Sweetener Foundation light 5 n dupes and alternatives R.E.M. Beauty
4.5 (732)·Light · 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 matte finish· Claims 36-hour wear
Differences: Slightly deeper· Slightly cooler undertone· Medium rather than buildable coverage
Score details
Shade match
85
Finish & visual result
89
Wear & performance
40
Skin suitability
73
Very close colour · Matte · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 14% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly deeper · Slightly cooler undertone · Medium rather than buildable coverage · No blurring effect claimed · Does not claim not settling into lines
Retailer shade note: light with cool rosy-peach undertones
Matches: Very close colour· Same neutral undertone· Both claim a blurring effect
Differences: Natural rather than matte finish· Medium rather than buildable coverage· Does not claim not settling into lines
Score details
Shade match
95
Finish & visual result
81
Wear & performance
40
Skin suitability
0
Very close colour · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 5% ingredient overlap
Differences: Natural rather than matte finish · Medium rather than buildable coverage · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for combination skin · Contains drying alcohol
Matches: Very close colour· Same neutral undertone· Both claim a blurring effect
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
81
Wear & performance
40
Skin suitability
0
Very close colour · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 8% ingredient overlap
Differences: Natural rather than matte finish · Medium rather than buildable coverage · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for combination skin
Retailer shade note: fair skin with neutral/peachy undertones
Matches: Very close colour· Same neutral undertone· Claims a lightweight feel
Differences: Radiant rather than matte finish· Light rather than buildable coverage· No blurring effect claimed
Score details
Shade match
95
Finish & visual result
43
Wear & performance
40
Skin suitability
0
Very close colour · Radiant · Light coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 9% ingredient overlap
Differences: Radiant rather than matte finish · Light rather than buildable coverage · No blurring effect claimed · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for combination skin
The closest shade to R.E.M. Beauty Sweetener Foundation light 5 n (Light · 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
IT Cosmetics CC+ Cream Full Coverage Color Correcting Foundation in Light Neutral, against R.E.M. Beauty Sweetener Foundation in light 5 n. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shadelight 5 nClosest shade matchLight NeutralHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall98
Colour60%96#f5bea5#f0bda4Looks identicalColour difference 1.1 (0 is identical)
Depth15%98LightLightSameDepth difference: 1.0
Retailer descriptionLightLightBoth described as lightThe 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 · 2 of 5 compared40
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%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%—not comparableNot listedNot listedNot claimed by eitherNeither product lists a comfortable, lightweight feel
Skin suitability5% of overall68
Skin type100%68CombinationNormal, dry, combination, oily, sensitiveBoth marketed for combination skin
Overall match 79/100Shade 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.
Natasha Denona HY-GLAM Powder Foundation in RN3, against R.E.M. Beauty Sweetener Foundation in light 5 n. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shadelight 5 nClosest overall alternativeRN3How they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall96
Colour60%95#f5bea5#fac4aaLooks identicalColour difference 1.5 (0 is identical)
Depth15%95LightFairCloseDepth difference: 2.9
Retailer descriptionLightLightBoth described as lightThe retailers describe the same depth
Coverage30%100BuildableMediumCloseMedium coverage rather than buildable (buildable: one step of tolerance)
Skin-like finish20%40Not listedClaimedSome differenceThe match claims a skin-like finish; your product does not list it
Blurring15%100ClaimedClaimedSameBoth products claim a blurring or smoothing effect
Wear & performance15% of overall · 2 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%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 overall100
Skin type100%100CombinationCombinationBoth marketed for combination skin
Overall match 86/100Shade 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.
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.
SephoraCosts $4 more
