Sweetener Foundation tan 4 g dupes and alternatives R.E.M. Beauty
4.5 (732)·Medium tan · Warm · 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: Very close colour· Both claim not settling into lines· Claims a lightweight feel
Differences: Neutral rather than warm undertone· Natural rather than matte finish· Medium rather than buildable coverage
Score details
Shade match
86
Finish & visual result
70
Wear & performance
74
Skin suitability
0
Very close colour · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 9% ingredient overlap
Differences: Neutral rather than warm undertone · Natural rather than matte finish · Medium rather than buildable coverage · No blurring effect claimed · Not marketed for combination skin · Contains drying alcohol
The closest shade to R.E.M. Beauty Sweetener Foundation tan 4 g (Medium tan · Warm · 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
Hourglass Illusion Luminous Glow Foundation SPF 30 in 18, against R.E.M. Beauty Sweetener Foundation in tan 4 g. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shadetan 4 gClosest shade match18How they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall97
Colour60%95#c88256#c77f56Looks identicalColour difference 1.4 (0 is identical)
Finish & visual result25% of overall · 3 of 4 compared50
Finish35%12MatteRadiantDifferentRadiant finish rather than matte
Coverage30%100BuildableMediumCloseMedium 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 · 3 of 5 compared57
Longevity30%40Not listed12-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%100ClaimedClaimedSameBoth products claim not settling into pores or fine lines
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 overall73
Skin type100%73CombinationNormal, dry, combinationBoth marketed for combination skin
Overall match 78/100Shade 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.
bareMinerals ORIGINAL Loose Matte Talc-Free Mineral Powder Foundation SPF 15 in Warm Tan 22, against R.E.M. Beauty Sweetener Foundation in tan 4 g. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shadetan 4 gClosest overall alternativeWarm Tan 22How they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall86
Colour60%92#c88256#c07d53Very close colourColour difference 2.0 (0 is identical)
Depth15%94Medium tanTanCloseDepth difference: 3.2
Retailer descriptionTanTanBoth described as tanThe retailers describe the same depth
Finish & visual result25% of overall · 3 of 4 compared89
Finish35%100MatteMatteSameSame matte finish
Coverage30%100BuildableMediumCloseMedium 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 compared74
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%100ClaimedClaimedSameBoth products claim not settling into pores or fine lines
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 overall80
Skin type100%80CombinationCombination, oilyBoth marketed for combination skin
Overall match 84/100Shade match 86/100Medium 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.
Sephora
Walmart$20.03 less (57%)
