Swipe Serum Non-Acnegenic Foundation 16P Palos Verdes dupes and alternatives Tower 28 Beauty
4.0 (441)·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: Very close colour· Same warm undertone· Same radiant finish
Differences: Light rather than medium coverage· No long-wear claim· Not marketed for sensitive skin
Score details
Shade match
95
Finish & visual result
91
Wear & performance
54
Skin suitability
0
Very close colour · Radiant · Light coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 13% ingredient overlap
Differences: Light rather than medium coverage · No long-wear claim · Not marketed for sensitive skin · Contains listed fragrance · Contains drying alcohol
Matches: Same warm undertone· Same radiant finish· Claims not settling into lines
Differences: Slightly lighter· Light rather than medium coverage· No long-wear claim
Score details
Shade match
87
Finish & visual result
91
Wear & performance
54
Skin suitability
0
Close colour · Radiant · Light coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 13% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly lighter · Light rather than medium coverage · No long-wear claim · Not marketed for sensitive skin · Contains listed fragrance · Contains drying alcohol
Matches: Very close colour· Same medium coverage· Claims transfer resistance
Differences: Olive rather than warm undertone· Natural rather than radiant finish· Does not claim a lightweight feel
Score details
Shade match
89
Finish & visual result
76
Wear & performance
54
Skin suitability
0
Very close colour · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 11% ingredient overlap
Differences: Olive rather than warm undertone · Natural rather than radiant finish · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Not marketed for sensitive skin
Matches: Same radiant finish· Both claim a lightweight feel
Differences: Neutral rather than warm undertone· Light rather than medium coverage· No long-wear claim
Score details
Shade match
78
Finish & visual result
91
Wear & performance
60
Skin suitability
0
Close colour · Radiant · Light coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 12% ingredient overlap
Differences: Neutral rather than warm undertone · Light rather than medium coverage · No long-wear claim · Not marketed for sensitive skin · Contains listed fragrance · Contains drying alcohol
Retailer shade note: for deep skin with neutral undertones
Differences: Matte rather than radiant finish· Full rather than medium coverage· Does not claim a lightweight feel
Score details
Shade match
95
Finish & visual result
43
Wear & performance
60
Skin suitability
0
Very close colour · Matte · Full coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 14% ingredient overlap
Differences: Matte rather than radiant finish · Full rather than medium coverage · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Not marketed for sensitive skin · Contains listed fragrance
The closest shade to Tower 28 Beauty Swipe Serum Non-Acnegenic Foundation 16P Palos Verdes (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
Clinique Acne Solutions Liquid Makeup Foundation in WN 112 Ginger, against Tower 28 Beauty Swipe Serum Non-Acnegenic Foundation in 16P Palos Verdes. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shade16P Palos VerdesClosest shade matchWN 112 GingerHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall95
Colour60%93#a27244#9c7047Very close colourColour difference 1.8 (0 is identical)
Finish & visual result25% of overall · 3 of 4 compared50
Finish35%12RadiantMatteDifferentMatte finish rather than radiant
Coverage30%100MediumMediumSameSame medium coverage
Skin-like finish20%—not comparableNot listedNot listedNot claimed by eitherNeither product lists a skin-like finish
Blurring15%40Not listedClaimedSome differenceThe match claims a blurring or smoothing effect; your product does not list it
Wear & performance15% of overall · 2 of 5 compared60
Longevity30%4016-hour wearNot listedSome differenceOnly your product claims long wear; the match does not list it
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 overall0
Skin type100%0SensitiveCombination, dry, oilyMarketed for different skin types
Overall match 74/100Shade match 95/100Medium 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 Maracuja Juicy Glow Tint in 46S Tan-Deep Sand, against Tower 28 Beauty Swipe Serum Non-Acnegenic Foundation in 16P Palos Verdes. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shade16P Palos VerdesClosest overall alternative46S Tan-Deep SandHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall94
Colour60%91#a27244#a97448Very close colourColour difference 2.2 (0 is identical)
Depth15%97Deep tanTanCloseDepth difference: 2.0
Retailer descriptionDeepDeep tanSome differenceRetailer descriptions one depth band apart
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 overall68
Skin type100%68SensitiveCombination, dry, normal, oily, sensitiveBoth marketed for sensitive skin
Overall match 92/100Shade 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.
32 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 $14 more
Sephora
Target
