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· Both claim a blurring effect
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone· Medium rather than buildable coverage· Does not claim a lightweight feel
Score details
Shade match
82
Finish & visual result
100
Wear & performance
80
Skin suitability
60
Very close colour · Matte · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 4% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone · Medium rather than buildable coverage · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Not marketed for dry/sensitive skin
Retailer shade note: medium skin with warm, peach undertones
Matches: Near-identical swatch colour· Same neutral undertone· Both claim long-wearing
Differences: Natural rather than matte finish· Medium rather than buildable coverage· No blurring effect claimed
Score details
Shade match
94
Finish & visual result
70
Wear & performance
85
Skin suitability
60
Looks identical · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 9% ingredient overlap
Differences: Natural rather than matte finish · Medium rather than buildable coverage · No blurring effect claimed · Not marketed for oily/sensitive skin
Retailer shade note: medium with neutral undertone
Matches: Very close colour· Same neutral undertone· Same matte finish
Differences: Full rather than buildable coverage· No blurring effect claimed· Does not claim a lightweight feel
Score details
Shade match
95
Finish & visual result
81
Wear & performance
55
Skin suitability
60
Very close colour · Matte · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 9% ingredient overlap
Differences: Full rather than buildable coverage · No blurring effect claimed · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Not marketed for combination/sensitive skin
Matches: Near-identical swatch colour· Similar undertone (cool vs neutral)· Both claim a blurring effect
Differences: Natural rather than matte finish· Medium rather than buildable coverage· Not marketed for combination/sensitive skin
Score details
Shade match
94
Finish & visual result
81
Wear & performance
61
Skin suitability
60
Looks identical · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 22% ingredient overlap
Differences: Natural rather than matte finish · Medium rather than buildable coverage · Not marketed for combination/sensitive skin · Contains listed fragrance · Contains drying alcohol
Matches: Near-identical swatch colour· Similar undertone (cool vs neutral)· Both claim a blurring effect
Differences: Radiant rather than matte finish· Medium rather than buildable coverage· Does not claim a lightweight feel
Score details
Shade match
95
Finish & visual result
62
Wear & performance
80
Skin suitability
60
Looks identical · Radiant · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 11% ingredient overlap
Differences: Radiant rather than matte finish · Medium rather than buildable coverage · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Not marketed for oily/sensitive skin · Contains listed fragrance
Retailer shade note: for medium to tan skin with rosy undertones
Matches: Near-identical swatch colour· Both claim long-wearing· Claims not settling into lines
Differences: Olive rather than neutral undertone· Natural rather than matte finish· Medium rather than buildable coverage
Score details
Shade match
90
Finish & visual result
70
Wear & performance
82
Skin suitability
60
Looks identical · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 8% ingredient overlap
Differences: Olive rather than neutral undertone · Natural rather than matte finish · Medium rather than buildable coverage · No blurring effect claimed · Not marketed for dry/sensitive skin
Matches: Very close colour· Same matte finish· Same buildable coverage
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone· Does not claim a lightweight feel· Not marketed for normal/sensitive skin
Score details
Shade match
81
Finish & visual result
100
Wear & performance
60
Skin suitability
60
Very close colour · Matte · Buildable coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 12% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Not marketed for normal/sensitive skin · Contains listed fragrance · Contains drying alcohol
Retailer shade note: medium skin with warm undertones
Matches: Very close colour· Same neutral undertone· Claims colour stability
Differences: Natural rather than matte finish· Full rather than buildable coverage· No blurring effect claimed
Score details
Shade match
95
Finish & visual result
62
Wear & performance
70
Skin suitability
60
Very close colour · Natural · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 15% ingredient overlap
Differences: Natural rather than matte finish · Full rather than buildable coverage · No blurring effect claimed · Not marketed for combination/sensitive skin
Matches: Near-identical swatch colour· Same neutral undertone· Both claim long-wearing
Differences: Radiant rather than matte finish· Light rather than buildable coverage· No blurring effect claimed
Score details
Shade match
94
Finish & visual result
43
Wear & performance
100
Skin suitability
60
Looks identical · Radiant · Light coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 8% ingredient overlap
Differences: Radiant rather than matte finish · Light rather than buildable coverage · No blurring effect claimed · Not marketed for oily/sensitive skin
Retailer shade note: Medium with neutral 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 a lightweight feel
Score details
Shade match
85
Finish & visual result
81
Wear & performance
70
Skin suitability
60
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 a lightweight feel · Not marketed for oily/sensitive skin
Matches: Near-identical swatch colour· Same neutral undertone· Claims transfer resistance
Differences: Radiant rather than matte finish· Medium rather than buildable coverage· No blurring effect claimed
Score details
Shade match
95
Finish & visual result
50
Wear & performance
51
Skin suitability
60
Looks identical · Radiant · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 10% ingredient overlap
Differences: Radiant rather than matte finish · Medium rather than buildable coverage · No blurring effect claimed · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Not marketed for oily/sensitive skin
The closest shade to Revolution Beauty Superfix Blur Longwear Foundation F7NC (Medium · Neutral · neutral pink 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
Nudestix Tinted Cover Foundation in NUDE 7, against Revolution Beauty Superfix Blur Longwear Foundation in F7NC. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shadeF7NCClosest shade matchNUDE 7How they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall99
Colour60%98#cd9870#ce9770Looks identicalColour difference 0.7 (0 is identical)
Depth15%100MediumMediumSameDepth difference: 0.2
Retailer descriptionMediumMediumBoth described as mediumThe retailers describe the same depth
Overall match 82/100Shade match 99/100Medium 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.
Tarte Amazonian Clay Blurring Powder Foundation in 32N Medium Neutral, against Revolution Beauty Superfix Blur Longwear Foundation in F7NC. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shadeF7NCClosest overall alternative32N Medium NeutralHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall92
Colour60%93#cd9870#ca9470Very close colourColour difference 1.8 (0 is identical)
Depth15%97MediumMediumSameDepth difference: 1.8
Retailer descriptionMediumMediumBoth described as mediumThe retailers describe the same depth
Overall match 90/100Shade match 92/100Medium 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.
32 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 $15.20 more
