Born This Way Soft Matte Foundation Ganache dupes and alternatives Too Faced
4.3 (3,608)·Rich deep · 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: 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
91
Finish & visual result
64
Wear & performance
63
Skin suitability
60
Very close colour · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 17% ingredient overlap
Differences: Natural rather than matte finish · No skin-like finish claimed · Does not claim not settling into lines · Does not claim colour stability · Not marketed for oily skin
Retailer shade note: dark deep to rich - neutral, slightly warm
The closest shade to Too Faced Born This Way Soft Matte Foundation Ganache (Rich deep · 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
Make Up For Ever Balancing & Perfecting Natural Finish Longwear Foundation in 479N Onyx, against Too Faced Born This Way Soft Matte Foundation in Ganache. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shadeGanacheClosest shade match479N OnyxHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall95
Colour60%92#472005#4a2511Very close colourColour difference 2.1 (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%40Not listedClaimedSome differenceThe match claims a blurring or smoothing effect; your product does not list it
Wear & performance15% of overall · 4 of 5 compared63
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%40ClaimedNot listedSome differenceOnly your product claims colour stability (no oxidation); the match does not list it
Comfort15%100ClaimedClaimedSameBoth products claim a comfortable, lightweight feel
Skin suitability5% of overall60
Skin type100%60Normal, combination, oilyNormal, dry, combinationBoth marketed for normal/combination skin
Overall match 81/100Shade match 95/100High 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.
Fenty Beauty Pro Filt'r Fluid Flex Natural Matte Longwear Foundation in 596N, against Too Faced Born This Way Soft Matte Foundation in Ganache. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shadeGanacheClosest overall alternative596NHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall86
Colour60%76#472005#402313Close colourColour difference 4.1 (0 is identical)
Finish & visual result25% of overall · 3 of 4 compared82
Finish35%56MatteNaturalSome differenceNatural finish rather than matte
Coverage30%100MediumMediumSameSame medium coverage
Skin-like finish20%100ClaimedClaimedSameBoth products claim a skin-like finish
Blurring15%—not comparableNot listedNot listedNot claimed by eitherNeither product lists a blurring or smoothing effect
Wear & performance15% of overall79
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%100ClaimedClaimedSameBoth products claim 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 86/100High 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.
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 $12 more
