HY-GLAM Powder Foundation R5 dupes and alternatives Natasha Denona
4.5 (946)·Light · 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: Both claim a skin-like finish· Claims long-wearing· Both claim a lightweight feel
Differences: Neutral rather than cool undertone· Natural rather than matte finish· Buildable rather than medium coverage
Score details
Shade match
80
Finish & visual result
76
Wear & performance
60
Skin suitability
70
Colour not compared · Natural · Buildable coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 1% ingredient overlap
Differences: Neutral rather than cool undertone · Natural rather than matte finish · Buildable rather than medium coverage · No blurring effect claimed
Matches: Both claim a skin-like finish· Claims long-wearing· Both claim a lightweight feel
Differences: Slightly deeper· Neutral rather than cool undertone· Natural rather than matte finish
Score details
Shade match
80
Finish & visual result
76
Wear & performance
60
Skin suitability
70
Colour not compared · Natural · Buildable coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 1% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly deeper · Neutral rather than cool undertone · Natural rather than matte finish · Buildable rather than medium coverage · No blurring effect claimed
Matches: Same cool undertone· Claims not settling into lines· Both claim a lightweight feel
Differences: Radiant rather than matte finish· Light rather than medium coverage· No skin-like finish claimed
Score details
Shade match
90
Finish & visual result
42
Wear & performance
66
Skin suitability
68
Close colour · 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
$17.99Ulta Beauty(product price)$37.01 less (67%)4.2 (5,328)
Matches: Very close colour· Both claim a skin-like finish· Claims 24-hour wear
Differences: Slightly deeper· Neutral rather than cool undertone· Radiant rather than matte finish
Score details
Shade match
81
Finish & visual result
54
Wear & performance
60
Skin suitability
68
Very close colour · Radiant · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 5% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly deeper · Neutral rather than cool undertone · Radiant rather than matte finish · Full rather than medium coverage · No blurring effect claimed · Contains drying alcohol
Matches: Same cool undertone· Claims long-wearing· Adds SPF 50
Differences: Slightly deeper· Natural rather than matte finish· Full rather than medium coverage
Score details
Shade match
84
Finish & visual result
58
Wear & performance
40
Skin suitability
68
Close colour · Natural · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 6% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly deeper · 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
Matches: Very close colour· Both claim a skin-like finish· Claims long-wearing
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone· Natural rather than matte finish· Full rather than medium coverage
Score details
Shade match
80
Finish & visual result
70
Wear & performance
55
Skin suitability
0
Very close colour · Natural · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 5% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone · Natural rather than matte finish · Full rather than medium coverage · No blurring effect claimed · Not marketed for combination skin
Retailer shade note: medium skin with neutral peach undertones
Differences: Neutral rather than cool undertone· Natural rather than matte finish· Light rather than medium coverage
Score details
Shade match
77
Finish & visual result
70
Wear & performance
40
Skin suitability
68
Close colour · Natural · Light coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 2% ingredient overlap
Differences: Neutral rather than cool undertone · Natural rather than matte finish · Light rather than medium coverage · No blurring effect claimed · Does not claim a lightweight feel
Matches: Both claim a skin-like finish· Claims long-wearing· Claims colour stability
Differences: Neutral rather than cool undertone· Natural rather than matte finish· Full rather than medium coverage
Score details
Shade match
79
Finish & visual result
70
Wear & performance
55
Skin suitability
0
Close colour · Natural · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 5% ingredient overlap
Differences: Neutral rather than cool undertone · Natural rather than matte finish · Full rather than medium coverage · No blurring effect claimed · Not marketed for combination skin
Retailer shade note: medium skin with neutral undertones
Matches: Near-identical swatch colour· Both claim a skin-like finish· Claims long-wearing
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone· Natural rather than matte finish· Full rather than medium coverage
Score details
Shade match
79
Finish & visual result
70
Wear & performance
55
Skin suitability
0
Looks identical · Natural · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 5% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone · Natural rather than matte finish · Full rather than medium coverage · No blurring effect claimed · Not marketed for combination skin
Retailer shade note: medium skin with warm undertones
Matches: Both claim a lightweight feel· Adds SPF 18
Differences: Neutral rather than cool undertone· Radiant rather than matte finish· Light rather than medium coverage
Score details
Shade match
78
Finish & visual result
42
Wear & performance
100
Skin suitability
0
Close colour · Radiant · Light coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 5% ingredient overlap
Differences: Neutral rather than cool undertone · Radiant rather than matte finish · Light rather than medium coverage · No skin-like finish claimed · No blurring effect claimed · Not marketed for combination skin
Matches: Very close colour· Both claim a skin-like finish· Claims long-wearing
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone· Natural rather than matte finish· Full rather than medium coverage
Score details
Shade match
77
Finish & visual result
70
Wear & performance
55
Skin suitability
0
Very close colour · Natural · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 5% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone · Natural rather than matte finish · Full rather than medium coverage · No blurring effect claimed · Not marketed for combination skin
Retailer shade note: medium skin with warm undertones
Matches: Both claim a skin-like finish· Claims long-wearing· Claims colour stability
Differences: Slightly lighter· Neutral rather than cool undertone· Natural rather than matte finish
Score details
Shade match
77
Finish & visual result
70
Wear & performance
55
Skin suitability
0
Close colour · Natural · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 5% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly lighter · Neutral rather than cool undertone · Natural rather than matte finish · Full rather than medium coverage · No blurring effect claimed · Not marketed for combination skin
Retailer shade note: medium skin with neutral undertones
$12.59$17.99Ulta Beauty$42.41 less (77%)4.2 (5,328)
Matches: Both claim a skin-like finish· Claims 24-hour wear· Both claim a lightweight feel
Differences: Slightly deeper· Neutral rather than cool undertone· Radiant rather than matte finish
Score details
Shade match
75
Finish & visual result
54
Wear & performance
60
Skin suitability
68
Close colour · Radiant · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 5% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly deeper · Neutral rather than cool undertone · Radiant rather than matte finish · Full rather than medium coverage · No blurring effect claimed · Contains drying alcohol
Matches: Very close colour· Both claim a skin-like finish· Claims long-wearing
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone· Natural rather than matte finish· Full rather than medium coverage
Score details
Shade match
75
Finish & visual result
70
Wear & performance
55
Skin suitability
0
Very close colour · Natural · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 5% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone · Natural rather than matte finish · Full rather than medium coverage · No blurring effect claimed · Not marketed for combination skin
Retailer shade note: medium skin with warm peach undertones
The closest shade to Natasha Denona HY-GLAM Powder Foundation R5 (Light · Cool · rosy 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
Basma The Foundation Stick for Hydrating, Buildable Coverage and Natural Finish in 30, against Natasha Denona HY-GLAM Powder Foundation in R5. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shadeR5Closest shade match30How they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall97
Colour60%95#f2b199#efb49cLooks identicalColour difference 1.4 (0 is identical)
Depth15%99LightLightSameDepth difference: 0.6
Retailer descriptionMediumMediumBoth described as mediumThe retailers describe the same depth
Finish35%56MatteNaturalSome differenceNatural finish rather than matte
Coverage30%80MediumFullCloseFull 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 · 3 of 5 compared55
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%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 overall0
Skin type100%0CombinationNormal, dry, oilyMarketed for different skin types
Overall match 79/100Shade 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.
Rare Beauty True to Myself Natural Matte Longwear Foundation in 17 Light Medium Cool, against Natasha Denona HY-GLAM Powder Foundation in R5. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shadeR5Closest overall alternative17 Light Medium CoolHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall87
Colour60%79#f2b199#f7b592Close colourColour difference 3.8 (0 is identical)
Depth15%97LightLightSameDepth difference: 1.9
Retailer descriptionMediumNot 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 84/100Shade 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.