Closest shade match is the equivalent shade, scored on colour, depth and undertone only. Closest overall alternative is the most similar concealer 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 concealer 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 concealer on shade, finish, wear and skin suitability together. Each row leads with its overall match; the shade match is beneath it.
Matches: Same neutral undertone· Both claim long-wearing· Both claim not settling into lines
Differences: Slightly lighter· Satin rather than radiant finish· Full rather than medium coverage
Score details
Shade match
85
Finish & visual result
70
Wear & performance
100
Skin suitability
75
Close colour · Satin · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 19% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly lighter · Satin rather than radiant finish · Full rather than medium coverage · No skin-like finish claimed · Not marketed for oily skin
Retailer shade note: tan with cool-neutral undertones
Matches: Near-identical swatch colour· Same radiant finish· Same medium coverage
Differences: Olive rather than neutral undertone· No long-wear claim· Does not claim not settling into lines
Score details
Shade match
88
Finish & visual result
100
Wear & performance
40
Skin suitability
75
Looks identical · Radiant · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 7% ingredient overlap
Differences: Olive rather than neutral undertone · No long-wear claim · Does not claim not settling into lines · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Not marketed for oily skin
Retailer shade note: medium tan with neutral olive undertones
Matches: Same neutral undertone· Same medium coverage· Claims a blurring effect
Differences: Slightly lighter· Natural rather than radiant finish· No skin-like finish claimed
Score details
Shade match
87
Finish & visual result
64
Wear & performance
82
Skin suitability
75
Close colour · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 15% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly lighter · Natural rather than radiant finish · No skin-like finish claimed · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for combination skin
Matches: Near-identical swatch colour· Both claim long-wearing· Both claim not settling into lines
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone· Natural rather than radiant finish· Full rather than medium coverage
Score details
Shade match
84
Finish & visual result
61
Wear & performance
86
Skin suitability
92
Looks identical · Natural · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 4% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone · Natural rather than radiant finish · Full rather than medium coverage · No skin-like finish claimed · Does not claim a lightweight feel
Matches: Very close colour· Both claim long-wearing· Both claim not settling into lines
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone· Natural rather than radiant finish· Full rather than medium coverage
Score details
Shade match
81
Finish & visual result
61
Wear & performance
86
Skin suitability
92
Very close colour · Natural · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 4% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone · Natural rather than radiant finish · Full rather than medium coverage · No skin-like finish claimed · Does not claim a lightweight feel
Matches: Both claim long-wearing· Both claim not settling into lines· Both claim a lightweight feel
Differences: Slightly lighter· Slightly warmer undertone· Luminous rather than radiant finish
Score details
Shade match
71
Finish & visual result
77
Wear & performance
100
Skin suitability
50
Close colour · Luminous · Buildable coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 10% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly lighter · Slightly warmer undertone · Luminous rather than radiant finish · Buildable rather than medium coverage · No skin-like finish claimed
Retailer shade note: for medium-tan warm skin with golden undertones
Matches: Same radiant finish· Same medium coverage· Both claim a skin-like finish
Differences: Slightly deeper· Olive rather than neutral undertone· No long-wear claim
Score details
Shade match
74
Finish & visual result
100
Wear & performance
40
Skin suitability
75
Close colour · Radiant · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 7% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly deeper · Olive rather than neutral undertone · No long-wear claim · Does not claim not settling into lines · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Not marketed for oily skin
Retailer shade note: medium deep with neutral olive undertones
The closest shade to Rare Beauty Liquid Touch Brightening Concealer 340C (Medium light · Neutral · neutral pink undertone) in each foundation range, compared on measured colour, depth and undertone. Price never changes the order.
Foundation shade colours are sampled from retailer swatch images, so check the shade on the retailer page before buying.
Why the closest match works
Glossier Stretch Concealer for Dewy Buildable Coverage in Medium Tan 2, against Rare Beauty Liquid Touch Brightening Concealer in 340C. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shade340CClosest matchMedium Tan 2How they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall93
Colour60%95#cf9f75#ca9d72Looks identicalColour difference 1.3 (0 is identical)
Finish & visual result25% of overall · 3 of 4 compared86
Finish35%100RadiantRadiantSameSame radiant finish
Coverage30%100MediumBuildableCloseBuildable coverage rather than medium (buildable: one step of tolerance)
Skin-like finish20%40ClaimedNot listedSome differenceOnly your product claims a skin-like finish; the match does not list it
Blurring15%—not comparableNot listedNot listedNot claimed by eitherNeither product lists a blurring or smoothing effect
Wear & performance15% of overall · 3 of 5 compared100
Longevity30%100Long-wearingLong-wearingSameBoth products claim 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%100ClaimedClaimedSameBoth products claim a comfortable, lightweight feel
Skin suitability5% of overall50
Skin type100%50Oily, dry, combination, normalNot publishedSkin-type suitability not published for one product
Overall match 90/100Shade match 93/100Medium 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
Ulta Beauty(product price)Costs $7 more
