HY-GLAM Powder Foundation P3 dupes and alternatives Natasha Denona
4.5 (946)·Light · Warm · peach 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.
$35Ulta Beauty(product price)$20 less (36%)4.5 (732)
Matches: Very close colour· Same matte finish· Both claim a blurring effect
Differences: Slightly deeper· Neutral rather than warm undertone· Buildable rather than medium coverage
Score details
Shade match
85
Finish & visual result
88
Wear & performance
40
Skin suitability
100
Very close colour · Matte · Buildable coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 10% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly deeper · Neutral rather than warm undertone · Buildable rather than medium coverage · No skin-like finish claimed · Does not claim a lightweight feel
Retailer shade note: light with neutral undertones
Matches: Very close colour· Both claim a blurring effect· Both claim a lightweight feel
Differences: Neutral rather than warm undertone· Natural rather than matte finish· Full rather than medium coverage
Score details
Shade match
87
Finish & visual result
67
Wear & performance
100
Skin suitability
0
Very close colour · Natural · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 10% ingredient overlap
Differences: Neutral rather than warm undertone · Natural rather than matte finish · Full rather than medium coverage · No skin-like finish claimed · Not marketed for combination skin
Retailer shade note: Fair with balanced neutral undertones
Matches: Very close colour· Both claim a skin-like finish· Claims long-wearing
Differences: Neutral rather than warm undertone· Natural rather than matte finish· Buildable rather than medium coverage
Score details
Shade match
87
Finish & visual result
76
Wear & performance
60
Skin suitability
70
Very close colour · Natural · Buildable coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 1% ingredient overlap
Differences: Neutral rather than warm undertone · Natural rather than matte finish · Buildable rather than medium coverage · No blurring effect claimed
Matches: Very close colour· Same medium coverage· Both claim a blurring effect
Differences: Neutral rather than warm undertone· Natural rather than matte finish· No skin-like finish claimed
Score details
Shade match
87
Finish & visual result
73
Wear & performance
60
Skin suitability
73
Very close colour · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 9% ingredient overlap
Differences: Neutral rather than warm undertone · Natural rather than matte finish · No skin-like finish claimed · Contains listed fragrance · Contains drying alcohol
Retailer shade note: for fair to light skin with neutral undertones
Matches: Very close colour· Same warm undertone· Same medium coverage
Differences: Natural rather than matte finish· No skin-like finish claimed· No blurring effect claimed
Score details
Shade match
95
Finish & visual result
64
Wear & performance
66
Skin suitability
0
Very close colour · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 6% ingredient overlap
Differences: Natural rather than matte finish · No skin-like finish claimed · No blurring effect claimed · Not marketed for combination skin · Contains drying alcohol
$18.99Ulta Beauty(product price)$36.01 less (65%)4.2 (18,317)
Matches: Very close colour· Same warm undertone· Same medium coverage
Differences: Natural rather than matte finish· No skin-like finish claimed· No blurring effect claimed
Score details
Shade match
95
Finish & visual result
64
Wear & performance
40
Skin suitability
70
Very close colour · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 2% ingredient overlap
Differences: Natural rather than matte finish · No skin-like finish claimed · No blurring effect claimed · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Contains listed fragrance
Matches: Very close colour· Same warm undertone· Adds SPF 50
Differences: Radiant rather than matte finish· Full rather than medium coverage· No skin-like finish claimed
Score details
Shade match
96
Finish & visual result
42
Wear & performance
40
Skin suitability
0
Very close colour · Radiant · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 6% ingredient overlap
Differences: Radiant rather than matte finish · Full rather than medium coverage · No skin-like finish claimed · No blurring effect claimed · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Not marketed for combination skin · Contains listed fragrance
Retailer shade note: golden beige shade with warm undertones
The closest shade to Natasha Denona HY-GLAM Powder Foundation P3 (Light · Warm · peach 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
Benefit Cosmetics The POREfessional Blurring & Smoothing Foundation in 8W Limitless, against Natasha Denona HY-GLAM Powder Foundation in P3. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shadeP3Closest shade match8W LimitlessHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall98
Colour60%97#f2c0a2#f1c2a4Looks identicalColour difference 0.9 (0 is identical)
Depth15%99LightFairCloseDepth difference: 0.6
Retailer descriptionLightLightBoth described as lightThe retailers describe the same depth
Finish35%56MatteNaturalSome differenceNatural finish rather than matte
Coverage30%100MediumMediumSameSame medium coverage
Skin-like finish20%40ClaimedNot listedSome differenceOnly your product claims a skin-like finish; the match does not list it
Blurring15%100ClaimedClaimedSameBoth products claim a blurring or smoothing effect
Wear & performance15% of overall · 2 of 5 compared60
Longevity30%40Not listed24-hour wearSome 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, oilyBoth marketed for combination skin
Overall match 85/100Shade match 98/100High 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.
Rare Beauty True to Myself Natural Matte Longwear Foundation in 14 Light Medium Warm, against Natasha Denona HY-GLAM Powder Foundation in P3. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shadeP3Closest overall alternative14 Light Medium WarmHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall96
Colour60%94#f2c0a2#f6bf9cVery close colourColour difference 1.6 (0 is identical)
Depth15%100LightLightSameDepth difference: 0.1
Retailer descriptionLightNot statedNo depth word in one descriptionNot compared
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 · 4 of 5 compared51
Longevity30%40Not listed8-hour wearSome differenceThe match claims long wear; your product does not list it
Transfer resistance20%40Not listedClaimedSome differenceThe match claims transfer resistance; your product does not list it
Settling20%—not comparableNot listedNot listedNot claimed by eitherNeither product lists 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%100ClaimedClaimedSameBoth products claim a comfortable, lightweight feel
Skin suitability5% of overall70
Skin type100%70CombinationCombination, normal, oily, sensitiveBoth marketed for combination skin
Overall match 89/100Shade match 96/100High 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.
32 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.