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 olive undertone· Claims long-wearing
Differences: Natural rather than radiant finish· Medium rather than light coverage· No skin-like finish claimed
Score details
Shade match
95
Finish & visual result
61
Wear & performance
54
Skin suitability
60
Looks identical · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 6% ingredient overlap
Differences: Natural rather than radiant finish · Medium rather than light coverage · No skin-like finish claimed · Not marketed for oily/sensitive skin
Matches: Very close colour· Claims a blurring effect· Claims not settling into lines
Differences: Cool rather than olive undertone· Natural rather than radiant finish· Medium rather than light coverage
Score details
Shade match
89
Finish & visual result
58
Wear & performance
66
Skin suitability
80
Very close colour · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 0% ingredient overlap
Differences: Cool rather than olive undertone · Natural rather than radiant finish · Medium rather than light coverage · No skin-like finish claimed · Not marketed for oily skin
Retailer shade note: very fair cool skin with pink undertones
Matches: Near-identical swatch colour· Claims long-wearing· Claims not settling into lines
Differences: Neutral rather than olive undertone· Natural rather than radiant finish· Medium rather than light coverage
Score details
Shade match
90
Finish & visual result
61
Wear & performance
54
Skin suitability
80
Looks identical · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 19% ingredient overlap
Differences: Neutral rather than olive undertone · Natural rather than radiant finish · Medium rather than light coverage · No skin-like finish claimed · Not marketed for sensitive skin
Matches: Very close colour· Both claim a skin-like finish· Claims long-wearing
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone· Natural rather than radiant finish· Medium rather than light coverage
Score details
Shade match
83
Finish & visual result
75
Wear & performance
60
Skin suitability
60
Very close colour · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 7% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone · Natural rather than radiant finish · Medium rather than light coverage · Not marketed for combination/oily skin
Retailer shade note: extra light with neutral warm undertones
Matches: Near-identical swatch colour· Both claim a skin-like finish· Both claim a lightweight feel
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone· Natural rather than radiant finish· Medium rather than light coverage
Score details
Shade match
79
Finish & visual result
68
Wear & performance
100
Skin suitability
20
Looks identical · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 0% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone · Natural rather than radiant finish · Medium rather than light coverage · Not marketed for combination/dry/normal/oily skin
Differences: Neutral rather than olive undertone· Natural rather than radiant finish· Medium rather than light coverage
Score details
Shade match
90
Finish & visual result
58
Wear & performance
60
Skin suitability
60
Looks identical · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 12% ingredient overlap
Differences: Neutral rather than olive undertone · Natural rather than radiant finish · Medium rather than light coverage · No skin-like finish claimed · Not marketed for oily/sensitive skin
Retailer shade note: very fair with neutral undertones
$8Ulta Beauty(product price)$7 less (47%)4.5 (40,486)
Matches: Very close colour· Claims long-wearing· Claims not settling into lines
Differences: Slightly deeper· Neutral rather than olive undertone· Natural rather than radiant finish
Score details
Shade match
84
Finish & visual result
61
Wear & performance
54
Skin suitability
80
Very close colour · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 19% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly deeper · Neutral rather than olive undertone · Natural rather than radiant finish · Medium rather than light coverage · No skin-like finish claimed · Not marketed for sensitive skin
The closest shade to Revolution Beauty Skin Silk Serum Foundation F2.5NC (Very fair · Olive · cool olive 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 match works
Tower 28 Beauty Swipe Serum Non-Acnegenic Foundation in 1.5O Blythe, against Revolution Beauty Skin Silk Serum Foundation in F2.5NC. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shadeF2.5NCClosest match1.5O BlytheHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall96
Colour60%97#efd2b3#ebd0b3Looks identicalColour difference 0.9 (0 is identical)
Depth15%98Very fairFairCloseDepth difference: 1.2
Retailer descriptionFairFairBoth described as fairThe retailers describe the same depth
Finish & visual result25% of overall · 3 of 4 compared79
Finish35%100RadiantRadiantSameSame radiant finish
Coverage30%80LightMediumCloseMedium coverage rather than light (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 · 2 of 5 compared60
Longevity30%40Not listed16-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%—not comparableNot listedNot listedNot claimed by eitherNeither product lists 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 overall20
Skin type100%20Combination, dry, normal, oily, sensitiveSensitiveBoth marketed for sensitive skin
Overall match 82/100Shade 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.
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.
SephoraCosts $13 more
