combination skin
Retailer shade note: very fair, cool-neutral undertones
Matches: Same cool undertone· Both claim a blurring effect· Both claim 16-hour wear
Differences: Matte rather than radiant finish· Full rather than medium coverage· Does not claim transfer resistance
Score details
Shade match
89
Finish & visual result
54
Wear & performance
83
Skin suitability
60
Close colour · Matte · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 19% ingredient overlap
Differences: Matte rather than radiant finish · Full rather than medium coverage · Does not claim transfer resistance · Not marketed for dry skin · Contains listed fragrance
Retailer shade note: fair skin with a balance of warm & cool undertones
Matches: Very close colour· Both claim not settling into lines
Differences: Neutral rather than cool undertone· Natural rather than radiant finish· Full rather than medium coverage
Score details
Shade match
85
Finish & visual result
62
Wear & performance
70
Skin suitability
84
Very close colour · Natural · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 6% ingredient overlap
Differences: Neutral rather than cool undertone · Natural rather than radiant finish · Full rather than medium coverage · No blurring effect claimed · Does not claim transfer resistance
Matches: Very close colour· Same cool undertone· Both claim not settling into lines
Differences: Matte rather than radiant finish· Full rather than medium coverage· No blurring effect claimed
Score details
Shade match
92
Finish & visual result
43
Wear & performance
70
Skin suitability
90
Very close colour · Matte · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 15% ingredient overlap
Differences: Matte rather than radiant finish · Full rather than medium coverage · No blurring effect claimed · Does not claim transfer resistance · Contains drying alcohol
Retailer shade note: for very fair skin w/ cool pink undertones
The closest shade to NARS Radiant Creamy Concealer Affogato (Very fair · Cool 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 shade match works
Tarte Shape Tape Full Coverage Matte Concealer in 12B fair beige, against NARS Radiant Creamy Concealer in Affogato. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shadeAffogatoClosest shade match12B fair beigeHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall93
Colour60%89#f9d7c0#f1d4c3Very close colourColour difference 2.4 (0 is identical)
Transfer resistance20%40ClaimedNot listedSome differenceOnly your product claims transfer resistance; the match does not list it
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%—not comparableNot listedNot listedNot claimed by eitherNeither product lists a comfortable, lightweight feel
Skin suitability5% of overall60
Skin type100%60Normal, dry, combinationNormal, combination, oilyBoth marketed for normal/combination skin
Overall match 80/100Shade match 93/100High 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.
Clinique Even Better All-Over Concealer + Eraser in CN 02 Breeze, against NARS Radiant Creamy Concealer in Affogato. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shadeAffogatoClosest overall alternativeCN 02 BreezeHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall92
Colour60%95#f9d7c0#f5d1baLooks identicalColour difference 1.5 (0 is identical)
Finish & visual result25% of overall · 3 of 4 compared81
Finish35%56RadiantNaturalSome differenceNatural finish rather than radiant
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 · 4 of 5 compared51
Longevity30%7016-hour wearLong-wearingSome differenceYour product claims 16-hour wear; the match says long-wearing without hours
Transfer resistance20%40ClaimedNot listedSome differenceOnly your product claims transfer resistance; the match does not list it
Settling20%40ClaimedNot listedSome differenceOnly your product claims not settling into pores or fine lines; the match does not list it
Colour stability15%—not comparableNot listedNot listedNot claimed by eitherNeither product lists colour stability (no oxidation)
Comfort15%40Not listedClaimedSome differenceThe match claims a comfortable, lightweight feel; your product does not list it
Skin suitability5% of overall60
Skin type100%60Normal, dry, combinationNormal, dry, oilyBoth marketed for normal/dry skin
Overall match 82/100Shade match 92/100Medium 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
