Closest shade match is the equivalent shade, scored on colour, depth, undertone and colour family only. Closest overall alternative is the most similar eyeshadow overall: shade match 55%, finish, pigmentation and format 30%, wear and performance 10%, comfort and skin suitability 5%.
Overall alternativesShade matchesRanked by the overall match: the most similar eyeshadow on shade, finish, wear and comfort 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 eyeshadow on shade, finish, wear and comfort and skin suitability together. Each row leads with its overall match; the shade match is beneath it.
Differences: Lighter· Opaque rather than buildable (pigmentation)· Cream rather than powder (format)
Score details
Shade match
86
Finish, pigmentation & format
74
Wear & performance
40
Comfort & skin suitability
50
Close colour · Metallic · Opaque
Ingredients (not scored): 17% ingredient overlap
Differences: Lighter · Opaque rather than buildable (pigmentation) · Cream rather than powder (format) · Long-wearing rather than not listed (longevity)
Matches: Very close colour· Same finish: shimmer· Claims waterproof
Differences: Peach rather than golden· Opaque rather than buildable (pigmentation)· Cream rather than powder (format)
Score details
Shade match
77
Finish, pigmentation & format
83
Wear & performance
40
Comfort & skin suitability
50
Very close colour · Shimmer · Opaque
Ingredients (not scored): 17% ingredient overlap
Differences: Peach rather than golden · Opaque rather than buildable (pigmentation) · Cream rather than powder (format) · Long-wearing rather than not listed (longevity)
Differences: Glitter rather than shimmer (finish)· Opaque rather than buildable (pigmentation)· Stick rather than powder (format)
Score details
Shade match
87
Finish, pigmentation & format
62
Wear & performance
40
Comfort & skin suitability
50
Close colour · Glitter · Opaque
Ingredients (not scored): 14% ingredient overlap
Differences: Glitter rather than shimmer (finish) · Opaque rather than buildable (pigmentation) · Stick rather than powder (format) · 12-hour wear rather than not listed (longevity)
Matches: Same finish: shimmer· Claims crease resistance
Differences: Nude rather than golden· Opaque rather than buildable (pigmentation)· Stick rather than powder (format)
Score details
Shade match
69
Finish, pigmentation & format
83
Wear & performance
40
Comfort & skin suitability
50
Close colour · Shimmer · Opaque
Ingredients (not scored): 8% ingredient overlap
Differences: Nude rather than golden · Opaque rather than buildable (pigmentation) · Stick rather than powder (format) · 24-hour wear rather than not listed (longevity)
Matches: Very close colour· Same finish: shimmer· Claims crease resistance
Differences: Pink rather than golden· Opaque rather than buildable (pigmentation)· Cream rather than powder (format)
Score details
Shade match
70
Finish, pigmentation & format
83
Wear & performance
40
Comfort & skin suitability
40
Very close colour · Shimmer · Opaque
Ingredients (not scored): 9% ingredient overlap
Differences: Pink rather than golden · Opaque rather than buildable (pigmentation) · Cream rather than powder (format) · Long-wearing rather than not listed (longevity)
Matches: Very close colour· Same finish: shimmer· Claims crease resistance
Differences: Rose rather than golden· Opaque rather than buildable (pigmentation)· Stick rather than powder (format)
Score details
Shade match
69
Finish, pigmentation & format
83
Wear & performance
40
Comfort & skin suitability
40
Very close colour · Shimmer · Opaque
Ingredients (not scored): 21% ingredient overlap
Differences: Rose rather than golden · Opaque rather than buildable (pigmentation) · Stick rather than powder (format) · 24-hour wear rather than not listed (longevity)
Sacheu Long Wear Liquid Eyeshadow STAY-N in Candy Dipp’d, against Ulta Beauty Collection Bouncy Cream Eyeshadow in Champagne Sorbet. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shadeChampagne SorbetClosest matchCandy Dipp’dHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall96
Colour60%94#d8a99b#d7ada0Very close colourColour difference 1.6 (0 is identical)
Depth15%98LightLightSameDepth difference 1.4 on the 0–100 scale
Undertone—not comparableNot listedNot listedUndertone unknown on one side
Colour family25%100GoldenGoldenSameSame colour family
Finish, pigmentation & format30% of overall · 2 of 3 compared85
Finish65%100ShimmerShimmerSameSame shimmer finish
Pigmentation20%—not comparableBuildableNot listedNot listed for eitherAn opacity not listed for one product
Format15%20PowderLiquidDifferentLiquid rather than powder
Wear & performance10% of overall · 2 of 3 compared40
Longevity50%40Not listedLong-wearingSome differenceThe match claims long wear; your product does not list it
Crease resistance30%40Not listedClaimedSome differenceThe match claims crease resistance; your product does not list it
Overall match 85/100Shade match 96/100Medium 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, undertone and colour family; the overall match on shade match, finish, pigmentation and format, wear and performance and comfort and suitability. A pair with no swatch colour on one side or Low data confidence is listed without a score. 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
SephoraCosts $13.50 more
