Sweetener Foundation deep 5 ng dupes and alternatives R.E.M. Beauty
4.5 (732)·Deep · Neutral · neutral golden 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 neutral undertone· Claims a skin-like finish
Differences: Natural rather than matte finish· Medium rather than buildable coverage· Does not claim not settling into lines
Score details
Shade match
94
Finish & visual result
73
Wear & performance
40
Skin suitability
73
Looks identical · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 18% ingredient overlap
Differences: Natural rather than matte finish · Medium rather than buildable coverage · Does not claim not settling into lines · Contains drying alcohol
The closest shade to R.E.M. Beauty Sweetener Foundation deep 5 ng (Deep · Neutral · neutral golden 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
Clinique Beyond Perfecting Foundation + Concealer in WN 122 Clove, against R.E.M. Beauty Sweetener Foundation in deep 5 ng. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shadedeep 5 ngClosest shade matchWN 122 CloveHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall97
Colour60%95#8e5537#8e553bLooks identicalColour difference 1.4 (0 is identical)
Depth15%100DeepDeepSameDepth difference: 0.1
Retailer descriptionDeepDeepBoth described as deepThe retailers describe the same depth
Finish & visual result25% of overall · 3 of 4 compared62
Finish35%56MatteNaturalSome differenceNatural finish rather than matte
Coverage30%80BuildableFullCloseFull coverage rather than buildable (buildable: one step of tolerance)
Skin-like finish20%—not comparableNot listedNot listedNot claimed by eitherNeither product lists 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 · 4 of 5 compared40
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%40ClaimedNot listedSome differenceOnly your product claims not settling into pores or fine lines; the match does not list it
Colour stability15%40Not listedClaimedSome differenceThe match claims colour stability (no oxidation); your product does not list it
Comfort15%40Not listedClaimedSome differenceThe match claims a comfortable, lightweight feel; your product does not list it
Skin suitability5% of overall0
Skin type100%0CombinationNormal, dry, oilyMarketed for different skin types
Overall match 75/100Shade 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.
Tarte Timeless Hydrating Foundation in 57S Rich Sand, against R.E.M. Beauty Sweetener Foundation in deep 5 ng. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shadedeep 5 ngClosest overall alternative57S Rich SandHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall92
Colour60%94#8e5537#8a5231Very close colourColour difference 1.7 (0 is identical)
Depth15%97DeepDeepSameDepth difference: 2.0
Retailer descriptionDeepNot statedNo depth word in one descriptionNot compared
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 compared40
Longevity30%40Not listed12-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%40ClaimedNot listedSome differenceOnly your product claims not settling into pores or fine lines; the match does not list it
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 overall68
Skin type100%68CombinationCombination, dry, normal, oily, sensitiveBoth marketed for combination skin
Overall match 80/100Shade match 92/100Medium 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.
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.
SephoraCosts $15 more
