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 natural finish· Both claim a skin-like finish
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone· Medium rather than buildable coverage· No long-wear claim
Score details
Shade match
89
Finish & visual result
100
Wear & performance
40
Skin suitability
60
Looks identical · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 3% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly warmer undertone · Medium rather than buildable coverage · No long-wear claim · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Not marketed for sensitive skin · Contains drying alcohol
Matches: Very close colour· Same neutral undertone· Both claim 16-hour wear
Differences: Radiant rather than natural finish· Medium rather than buildable coverage· No skin-like finish claimed
Score details
Shade match
93
Finish & visual result
68
Wear & performance
87
Skin suitability
33
Very close colour · Radiant · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 8% ingredient overlap
Differences: Radiant rather than natural finish · Medium rather than buildable coverage · No skin-like finish claimed · Not marketed for normal/dry skin
Matches: Very close colour· Same neutral undertone· Both claim a skin-like finish
Differences: Radiant rather than natural finish· Medium rather than buildable coverage· Does not claim a lightweight feel
Score details
Shade match
93
Finish & visual result
76
Wear & performance
67
Skin suitability
60
Very close colour · Radiant · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 12% ingredient overlap
Differences: Radiant rather than natural finish · Medium rather than buildable coverage · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Not marketed for sensitive skin
Retailer shade note: medium with golden neutral undertones
Matches: Very close colour· Same neutral undertone· Same natural finish
Differences: Slightly lighter· Medium rather than buildable coverage· No skin-like finish claimed
Score details
Shade match
92
Finish & visual result
86
Wear & performance
37
Skin suitability
84
Very close colour · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 12% ingredient overlap
Differences: Slightly lighter · Medium rather than buildable coverage · No skin-like finish claimed · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Contains listed fragrance
Retailer shade note: medium skin with neutral beige undertones
The closest shade to Yepoda The Dewy Day 5N (Medium tan · 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
Jung Saem Mool Essential Skin Nuder Long-Lasting Hydrating Compact Cushion Foundation in 32N Walnut, against Yepoda The Dewy Day in 5N. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shade5NClosest shade match32N WalnutHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall98
Colour60%96#ba8d67#bd8e6aLooks identicalColour difference 1.2 (0 is identical)
Finish & visual result25% of overall · 3 of 4 compared86
Finish35%100NaturalNaturalSameSame natural finish
Coverage30%100BuildableMediumCloseMedium coverage rather than buildable (buildable: one step of tolerance)
Skin-like finish20%40ClaimedNot listedSome differenceOnly your product claims a skin-like finish; the match does not list it
Blurring15%—not comparableNot listedNot listedNot claimed by eitherNeither product lists a blurring or smoothing effect
Wear & performance15% of overall · 2 of 5 compared80
Longevity30%7012-hour wearLong-wearingSome differenceYour product claims 12-hour wear; the match says long-wearing without hours
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 overall33
Skin type100%33Normal, dry, sensitiveDryBoth marketed for dry skin
Overall match 89/100Shade match 98/100Medium 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.
Finish & visual result25% of overall · 3 of 4 compared100
Finish35%100NaturalNaturalSameSame natural finish
Coverage30%100BuildableMediumCloseMedium coverage rather than buildable (buildable: one step of tolerance)
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 overall · 2 of 5 compared80
Longevity30%7012-hour wearLong-wearingSome differenceYour product claims 12-hour wear; the match says long-wearing without hours
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 overall100
Skin type100%100Normal, dry, sensitiveNormal, dry, sensitiveBoth marketed for normal/dry/sensitive skin
Overall match 90/100Shade match 87/100High 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.
SephoraCosts $10 more
