Architecture Soft Matte 24H Multi-Use Foundation Stick 2.0N Ivory Silk dupes and alternatives Tom Ford
4.9 (11)·Very fair · Neutral 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: Near-identical swatch colour· Same neutral undertone· Same medium coverage
Differences: Natural rather than matte finish· No blurring effect claimed· Does not claim not settling into lines
Score details
Shade match
98
Finish & visual result
76
Wear & performance
68
Skin suitability
60
Looks identical · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 1% 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: extra light with neutral undertones
Matches: Very close colour· Same neutral undertone· Same medium coverage
Differences: Natural rather than matte finish· No blurring effect claimed· Does not claim not settling into lines
Score details
Shade match
93
Finish & visual result
76
Wear & performance
68
Skin suitability
60
Very close colour · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 1% 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: extra light with neutral warm undertones
Matches: Near-identical swatch colour· Same neutral undertone· Same medium coverage
Differences: Natural rather than matte finish· No skin-like finish claimed· Does not claim not settling into lines
Score details
Shade match
93
Finish & visual result
73
Wear & performance
51
Skin suitability
100
Looks identical · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 11% ingredient overlap
Differences: Natural rather than matte finish · No skin-like finish claimed · Does not claim not settling into lines · Does not claim a lightweight feel
Retailer shade note: very fair, warm-neutral undertones
Matches: Very close colour· Same neutral undertone· Same medium coverage
Differences: Natural rather than matte finish· No skin-like finish claimed· Does not claim not settling into lines
Score details
Shade match
92
Finish & visual result
73
Wear & performance
51
Skin suitability
100
Very close colour · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 11% ingredient overlap
Differences: Natural rather than matte finish · No skin-like finish claimed · Does not claim not settling into lines · Does not claim a lightweight feel
Retailer shade note: very fair, cool-neutral undertones
The closest shade to Tom Ford Architecture Soft Matte 24H Multi-Use Foundation Stick 2.0N Ivory Silk (Very fair · Neutral 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
Bobbi Brown Weightless Skin Oil-Controlling Foundation SPF 15 in Neutral Alabaster (N-000), against Tom Ford Architecture Soft Matte 24H Multi-Use Foundation Stick in 2.0N Ivory Silk. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shade2.0N Ivory SilkClosest shade matchNeutral Alabaster (N-000)How they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall99
Colour60%99#eed6c0#efd6c0Looks identicalColour difference 0.4 (0 is identical)
Coverage30%100MediumMediumSameSame medium coverage
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 compared75
Longevity30%7024-hour wearLong-wearingSome differenceYour product claims 24-hour wear; the match says long-wearing without hours
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 overall60
Skin type100%60Normal, dry, combinationNormal, combination, oilyBoth marketed for normal/combination skin
Overall match 89/100Shade match 99/100High 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 Very Light Neutral 100, against Tom Ford Architecture Soft Matte 24H Multi-Use Foundation Stick in 2.0N Ivory Silk. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
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 89/100Shade match 96/100High 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.
31 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$4 less (7%)
