Architecture Soft Matte 24H Multi-Use Foundation Stick 16.5C Mocha dupes and alternatives Tom Ford
4.9 (11)·Medium tan · Cool 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 medium coverage· Both claim a blurring effect· Both claim 24-hour wear
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone· Natural rather than matte finish· No skin-like finish claimed
Score details
Shade match
71
Finish & visual result
73
Wear & performance
82
Skin suitability
100
Close colour · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 5% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone · Natural rather than matte finish · No skin-like finish claimed · Does not claim not settling into lines · Contains drying alcohol
The closest shade to Tom Ford Architecture Soft Matte 24H Multi-Use Foundation Stick 16.5C Mocha (Medium tan · Cool 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
Clinique Even Better Makeup Broad Spectrum SPF 15 Foundation in WN 115.5 Mocha, against Tom Ford Architecture Soft Matte 24H Multi-Use Foundation Stick in 16.5C Mocha. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shade16.5C MochaClosest shade matchWN 115.5 MochaHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall77
Colour60%85#be8c70#bf8964Very close colourColour difference 2.9 (0 is identical)
Finish35%56MatteNaturalSome differenceNatural finish rather than matte
Coverage30%100MediumMediumSameSame medium coverage
Skin-like finish20%40ClaimedNot listedSome differenceOnly your product claims a skin-like finish; the match does not list it
Blurring15%100ClaimedClaimedSameBoth products claim a blurring or smoothing effect
Wear & performance15% of overall · 4 of 5 compared51
Longevity30%7024-hour wearLong-wearingSome differenceYour product claims 24-hour wear; the match says long-wearing without hours
Transfer resistance20%—not comparableNot listedNot listedNot claimed by eitherNeither product lists transfer resistance
Settling20%40ClaimedNot listedSome differenceOnly your product claims not settling into pores or fine lines; the match does not list it
Colour stability15%40Not listedClaimedSome differenceThe match claims colour stability (no oxidation); your product does not list it
Comfort15%40ClaimedNot listedSome differenceOnly your product claims a comfortable, lightweight feel; the match does not list it
Skin suitability5% of overall100
Skin type100%100Normal, dry, combinationNormal, dry, combinationBoth marketed for normal/dry/combination skin
Overall match 73/100Shade 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.
Kosas Revealer Skin-Improving Foundation SPF 25 in Deep Warm 370, against Tom Ford Architecture Soft Matte 24H Multi-Use Foundation Stick in 16.5C Mocha. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shade16.5C MochaClosest overall alternativeDeep Warm 370How they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall73
Colour60%87#be8c70#c98c6dVery close colourColour difference 2.7 (0 is identical)
Finish35%56MatteNaturalSome differenceNatural finish rather than matte
Coverage30%100MediumMediumSameSame medium coverage
Skin-like finish20%100ClaimedClaimedSameBoth products claim a skin-like finish
Blurring15%100ClaimedClaimedSameBoth products claim a blurring or smoothing effect
Wear & performance15% of overall · 3 of 5 compared68
Longevity30%7024-hour wearLong-wearingSome differenceYour product claims 24-hour wear; the match says long-wearing without hours
Transfer resistance20%—not comparableNot listedNot listedNot claimed by eitherNeither product lists transfer resistance
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 overall100
Skin type100%100Normal, dry, combinationNormal, dry, combinationBoth marketed for normal/dry/combination skin
Overall match 77/100Shade match 73/100Medium 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 $3 more
