Soft Matte Complete Concealer Praline dupes and alternatives NARS
4.5 (4,186)·Light · Warm 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: Same warm undertone· Both claim a blurring effect· Claims transfer resistance
Differences: Slightly deeper· Natural rather than matte finish· Full rather than medium coverage
Score details
Shade match
88
Finish & visual result
73
Wear & performance
38
Skin suitability
60
Close colour · Natural · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 18% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly deeper · Natural rather than matte finish · Full rather than medium coverage · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for combination skin
Matches: Near-identical swatch colour· Both claim not settling into lines· Claims a lightweight feel
Differences: Neutral rather than warm undertone· Radiant rather than matte finish· Buildable rather than medium coverage
Score details
Shade match
88
Finish & visual result
50
Wear & performance
72
Skin suitability
50
Looks identical · Radiant · Buildable coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 5% ingredient overlap
Differences: Neutral rather than warm undertone · Radiant rather than matte finish · Buildable rather than medium coverage · No blurring effect claimed
Matches: Both claim a blurring effect· Claims transfer resistance· Claims a lightweight feel
Differences: Slightly deeper· Neutral rather than warm undertone· Natural rather than matte finish
Score details
Shade match
81
Finish & visual result
73
Wear & performance
38
Skin suitability
60
Close colour · Natural · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 18% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly deeper · Neutral rather than warm undertone · Natural rather than matte finish · Full rather than medium coverage · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for combination skin
Retailer shade note: medium with neutral undertones
Matches: Very close colour· Both claim not settling into lines· Claims a lightweight feel
Differences: Slightly lighter· Neutral rather than warm undertone· Radiant rather than matte finish
Score details
Shade match
80
Finish & visual result
50
Wear & performance
72
Skin suitability
50
Very close colour · Radiant · Buildable coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 5% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly lighter · Neutral rather than warm undertone · Radiant rather than matte finish · Buildable rather than medium coverage · No blurring effect claimed
The closest shade to NARS Soft Matte Complete Concealer Praline (Light · Warm 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
Maybelline Instant Age Rewind Eraser Dark Circle Treatment Concealer in 122, against NARS Soft Matte Complete Concealer in Praline. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shadePralineClosest shade match122How they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall97
Colour60%96#ebbc8c#eec192Looks identicalColour difference 1.3 (0 is identical)
Depth15%96LightLightSameDepth difference: 2.3
Retailer descriptionMediumNot statedNo depth word in one descriptionNot compared
Finish & visual result25% of overall · 2 of 4 compared20
Finish35%12MatteRadiantDifferentRadiant finish rather than matte
Coverage30%—not comparableMediumNot listedNot comparedCoverage not listed for one product
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 · 2 of 5 compared64
Longevity30%4012-hour wearNot listedSome differenceOnly your product claims long wear; the match does not list it
Transfer resistance20%—not comparableNot listedNot listedNot claimed by eitherNeither product lists transfer resistance
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 overall0
Skin type100%0Normal, combination, oilySensitiveMarketed for different skin types
Overall match 68/100Shade 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.
Clinique Even Better All-Over Concealer + Eraser in WN 56 Cashew, against NARS Soft Matte Complete Concealer in Praline. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shadePralineClosest overall alternativeWN 56 CashewHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall94
Colour60%97#ebbc8c#e7bb8aLooks identicalColour difference 1.1 (0 is identical)
Depth15%98LightLightSameDepth difference: 1.0
Retailer descriptionMediumMediumBoth described as mediumThe retailers describe the same depth
Finish & visual result25% of overall · 3 of 4 compared81
Finish35%56MatteNaturalSome differenceNatural finish rather than matte
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 · 3 of 5 compared54
Longevity30%7012-hour wearLong-wearingSome differenceYour product claims 12-hour wear; the match says long-wearing without hours
Transfer resistance20%—not comparableNot listedNot listedNot claimed by eitherNeither product lists transfer resistance
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, combination, oilyNormal, dry, oilyBoth marketed for normal/oily skin
Overall match 83/100Shade match 94/100Medium 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
SephoraSame price
