Sweetener Foundation medium 2 n dupes and alternatives R.E.M. Beauty
4.5 (732)·Light medium · 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· Both claim a blurring effect· Claims long-wearing
Differences: Slightly cooler undertone· Natural rather than matte finish· Medium rather than buildable coverage
Score details
Shade match
87
Finish & visual result
81
Wear & performance
40
Skin suitability
73
Very close colour · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 7% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly cooler undertone · Natural rather than matte finish · Medium rather than buildable coverage · Does not claim not settling into lines
Retailer shade note: M3.25 - medium with cool undertones, and a rosy tone
The closest shade to R.E.M. Beauty Sweetener Foundation medium 2 n (Light medium · 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
Dior Forever Skin Perfect 24H Multi-Use Foundation Stick in 3,5 N Neutral, against R.E.M. Beauty Sweetener Foundation in medium 2 n. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shademedium 2 nClosest shade match3,5 N NeutralHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall96
Colour60%94#e6ab89#e9b18eVery close colourColour difference 1.7 (0 is identical)
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 · 2 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%—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 overall0
Skin type100%0CombinationNormal, dry, oilyMarketed for different skin types
Overall match 79/100Shade 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.
NARS Natural Matte Longwear Foundation in Porto, against R.E.M. Beauty Sweetener Foundation in medium 2 n. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shademedium 2 nClosest overall alternativePortoHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall89
Colour60%97#e6ab89#e8af8eLooks identicalColour difference 1.1 (0 is identical)
Finish & visual result25% of overall · 3 of 4 compared93
Finish35%100MatteMatteSameSame matte finish
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%100ClaimedClaimedSameBoth products claim a blurring or smoothing effect
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%40Not listedClaimedSome differenceThe match claims transfer resistance; your product does not list it
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 overall73
Skin type100%73CombinationNormal, combination, oilyBoth marketed for combination skin
Overall match 82/100Shade match 89/100Medium 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 $23 more
