HY-GLAM Powder Foundation NP16 dupes and alternatives Natasha Denona
4.5 (946)·Rich deep · 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.
Matches: Very close colour· Same neutral undertone· Both claim a blurring effect
Differences: Natural rather than matte finish· Buildable rather than medium coverage· No skin-like finish claimed
Score details
Shade match
93
Finish & visual result
73
Wear & performance
40
Skin suitability
0
Very close colour · Natural · Buildable coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 8% ingredient overlap
Differences: Natural rather than matte finish · Buildable rather than medium coverage · No skin-like finish claimed · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Not marketed for combination skin · Contains listed fragrance
Retailer shade note: very deep skin with neutral undertones
The closest shade to Natasha Denona HY-GLAM Powder Foundation NP16 (Rich deep · 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
Refy Skin Base Hydrating Gel Skin Tint in 280N, against Natasha Denona HY-GLAM Powder Foundation in NP16. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shadeNP16Closest shade match280NHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall96
Colour60%94#472318#4b281eVery close colourColour difference 1.6 (0 is identical)
Finish35%56MatteNaturalSome differenceNatural finish rather than matte
Coverage30%80MediumLightCloseLight coverage rather than medium (buildable: one step of tolerance)
Skin-like finish20%100ClaimedClaimedSameBoth products claim 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 compared60
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%—not comparableNot listedNot listedNot claimed by eitherNeither product lists colour stability (no oxidation)
Comfort15%100ClaimedClaimedSameBoth products claim a comfortable, lightweight feel
Skin suitability5% of overall73
Skin type100%73CombinationNormal, combination, sensitiveBoth marketed for combination skin
Overall match 83/100Shade match 96/100Medium 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.
Ulta Beauty Collection Complexion Crush Foundation in Very Deep Cool, against Natasha Denona HY-GLAM Powder Foundation in NP16. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shadeNP16Closest overall alternativeVery Deep CoolHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall84
Colour60%89#472318#3f2013Very close colourColour difference 2.5 (0 is identical)
Coverage30%100MediumMediumSameSame medium coverage
Skin-like finish20%100ClaimedClaimedSameBoth products claim a skin-like finish
Blurring15%100ClaimedClaimedSameBoth products claim a blurring or smoothing effect
Wear & performance15% of overall · 1 of 5 compared100
Longevity30%—not comparableNot listedNot listedNot claimed by eitherNeither product lists long wear
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%—not comparableNot listedNot listedNot claimed by eitherNeither product lists colour stability (no oxidation)
Comfort15%100ClaimedClaimedSameBoth products claim a comfortable, lightweight feel
Skin suitability5% of overall68
Skin type100%68CombinationCombination, dry, normal, oily, sensitiveBoth marketed for combination skin
Overall match 90/100Shade match 84/100Medium 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.
Ulta Beauty
Sephora$16 less (29%)
