Loose Mineral Foundation Hazelnut dupes and alternatives Youngblood
4.8 (79)·Very deep · Warm 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· Claims long-wearing· Claims transfer resistance
Differences: Neutral rather than warm undertone· Medium rather than buildable coverage· Does not claim a lightweight feel
Score details
Shade match
88
Finish & visual result
100
Wear & performance
40
Skin suitability
0
Looks identical · Natural · Medium coverage
Ingredients (not scored): 1% ingredient overlap
Differences: Neutral rather than warm undertone · Medium rather than buildable coverage · Does not claim a lightweight feel · Not marketed for sensitive skin
The closest shade to Youngblood Loose Mineral Foundation Hazelnut (Very deep · Warm 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
NARS Light Reflecting Foundation in Namibia, against Youngblood Loose Mineral Foundation in Hazelnut. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shadeHazelnutClosest shade matchNamibiaHow they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall96
Colour60%95#793e20#7f4123Looks identicalColour difference 1.5 (0 is identical)
Finish & visual result25% of overall · 2 of 4 compared80
Finish35%—not comparableNot listedNaturalNot comparedFinish not listed for one product
Coverage30%100BuildableMediumCloseMedium coverage rather than buildable (buildable: one step of tolerance)
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%40Not listedLong-wearingSome differenceThe match claims long wear; your product 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%0SensitiveNormal, dry, combinationMarketed for different skin types
Overall match 82/100Shade 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.
Pat McGrath Labs Skin Fetish: Sublime Perfection Foundation in Deep 33, against Youngblood Loose Mineral Foundation in Hazelnut. Every attribute compared, with its share of the score.
ComparedYour shadeHazelnutClosest overall alternativeDeep 33How they compareScore
Shade match55% of overall90
Colour60%98#793e20#794023Looks identicalColour difference 0.7 (0 is identical)
Finish & visual result25% of overall · 2 of 4 compared80
Finish35%—not comparableNot listedRadiantNot comparedFinish not listed for one product
Coverage30%100BuildableMediumCloseMedium coverage rather than buildable (buildable: one step of tolerance)
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 · 1 of 5 compared100
Longevity30%—not comparableNot listedNot listedNot claimed by eitherNeither product lists long wear
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%0SensitiveNormal, dry, combinationMarketed for different skin types
Overall match 84/100Shade match 90/100Medium 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 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.