HY-GLAM Powder Foundation R4 dupes and alternatives Natasha Denona
4.5 (946)·Light medium · Cool · rosy 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: Near-identical swatch colour· Same cool undertone· Claims not settling into lines
Differences: Radiant rather than matte finish· Light rather than medium coverage· No skin-like finish claimed
Score details
Shade match
97
Finish & visual result
42
Wear & performance
66
Skin suitability
68
Looks identical · Radiant · Light coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 0% ingredient overlap
Differences: Radiant rather than matte finish · Light rather than medium coverage · No skin-like finish claimed · No blurring effect claimed · Contains listed fragrance
Matches: Very close colour· Same cool undertone· Claims long-wearing
Differences: Natural rather than matte finish· Full rather than medium coverage· No skin-like finish claimed
Score details
Shade match
96
Finish & visual result
58
Wear & performance
40
Skin suitability
68
Very close colour · Natural · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 6% ingredient overlap
Differences: Natural rather than matte finish · Full rather than medium coverage · No skin-like finish claimed · No blurring effect claimed · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Contains listed fragrance
The closest shade to Natasha Denona HY-GLAM Powder Foundation R4 (Light medium · Cool · rosy undertone) in each concealer range, compared on measured colour, depth and undertone. Price never changes the order.
Coverage30%100MediumMediumSameSame medium coverage
Skin-like finish20%40ClaimedNot listedSome differenceOnly your product claims a skin-like finish; the match does not list it
Blurring15%40ClaimedNot listedSome differenceOnly your product claims a blurring or smoothing effect; the match does not list it
Wear & performance15% of overall · 1 of 5 compared40
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%40ClaimedNot listedSome differenceOnly your product claims a comfortable, lightweight feel; the match does not list it
Skin suitability5% of overall68
Skin type100%68CombinationCombination, dry, normal, oily, sensitiveBoth marketed for combination skin
Overall match 83/100Shade match 98/100Medium 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.
bareMinerals ORIGINAL Loose Matte Talc-Free Mineral Powder Foundation SPF 15 in Medium 10, against Natasha Denona HY-GLAM Powder Foundation in R4. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shadeR4Closest overall alternativeMedium 10How they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall97
Colour60%95#e2ae95#e2af9aLooks identicalColour difference 1.5 (0 is identical)
Coverage30%100MediumMediumSameSame medium coverage
Skin-like finish20%40ClaimedNot listedSome differenceOnly your product claims a skin-like finish; the match does not list it
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 compared66
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%40Not listedClaimedSome differenceThe match claims not settling into pores or fine lines; your product does not list it
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 overall80
Skin type100%80CombinationCombination, oilyBoth marketed for combination skin
Overall match 87/100Shade 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.
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$39 less (71%)
Sephora
