Amazonian Clay 16-Hour Full Coverage Foundation 59N Mahogany Neutral dupes and alternatives Tarte
3.4 (2,267)·Deep tan · Warm · peach 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: Same matte finish· Both claim a blurring effect· Both claim not settling into lines
Differences: Neutral rather than warm undertone· Buildable rather than full coverage· No long-wear claim
Score details
Shade match
75
Finish & visual result
93
Wear & performance
59
Skin suitability
33
Close colour · Matte · Buildable coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 7% ingredient overlap
Differences: Neutral rather than warm undertone · Buildable rather than full coverage · No long-wear claim · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Not marketed for normal/oily skin
Matches: Same warm undertone· Same full coverage· Claims a skin-like finish
Differences: Natural rather than matte finish· No blurring effect claimed· Does not claim not settling into lines
Score details
Shade match
86
Finish & visual result
64
Wear & performance
54
Skin suitability
60
Close colour · Natural · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 7% ingredient overlap
Differences: Natural rather than matte finish · No blurring effect claimed · Does not claim not settling into lines · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Not marketed for combination skin
Matches: Same warm undertone· Same full coverage· Both claim 12-hour wear
Differences: Slightly deeper· Natural rather than matte finish· No blurring effect claimed
Score details
Shade match
79
Finish & visual result
70
Wear & performance
72
Skin suitability
60
Slight colour difference · Natural · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 4% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly deeper · Natural rather than matte finish · No blurring effect claimed · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for oily skin
Matches: Same warm undertone· Both claim a lightweight feel· No fragrance listed
Differences: Natural rather than matte finish· Buildable rather than full coverage· No blurring effect claimed
Score details
Shade match
85
Finish & visual result
62
Wear & performance
68
Skin suitability
33
Close colour · Natural · Buildable coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 15% ingredient overlap
Differences: Natural rather than matte finish · Buildable rather than full coverage · No blurring effect claimed · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for combination/oily skin
Matches: Both claim a blurring effect· Both claim 12-hour wear· Both claim a lightweight feel
Differences: Neutral rather than warm undertone· Natural rather than matte finish· Buildable rather than full coverage
Score details
Shade match
73
Finish & visual result
73
Wear & performance
72
Skin suitability
84
Close colour · Natural · Buildable coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 13% ingredient overlap
Differences: Neutral rather than warm undertone · Natural rather than matte finish · Buildable rather than full coverage · Does not claim not settling into lines
Matches: Similar undertone (neutral vs warm)· Same full coverage· Claims colour stability
Differences: Natural rather than matte finish· No blurring effect claimed· Does not claim not settling into lines
Score details
Shade match
79
Finish & visual result
70
Wear & performance
59
Skin suitability
60
Close colour · Natural · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 19% ingredient overlap
Differences: Natural rather than matte finish · No blurring effect claimed · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for combination skin
Matches: Both claim a blurring effect· Both claim 12-hour wear· Both claim a lightweight feel
Differences: Slightly deeper· Neutral rather than warm undertone· Natural rather than matte finish
Score details
Shade match
73
Finish & visual result
73
Wear & performance
72
Skin suitability
60
Close colour · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 2% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly deeper · Neutral rather than warm undertone · Natural rather than matte finish · Medium rather than full coverage · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for oily skin
Retailer shade note: Very deep with neutral undertones
Matches: Same warm undertone· Same full coverage· Claims a skin-like finish
Differences: Natural rather than matte finish· No blurring effect claimed· Does not claim not settling into lines
Score details
Shade match
80
Finish & visual result
64
Wear & performance
63
Skin suitability
60
Slight colour difference · Natural · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 4% ingredient overlap
Differences: Natural rather than matte finish · No blurring effect claimed · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for combination skin
Retailer shade note: deep skin with warm golden undertones
Matches: Same full coverage· Claims a skin-like finish· Both claim a blurring effect
Differences: Slightly cooler undertone· Natural rather than matte finish· Does not claim not settling into lines
Score details
Shade match
73
Finish & visual result
73
Wear & performance
72
Skin suitability
60
Close colour · Natural · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 8% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly cooler undertone · Natural rather than matte finish · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for normal skin · Contains drying alcohol
Retailer shade note: deep with cool-neutral undertones
Matches: Claims a skin-like finish· Both claim a blurring effect· Both claim a lightweight feel
Differences: Olive rather than warm undertone· Natural rather than matte finish· Medium rather than full coverage
Score details
Shade match
80
Finish & visual result
61
Wear & performance
68
Skin suitability
60
Close colour · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 2% ingredient overlap
Differences: Olive rather than warm undertone · Natural rather than matte finish · Medium rather than full coverage · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for oily skin
Retailer shade note: Rich Deep with neutral olive undertones
Matches: Both claim a blurring effect· Both claim 16-hour wear· Both claim a lightweight feel
Differences: Neutral rather than warm undertone· Natural rather than matte finish· Medium rather than full coverage
Score details
Shade match
73
Finish & visual result
66
Wear & performance
82
Skin suitability
60
Close colour · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 11% ingredient overlap
Differences: Neutral rather than warm undertone · Natural rather than matte finish · Medium rather than full coverage · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for oily skin
Matches: Claims a skin-like finish· Both claim a blurring effect· Both claim a lightweight feel
Differences: Neutral rather than warm undertone· Natural rather than matte finish· Medium rather than full coverage
Score details
Shade match
79
Finish & visual result
61
Wear & performance
68
Skin suitability
60
Close colour · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 2% ingredient overlap
Differences: Neutral rather than warm undertone · Natural rather than matte finish · Medium rather than full coverage · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for oily skin
Retailer shade note: Rich Deep with neutral red undertones
$11.99Ulta Beauty(product price)$30.01 less (71%)4.4 (182,841)
Matches: Same matte finish· Both claim 12-hour wear· Both claim a lightweight feel
Differences: Neutral rather than warm undertone· Medium rather than full coverage· No blurring effect claimed
Score details
Shade match
71
Finish & visual result
74
Wear & performance
72
Skin suitability
67
Slight colour difference · Matte · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 14% ingredient overlap
Differences: Neutral rather than warm undertone · Medium rather than full coverage · No blurring effect claimed · Does not claim not settling into lines · Not marketed for combination skin · Contains drying alcohol
Matches: Claims a skin-like finish· Both claim a lightweight feel· No fragrance listed
Differences: Neutral rather than warm undertone· Natural rather than matte finish· Medium rather than full coverage
Score details
Shade match
81
Finish & visual result
58
Wear & performance
54
Skin suitability
84
Close colour · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 7% ingredient overlap
Differences: Neutral rather than warm undertone · Natural rather than matte finish · Medium rather than full coverage · No blurring effect claimed · No long-wear claim · Does not claim not settling into lines
The closest shade to Tarte Amazonian Clay 16-Hour Full Coverage Foundation 59N Mahogany Neutral (Deep tan · Warm · peach 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
Estée Lauder Double Wear Stay-in-Place Foundation in 7W1 Deep Spice, against Tarte Amazonian Clay 16-Hour Full Coverage Foundation in 59N Mahogany Neutral. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shade59N Mahogany NeutralClosest shade match7W1 Deep SpiceHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall94
Colour60%91#a26656#a76853Very close colourColour difference 2.2 (0 is identical)
Finish & visual result25% of overall · 3 of 4 compared81
Finish35%100MatteMatteSameSame matte finish
Coverage30%80FullMediumCloseMedium coverage rather than full (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 · 4 of 5 compared44
Longevity30%2016-hour wear36-hour wearDifferent36-hour wear claimed against 16-hour wear
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%100ClaimedClaimedSameBoth products claim a comfortable, lightweight feel
Skin suitability5% of overall60
Skin type100%60Normal, combination, oilyDry, combination, oilyBoth marketed for combination/oily skin
Overall match 82/100Shade match 94/100Medium 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 Face Tape Full Coverage Foundation in 53H Deep Honey, against Tarte Amazonian Clay 16-Hour Full Coverage Foundation in 59N Mahogany Neutral. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shade59N Mahogany NeutralClosest overall alternative53H Deep HoneyHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall77
Colour60%62#a26656#aa6544Slight colour differenceColour difference 6.0 (0 is identical)
Finish & visual result25% of overall · 3 of 4 compared100
Finish35%100MatteMatteSameSame matte finish
Coverage30%100FullFullSameSame full coverage
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 compared79
Longevity30%8016-hour wear12-hour wearClose12-hour wear claimed against 16-hour wear
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%100ClaimedClaimedSameBoth products claim a comfortable, lightweight feel
Skin suitability5% of overall100
Skin type100%100Normal, combination, oilyNormal, combination, oilyBoth marketed for normal/combination/oily skin
Overall match 84/100Shade match 77/100Medium 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$3 less (7%)
