Hy-Glam Foundation Hydrating & Blurring Luminous Longwear Serum Foundation YP8 dupes and alternatives Natasha Denona
4.5 (2,944)·Light · Warm · yellow 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: Same warm undertone· Same medium coverage· Claims transfer resistance
Differences: Natural rather than radiant finish· No blurring effect claimed· Does not claim not settling into lines
Score details
Shade match
90
Finish & visual result
70
Wear & performance
51
Skin suitability
60
Close colour · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 6% ingredient overlap
Differences: Natural rather than radiant finish · No blurring effect claimed · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for sensitive skin
Retailer shade note: medium with yellow undertones
Matches: Same warm undertone· Same medium coverage· Claims transfer resistance
Differences: Natural rather than radiant finish· No blurring effect claimed· Does not claim not settling into lines
Score details
Shade match
89
Finish & visual result
70
Wear & performance
51
Skin suitability
60
Close colour · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 6% ingredient overlap
Differences: Natural rather than radiant finish · No blurring effect claimed · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for sensitive skin
Retailer shade note: medium with yellow undertones
Matches: Same warm undertone· No drying alcohol listed
Differences: Slightly deeper· Natural rather than radiant finish· Buildable rather than medium coverage
Score details
Shade match
86
Finish & visual result
70
Wear & performance
40
Skin suitability
84
Close colour · Natural · Buildable coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 2% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly deeper · Natural rather than radiant finish · Buildable rather than medium coverage · No blurring effect claimed · No long-wear claim · Does not claim not settling into lines
Matches: Same warm undertone· Same medium coverage· Both claim a blurring effect
Differences: Slightly deeper· Natural rather than radiant finish· No long-wear claim
Score details
Shade match
85
Finish & visual result
81
Wear & performance
40
Skin suitability
30
Close colour · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 4% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly deeper · Natural rather than radiant finish · No long-wear claim · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for dry/sensitive skin
Matches: Similar undertone (neutral vs warm)· Both claim a blurring effect· Claims a lightweight feel
Differences: Slightly deeper· Natural rather than radiant finish· Buildable rather than medium coverage
Score details
Shade match
78
Finish & visual result
81
Wear & performance
54
Skin suitability
60
Close colour · Natural · Buildable coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 2% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly deeper · Natural rather than radiant finish · Buildable rather than medium coverage · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for sensitive skin
Retailer shade note: Medium skin with a neutral-golden undertone
Matches: Similar undertone (neutral vs warm)· Same radiant finish· Claims a lightweight feel
Differences: Light rather than medium coverage· No blurring effect claimed· No long-wear claim
Score details
Shade match
83
Finish & visual result
74
Wear & performance
40
Skin suitability
67
Close colour · Radiant · Light coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 5% ingredient overlap
Differences: Light rather than medium coverage · No blurring effect claimed · No long-wear claim · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for sensitive skin
Matches: Same warm undertone· Both claim a blurring effect· Claims a lightweight feel
Differences: Matte rather than radiant finish· Full rather than medium coverage· Does not claim not settling into lines
Score details
Shade match
88
Finish & visual result
54
Wear & performance
54
Skin suitability
33
Close colour · Matte · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 5% ingredient overlap
Differences: Matte rather than radiant finish · Full rather than medium coverage · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for dry/sensitive skin
Matches: Same medium coverage· Claims transfer resistance· Claims a lightweight feel
Differences: Olive rather than warm undertone· Natural rather than radiant finish· No blurring effect claimed
Score details
Shade match
79
Finish & visual result
70
Wear & performance
51
Skin suitability
60
Close colour · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 6% ingredient overlap
Differences: Olive rather than warm undertone · Natural rather than radiant finish · No blurring effect claimed · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for sensitive skin
Matches: Similar undertone (neutral vs warm)· Same radiant finish· Claims a lightweight feel
Differences: Light rather than medium coverage· No blurring effect claimed· No long-wear claim
Score details
Shade match
79
Finish & visual result
74
Wear & performance
40
Skin suitability
67
Close colour · Radiant · Light coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 5% ingredient overlap
Differences: Light rather than medium coverage · No blurring effect claimed · No long-wear claim · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for sensitive skin
Matches: Same warm undertone· Both claim a blurring effect· Claims transfer resistance
Differences: Slightly deeper· Matte rather than radiant finish· Full rather than medium coverage
Score details
Shade match
88
Finish & visual result
54
Wear & performance
51
Skin suitability
28
Close colour · Matte · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 2% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly deeper · Matte rather than radiant finish · Full rather than medium coverage · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for dry/sensitive skin
Retailer shade note: M3 - Medium with warm undertones, and a yellow tone
Matches: Claims a skin-like finish· Claims a lightweight feel· No drying alcohol listed
Differences: Neutral rather than warm undertone· Natural rather than radiant finish· Buildable rather than medium coverage
Score details
Shade match
80
Finish & visual result
64
Wear & performance
54
Skin suitability
56
Colour not compared · Natural · Buildable coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 2% ingredient overlap
Differences: Neutral rather than warm undertone · Natural rather than radiant finish · Buildable rather than medium coverage · No blurring effect claimed · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for sensitive skin
Matches: Same warm undertone· Both claim a blurring effect· Claims a lightweight feel
Differences: Slightly deeper· Matte rather than radiant finish· Full rather than medium coverage
Score details
Shade match
83
Finish & visual result
54
Wear & performance
54
Skin suitability
33
Close colour · Matte · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 5% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly deeper · Matte rather than radiant finish · Full rather than medium coverage · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for dry/sensitive skin
The closest shade to Natasha Denona Hy-Glam Foundation Hydrating & Blurring Luminous Longwear Serum Foundation YP8 (Light · Warm · yellow 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
about-face THE PERFORMER Skin-Focused Foundation in M1WARM, against Natasha Denona Hy-Glam Foundation Hydrating & Blurring Luminous Longwear Serum Foundation in YP8. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shadeYP8Closest shade matchM1WARMHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall91
Colour60%86#f9b873#ecb67bVery close colourColour difference 2.9 (0 is identical)
Depth15%96LightLightSameDepth difference: 2.5
Retailer descriptionMediumMediumBoth described as mediumThe retailers describe the same depth
Overall match 77/100Shade match 91/100Medium 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.
Maybelline Instant Age Rewind Eraser Treatment Foundation in 210, against Natasha Denona Hy-Glam Foundation Hydrating & Blurring Luminous Longwear Serum Foundation in YP8. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shadeYP8Closest overall alternative210How they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall87
Colour60%79#f9b873#ebb882Close colourColour difference 3.8 (0 is identical)
Depth15%97LightLightSameDepth difference: 1.8
Retailer descriptionMediumNot statedNo depth word in one descriptionNot compared
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 · 3 of 5 compared59
Longevity30%4018-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%40Not listedClaimedSome differenceThe match claims a comfortable, lightweight feel; your product does not list it
Skin suitability5% of overall33
Skin type100%33Normal, dry, sensitiveSensitiveBoth marketed for sensitive skin
Overall match 78/100Shade match 87/100Medium 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.
Walmart
Ulta Beauty$48.11 less (93%)
Sephora
Target
