Hy-Glam Foundation Hydrating & Blurring Luminous Longwear Serum Foundation NR13 dupes and alternatives Natasha Denona
4.5 (2,944)·Deep 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.
The closest shade to Natasha Denona Hy-Glam Foundation Hydrating & Blurring Luminous Longwear Serum Foundation NR13 (Deep 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
Estée Lauder Double Wear Stay-in-Place Matte Powder Foundation in 8C1 Rich Java, against Natasha Denona Hy-Glam Foundation Hydrating & Blurring Luminous Longwear Serum Foundation in NR13. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shadeNR13Closest shade match8C1 Rich JavaHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall97
Colour60%96#9a5f37#9a623dLooks identicalColour difference 1.3 (0 is identical)
Finish & visual result25% of overall · 3 of 4 compared43
Finish35%12RadiantMatteDifferentMatte finish rather than radiant
Coverage30%80MediumFullCloseFull 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%40ClaimedNot listedSome differenceOnly your product claims a blurring or smoothing effect; the match does not list it
Wear & performance15% of overall · 4 of 5 compared66
Longevity30%7018-hour wear12-hour wearSome difference12-hour wear claimed against 18-hour wear
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%40Not listedClaimedSome differenceThe match claims colour stability (no oxidation); your product does not list it
Comfort15%40Not listedClaimedSome differenceThe match claims a comfortable, lightweight feel; your product does not list it
Skin suitability5% of overall28
Skin type100%28Normal, dry, sensitiveCombination, normal, oilyBoth marketed for normal skin
Overall match 76/100Shade 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.
Milk Makeup Hydro Grip 12-Hour Hydrating Gel Skin Tint in 12, against Natasha Denona Hy-Glam Foundation Hydrating & Blurring Luminous Longwear Serum Foundation in NR13. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shadeNR13Closest overall alternative12How they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall92
Colour60%88#9a5f37#9c6642Very close colourColour difference 2.6 (0 is identical)
Finish & visual result25% of overall · 3 of 4 compared81
Finish35%100RadiantRadiantSameSame radiant finish
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%40ClaimedNot listedSome differenceOnly your product claims a blurring or smoothing effect; the match does not list it
Wear & performance15% of overall · 3 of 5 compared72
Longevity30%7018-hour wear12-hour wearSome difference12-hour wear claimed against 18-hour wear
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%40Not listedClaimedSome differenceThe match claims a comfortable, lightweight feel; your product does not list it
Skin suitability5% of overall100
Skin type100%100Normal, dry, sensitiveNormal, dry, sensitiveBoth marketed for normal/dry/sensitive skin
Overall match 87/100Shade 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.
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.