S/B Foundation 012 Espresso dupes and alternatives Temptu
Rich deep · Warm 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: Both claim long-wearing· Claims transfer resistance· No drying alcohol listed
Differences: Neutral rather than warm undertone· Natural rather than luminous finish· Medium rather than buildable coverage
Score details
Shade match
76
Finish & visual result
56
Wear & performance
68
Skin suitability
50
Close colour · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 18% ingredient overlap
Differences: Neutral rather than warm undertone · Natural rather than luminous finish · Medium rather than buildable coverage · No skin-like finish claimed · No blurring effect claimed · Does not claim a lightweight feel
Matches: Very close colour· Both claim a skin-like finish· No drying alcohol listed
Differences: Slightly cooler undertone· Natural rather than luminous finish· Medium rather than buildable coverage
Score details
Shade match
73
Finish & visual result
68
Wear & performance
40
Skin suitability
50
Very close colour · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 16% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly cooler undertone · Natural rather than luminous finish · Medium rather than buildable coverage · No blurring effect claimed · No long-wear claim · Does not claim a lightweight feel
Matches: Both claim a skin-like finish· Both claim a blurring effect· Both claim long-wearing
Differences: Described as very deep, yours as medium tan· Neutral rather than warm undertone· Radiant rather than luminous finish
Score details
Shade match
40
Finish & visual result
86
Wear & performance
100
Skin suitability
50
Close colour · Radiant · Light coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 8% ingredient overlap
Differences: Described as very deep, yours as medium tan · Neutral rather than warm undertone · Radiant rather than luminous finish · Light rather than buildable coverage
Retailer shade note: deepest with neutral undertones
Low confidence· Digital matchRetailer descriptions disagree: described as very deep, yours as medium tan
$13.99Ulta Beauty(product price)$15.01 less (52%)4.3 (33,167)
Matches: Both claim a skin-like finish· No drying alcohol listed
Differences: Slightly lighter· Slightly cooler undertone· Natural rather than luminous finish
Score details
Shade match
61
Finish & visual result
68
Wear & performance
40
Skin suitability
50
Slight colour difference · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 16% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly lighter · Slightly cooler undertone · Natural rather than luminous finish · Medium rather than buildable coverage · No blurring effect claimed · No long-wear claim · Does not claim a lightweight feel
Matches: Near-identical swatch colour· Same warm undertone· Both claim a blurring effect
Differences: Described as very deep, yours as medium tan· Radiant rather than luminous finish· Medium rather than buildable coverage
Score details
Shade match
40
Finish & visual result
80
Wear & performance
80
Skin suitability
50
Looks identical · Radiant · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 6% ingredient overlap
Differences: Described as very deep, yours as medium tan · Radiant rather than luminous finish · Medium rather than buildable coverage · No skin-like finish claimed
Retailer shade note: very deep skin with warm, peach undertones
Low confidence· Digital matchRetailer descriptions disagree: described as very deep, yours as medium tan
Matches: Both claim a skin-like finish· Both claim a blurring effect· No drying alcohol listed
Differences: Described as deep, yours as medium tan· Neutral rather than warm undertone· Radiant rather than luminous finish
Score details
Shade match
40
Finish & visual result
92
Wear & performance
60
Skin suitability
50
Close colour · Radiant · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 1% ingredient overlap
Differences: Described as deep, yours as medium tan · Neutral rather than warm undertone · Radiant rather than luminous finish · Medium rather than buildable coverage · Does not claim a lightweight feel
Retailer shade note: deep with rich neutral undertones
Low confidence· Digital matchRetailer descriptions disagree: described as deep, yours as medium tan
Matches: Same buildable coverage· Both claim a blurring effect· Both claim long-wearing
Differences: Described as rich deep, yours as medium tan· Neutral rather than warm undertone· Natural rather than luminous finish
Score details
Shade match
40
Finish & visual result
65
Wear & performance
100
Skin suitability
50
Close colour · Natural · Buildable coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 16% ingredient overlap
Differences: Described as rich deep, yours as medium tan · Neutral rather than warm undertone · Natural rather than luminous finish · No skin-like finish claimed
Retailer shade note: Deep rich with a neutral undertone
Low confidence· Digital matchRetailer descriptions disagree: described as rich deep, yours as medium tan
Matches: Both claim a blurring effect· Both claim long-wearing· Both claim a lightweight feel
Differences: Described as rich deep, yours as medium tan· Neutral rather than warm undertone· Natural rather than luminous finish
Score details
Shade match
40
Finish & visual result
65
Wear & performance
100
Skin suitability
50
Close colour · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 9% ingredient overlap
Differences: Described as rich deep, yours as medium tan · Neutral rather than warm undertone · Natural rather than luminous finish · Medium rather than buildable coverage · No skin-like finish claimed
Retailer shade note: D8 - very rich deep with neutral undertones
Low confidence· Digital matchRetailer descriptions disagree: described as rich deep, yours as medium tan
Differences: Described as deep, yours as medium tan · Neutral rather than warm undertone · Natural rather than luminous finish · Light rather than buildable coverage · No blurring effect claimed
Retailer shade note: deep with neutral tones
Low confidence· Digital matchRetailer descriptions disagree: described as deep, yours as medium tan
Matches: Very close colour· Both claim a skin-like finish· Both claim long-wearing
Differences: Described as rich deep, yours as medium tan· Neutral rather than warm undertone· Natural rather than luminous finish
Score details
Shade match
40
Finish & visual result
68
Wear & performance
82
Skin suitability
50
Very close colour · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 5% ingredient overlap
Differences: Described as rich deep, yours as medium tan · Neutral rather than warm undertone · Natural rather than luminous finish · Medium rather than buildable coverage · No blurring effect claimed
Retailer shade note: deep rich with neutral undertones
Low confidence· Digital matchRetailer descriptions disagree: described as rich deep, yours as medium tan
The closest shade to Temptu S/B Foundation 012 Espresso (Rich deep · Warm 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
L'Oréal Paris Infallible 32H Fresh Wear Foundation in 545 Ebony, against Temptu S/B Foundation in 012 Espresso. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shade012 EspressoClosest shade match545 EbonyHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall77
Colour60%75#3a211c#482e26Close colourColour difference 4.3 (0 is identical)
Finish35%34LuminousNaturalDifferentNatural finish rather than luminous
Coverage30%80BuildableFullCloseFull coverage rather than buildable (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%40ClaimedNot listedSome differenceOnly your product claims a blurring or smoothing effect; the match does not list it
Wear & performance15% of overall · 4 of 5 compared63
Longevity30%70Long-wearing32-hour wearSome differenceThe match claims 32-hour wear; your product says long-wearing without hours
Transfer resistance20%40Not listedClaimedSome differenceThe match claims transfer resistance; your product does not list it
Settling20%—not comparableNot listedNot listedNot claimed by eitherNeither product lists not settling into pores or fine lines
Colour stability15%40Not listedClaimedSome differenceThe match claims colour stability (no oxidation); your product does not list it
Comfort15%100ClaimedClaimedSameBoth products claim a comfortable, lightweight feel
Skin suitability5% of overall50
Skin type100%50Not publishedCombination, dry, normal, oily, sensitiveSkin-type suitability not published for one product
Overall match 66/100Shade match 77/100Low 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.
Maybelline Super Stay 24H Skin Tint + Vitamin C in 374, against Temptu S/B Foundation in 012 Espresso. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shade012 EspressoClosest overall alternative374How they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall72
Colour60%76#3a211c#43261aClose colourColour difference 4.1 (0 is identical)
Finish35%78LuminousRadiantCloseRadiant finish rather than luminous
Coverage30%80BuildableFullCloseFull coverage rather than buildable (buildable: one step of tolerance)
Skin-like finish20%100ClaimedClaimedSameBoth products claim 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 compared80
Longevity30%70Long-wearing24-hour wearSome differenceThe match claims 24-hour wear; your product says long-wearing without hours
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 overall50
Skin type100%50Not publishedCombination, dry, normal, oily, sensitiveSkin-type suitability not published for one product
Overall match 73/100Shade match 72/100Medium 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.
Ulta Beauty(product price)Costs $17 more
Sephora
