The Hourglass Phantom Volumizing Glossy Balm is one of my fave lip formulas ever. I’m addicted to the comfortable balmy texture, strong pigmentation, gorgeous shades, and juicy shine.

But at £36 each, these lip glosses are expensive. And let’s be honest, the drugstore has been killing it with high-quality products at a fraction of the price of luxury brands.

e.l.f. Cosmetics recently launched the Pout Clout Lip Plumping Pen. As soon as I saw it I immediately thought of how similar it looked to my beloved Hourglass formula.

Is the new £8 e.l.f. Cosmetics Pout Clout Lip Plumping Pen a dupe for the £36 Hourglass Phantom Volumizing Glossy Balm? This in-depth comparison post covers everything you need to know, with side-by-side swatches, a discussion around texture and application, and what they look like on the lips.

Get 15% off Hourglass products at Sephora with my exclusive code SARAHSSPH. Shop here.

** This post contains some affiliate links. This means at no extra cost to you, I earn some commission if you purchase a product through my link. All thoughts are my own, though, as always. If you want to find out more, visit my affiliate disclosure page **

About the Hourglass Phantom Volumizing Glossy Balm

The Hourglass Phantom Volumizing Glossy Balm is a 3-in-1 lip formula that hydrates like a lip balm, plumps for fuller-looking lips, and delivers the high-shine finish of a lip gloss. It’s nourishing, non-sticky, and smooths over the lips effortlessly. Hourglass is cruelty-free.

About the e.l.f. Cosmetics Pout Clout Lip Plumping Pen

The e.l.f. Cosmetics Pout Clout Lip Plumping Pen is a tinted, moisturising lip-plumping gloss with a cooling sensation that delivers a smooth, glossy, and pumped-up pout. It’s non-sticky and offers sheer colour with a glossy shine. e.l.f. Cosmetics is vegan and cruelty-free.

The comparison

Price

e.l.f. obviously wins on price. Its glossy lip formula costs £8 for 2g, which is pretty budget-friendly.

Hourglass, on the other hand, is almost 5 times more expensive for slightly less product. It costs £36 for 1.7g.

Packaging

Unsurprisingly, Hourglass wins on the packaging in front, both in terms of aesthetics and functionality. Hourglass has a reflective gold, sturdy outer case. It feels weighty and expensive. This glossy balm offers a twist-up mechanism for effortless application.

e.l.f. feels cheaper, with light plastic packaging. It looks much more basic. This product offers a click-up mechanism for easy application.

I find that I have more control over how much product comes out with Hourglass’ twist-up mechanism over the e.l.f. clicking mechanism. With both of these lip products, once you have twisted or clicked the product up, you can’t get it back down. But neither dispenses too much product in one go, so this shouldn’t cause an issue. Both pens are sleek and tall.

Ingredients

The ingredients in both products vary depending on which shade you pick.

e.l.f. Cosmetics features maracuja oil for nourishment alongside the antioxidant blueberry, watermelon and pomegranate extracts. Hourglass is enriched with menthyl lactate for an instant cooling sensation and a blend of emollients and oils that nourish, condition, and hydrate lips. 

Texture

The textures of these 2 products are fairly similar. Both feel hydrating, smooth, comfortable, and non-sticky on the lips.

Hourglass has a balmier consistency and is a little bit more nourishing. e.l.f. Cosmetics is a bit thicker and not quite as smooth or conditioning as Hourglass. I find that e.l.f. takes a bit more spreading to prevent the product from gathering in one place on the lips.

Ultimately, these consistencies are both enjoyable to wear. I think Hourglass is just more unique and special.

Pigmentation

e.l.f. and Hourglass offer rich and seamless colour payoff. They both provide medium pigmentation that can be easily built up for a more intense, vivid look. The deeper and bolder shades in both formulas are more pigmented than the nude shades.

Shade range

Hourglass wins on shade range. It offers 16 beautiful shades, ranging from cool beige, warm peach, bright red, deep berry, and burnt rosewood.

e.l.f. offers half the number of shades. Its 8 pretty shades include clear (Hourglass doesn’t have a transparent shade), black cherry, sheer red, mauve, and neutral beige.

Swatches

To show you how these glossy lip products compare to one another, I swatched them. These were done on my bare arm, without primer. I tried to get similar shades in both lines for the swatches to be as close as possible.

In Hourglass, I have the shades Crave (warm pink) and Lure (deep berry). In e.l.f., I own the shades Pinky Out (light nude pink) and Plum on Over (berry).

The lip gloss shades aren’t as similar as I was hoping, but you can see that the formulas are quite similar. Hourglass is noticeably shinier and balmier, whereas e.l.f. is thicker and less glossy. Both are sleek, non-tacky, and offer similar pigmentation.

Lure is deeper and less purple than Plum on Over. Lure has more red in it and is less vibrant. Crave is a little deeper and more pink than Pinky Out. Pinky Out is quite pale and has more peach undertones.

On the lips

And now for the real test: how does e.l.f. compare to Hourglass on the lips? I took some pictures of me wearing each shade in both formulas below.

In terms of the finish, the e.l.f. Cosmetics Pout Clout Lip Plumping Pen and Hourglass Phantom Volumizing Glossy Balm look super similar.

The Hourglass formula is shinier in person. I also prefer the Hourglass shades, as I think they’re more flattering on my complexion. But I still really like the e.l.f. shades.

In terms of the feeling, both have a minty, cooling sensation on the lips, which I love. Hourglass is balmier, a bit more hydrating, and applies more seamlessly. However, the formulas are overall alike.

Longevity

As expected with a balmy formula, these lip products don’t wear particularly well. Glossy products are notorious for transferring, and these are no exception. Both last for around 3 hours, including eating and drinking, but you’ll need to top up after this, as the product will be almost completely gone.

Hourglass wears a little more flatteringly. I found that the e.l.f. formula wore off completely in the centre of my lips but left a bit of a stain around the outside. Whereas Hourglass wore off evenly, so it didn’t look patchy.

Honest thoughts on whether e.l.f. Cosmetics Pout Clout Lip Plumping Pen is a worthy dupe for the Hourglass Phantom Volumizing Glossy Balm

Overall, I think the the e.l.f. Cosmetics Pout Clout Lip Plumping Pen is a pretty good dupe for the Hourglass Phantom Volumizing Glossy Balm.

Hourglass is still my fave. It’s balmier, shinier, more comfortable, easier to apply, the packaging is prettier, and I prefer the shades. It just has that extra oomph. However, e.l.f. is a great and way more affordable alternative that delivers a similar glossy, hydrating finish.

If you want to achieve a hydrating glossy lip at a fraction of the price of the Hourglass Phantom Volumizing Glossy Balm, the e.l.f. Cosmetics Pout Clout Lip Plumping Pen is a good choice.

Get 15% off Hourglass products at Sephora with my exclusive code SARAHSSPH. Shop here.

Check out some of my other makeup dupes to bag yourself some high-quality bargains.

The post Is the new e.l.f. Cosmetics Pout Clout Lip Plumping Pen a dupe for the Hourglass Phantom Volumizing Glossy Balm? A side-by-side comparison appeared first on A Woman's Confidence.

The Dior Addict Lip Glow Oil is one of the most viral lip products. This luxury lip oil features in every other TikTok video and Instagram reel. It’s such a pretty product and makes lips look juicy and feel hydrated.

But at £32, it’s very expensive. And do you really need to spend over £30 on a lip oil for high-quality results?  

The answer is no!

I’ve found the perfect dupe for the Dior lip oil that performs just as well and is a fraction of the price.

The Saem Eco Soul Lip Oil only costs £7 and delivers the same results as its high-end counterpart. Once applied, you can’t tell the difference between the 2 lip oils. But your bank will definitely be able to tell the difference.

Find out why this Dior lip oil dupe is the perfect option for hydrated, shiny, and juicy lips without any stickiness in this detailed comparison post.

Use my code CONFIDENCE10 for up to 5% off YesStyle. For new customers, use the code YESSTYLE for 10% off with a minimum £28.70 ($35 USD) purchase. Buy the £7 Dior lip oil dupe here.

** This post contains some affiliate links. This means at no extra cost to you, I earn some commission if you purchase a product through my link. All thoughts are my own, though, as always. If you want to find out more, visit my affiliate disclosure page **

About the Dior Addict Lip Glow Oil in 001 Pink

The Dior Addict Lip Glow Oil is a glossy lip oil that deeply protects and nourishes the lips. It enhances the natural colour of your lips. Infused with cherry oil, this lip product softens and revitalises the lips with a high-shine finish. The formula is non-greasy and non-sticky. It can be worn on its own, as a primer under lipstick, or as a top coat for volumising shine.

001 Pink is a light, sheer pink that provides a subtle touch of colour. It has a mint scent.

About The Saem Eco Soul Lip Oil in #02 Berry

The Saem Eco Soul Lip Oil is a nourishing oil that delivers lasting moisture. It makes lips look plump and juicy while feeling soft and supple. The non-sticky formula makes lips look healthy and soothes any dryness or chapping. It can be worn alone for glossy hydration or as a lip mask at night to condition your lips while you sleep.

#02 Berry is a soft, sheer berry that provides a hint of colour. It has a light berry scent.

The comparison

Price

Of course, The Saem wins on price. It only costs £7.07 for 6ml. And YesStyle often runs discounts, so you can pick this up for even less!

The Dior Addict Lip Glow Oil is more than 4 times the price. It costs £32 for 3.5g. I think there’s actually a bit more product in The Saem, so you get more for your money.

Packaging

Honestly, I think Dior wins on packaging. Just. It looks expensive with the silver lid and writing on the front. Plus, the completely transparent packaging means you can see the pretty pink oil inside. And it’s aesthetically pleasing with a look at the juicy oil inside.

The Saem has a contrasting white lid and transparent packaging that houses the berry lip oil. There’s slight frosting on the lip gloss packaging, so you don’t get as good a look at the lip oil inside compared to Dior. But it’s still pretty.

Both come with pretty big doe foot applicators. This makes it easy to coat your lips in the oil. The Saem has a slightly bigger applicator, but they’re very similar.  

Ingredients

The Saem has a longer INCI list than Dior. Both lip oils contain the emollients ethylhexyl palmitate and diisostearyl malate, and the antioxidant vitamin E tocopherol. Ultimately, outside of colouring agents, these lip oils don’t share many of the same ingredients.

The Dior lip oil contains the emollients tridecyl trimellitate and phytosteryl/octyldodecyl lauroyl glutamate, glossing agent polybutene, moisturising pentaerythrityl tetraisostearate, skin-replenishing caprylic/capric triglyceride, skin-conditioning polyglyceryl 2 triisostearate, and many more.

The Saem lip oil is enriched with the emollients polyglyceryl-2 isostearate/​dimer dilinoleate copolymer, olive fruit oil, sunflower seed oil, and camellia japonica seed oil. It also features soothing and hydrating jojoba seed oil, the antioxidants vitamin E tocopheryl acetate and green tea seed oil, and many more.

Texture

These lip oils offer similar textures. But as far as differences go, Dior is a bit thinner, a little stickier, and feels lighter on the lips. The Saem is thicker, not sticky at all, and coats the lips with a more nourishing oil consistency. I think The Saem is closer to a gloss, as it coats the lips with a juicier and richer texture.

Pigmentation

The Dior Addict Lip Glow Oil in 001 Pink offers a bit more pigmentation than The Saem Eco Soul Lip Oil in #02 Berry, despite the dupe looking deeper in the packaging.

Dior offers a light pink tint of colour. The Saem has a very slight berry tint, but it’s barely noticeable. Although, neither of these lip oils are supposed to be pigmented, as they opt for moisture and shine over colour. The effect is natural and soft.

Shade range

Dior has a wider shade range, offering 8 different colours in cherry, clear, coral, berry, mahogany, pink, raspberry, and rosewood.

The Saem has 3 shades on offer: berry, honey, and grapefruit.

Swatches

To show you how these lip oils compare to one another, I swatched them. These were done on my bare arm, without primer.

As you can see, these lip oils are very similar in terms of colour, texture, and shine.

Dior, on the top, offers a little more pigmentation and is pinker. It’s also a bit cooler. The Saem, on the bottom, is a warmer berry tone. But the colour is more sheer than Dior. They both look and feel thick, non-sticky, and smooth.

On the lips

And now for the real test: how does The Saem lip oil compare to the Dior lip oil on the lips? Without looking at the caption, can you tell which side is which?!

They look pretty much identical!

On the right-hand side of my lips, Dior is a bit more pigmented and has more of a pink tone. While The Saem, on the left-hand side, is more transparent and has a softer berry tone. But without knowing, you wouldn’t be able to tell that I’m wearing 2 different lip oils.

As for how they feel on the lips, they’re also very similar. In fact, I even prefer The Saem’s texture, as it’s a bit richer and feels more nourishing. Both sides feel very lightweight and hydrating. And the lip oils offer the same, addictive mirror-like shine. They’re so glossy and look amazing.

Longevity

As you can expect, lip oils aren’t the most long-lasting due to their glossy finish, which is notorious for wearing off. After 3 hours of wear, which included eating and drinking, both lip oils had worn off significantly. The shine had almost completely disappeared and most of the product had come off.

However, there was a bit more product on the Dior side compared to The Saem. But the Dior side also felt a bit sticky, whereas The Saem left no stickiness whatsoever.

Despite most of the product wearing off within a few hours, my lips on both sides were left more hydrated, soft, and nourished. They also felt soothed and relieved of any dryness or soreness. So while the glossy finish will wear off, the hydrating and soothing benefits won’t.

Honest thoughts on the Dior lip oil dupe

The Saem Eco Soul Lip Oil is an excellent dupe for the popular Dior Addict Lip Glow Oil.

It costs 4 times less while offering the same juicy shine, hydrating benefits, and sheer tint as the high-end version. In fact, The Saem lip oil is even more nourishing and conditioning than the Dior one, so I genuinely prefer it.

On the lips, there’s hardly any difference in the way these lip oils look and feel. So why spend £32 when you can spend £7 for the same results and even more product? The Saem is the clear winner!

Use my code CONFIDENCE10 for up to 5% off YesStyle. For new customers, use the code YESSTYLE for 10% off with a minimum £28.70 ($35 USD) purchase. Buy the £7 Dior lip oil dupe here.

The post Don’t spend £32 on the viral Dior lip oil when this stunning £7 dupe is identical appeared first on A Woman's Confidence.

Raise your hand if you’re also addicted to the Rare Beauty Soft Pinch Liquid Blush. This viral TikTok sensation has made its way into every makeup lover’s collection. It’s weightless, easy to blend, and super pigmented. Plus, it comes an array of gorgeous shades.

Ever since I bought the shade Bliss, a soft nude pink, it’s become a holy grail. The formula is divine.

The A’PIEU Juicy-Pang Water Blusher in #PK03 Guava is supposed to be a dupe for the Rare Beauty blush in Bliss. And at nearly 3 times cheaper than Rare Beauty, the Korean blush dupe is definitely worth considering.

But is the A’PIEU Juicy-Pang Water Blusher a worthy dupe for the iconic Rare Beauty Soft Pinch Liquid Blush? This honest comparison post puts these blushes head to head, with a look at the packaging, ingredients, texture, pigmentation, swatches, and lasting power, to see which blush comes out on top.

Use my code CONFIDENCE10 for up to 5% off YesStyle. For new customers, use the code YESSTYLE for 10% off with a minimum £28.70 ($35 USD) purchase. Shop the Rare Beauty blush dupe here.

** This post contains some affiliate links. This means at no extra cost to you, I earn some commission if you purchase a product through my link. All thoughts are my own, though, as always. If you want to find out more, visit my affiliate disclosure page **

About the Rare Beauty Soft Pinch Liquid Blush in Bliss

The Rare Beauty Soft Pinch Liquid Blush is weightless and long-wearing with a second skin finish. There are both matte and dewy finishes available, which all look natural and give the skin a pop of colour. The blush is buildable, blends seamlessly, and is very pigmented. It works well over cream, liquid, and powder products, so it won’t disturb any base products.

The shade Bliss is a warm-toned nude pink blush. It’s soft and flattering.

About the A’PIEU Juicy-Pang Water Blusher in #PK03 Guava

The A’PIEU Juicy-Pang Water Blusher is a soft watery blush that’s easy to blend into the skin. It offers a dewy finish and a natural flush of colour. This buildable blush starts off quite sheer but can be layered seamlessly for more vibrancy.

The shade #PK03 Guava is a soft nude pink blush. It has a slightly cool tone and is very wearable.

The comparison

Price

A’PIEU is the more budget-friendly option. It costs £8.16 for 9g. Rare Beauty is almost 3 times as much, costing £22 for 7.5ml.

Packaging

The packaging of these 2 blushes is quite different. While both are plastic, Rare Beauty is weightier and bigger. A’PIEU is very light and small; it almost looks like a nail varnish bottle.

Rare Beauty has a very distinct gold lid with a ball shape at the top. This is designed for people who struggle to grip lids and make it easier for them to open the blush. Apparently, this design came about as Selena Gomez, Rare Beauty’s founder, has lupus and sometimes finds it difficult to open certain products. This is such a thoughtful consideration, and the lid is definitely very easy to grip. Rare Beauty’s blush also comes with a large doe foot applicator to easily dot the product directly onto your cheeks.

A’PIEU has a long white lid and a small brush as opposed to a doe foot applicator. This makes it easy to pick up the liquid blush and place it onto your cheeks.

Ingredients

Looking at the INCI lists, A’PIEU’s is longer. They share several of the same ingredients, including glow-giving mica, skin-softening trimethylsiloxysilicate, and moisture-binding 1,2-Hexanediol.

Rare Beauty features the emollients hydrogenated polyisobutene, sunflower seed oil, and hydrogenated poly (C6-14 Olefin). It incorporates fragrant and potentially sensitising gardenia florida extract, antioxidant lotus flower extract, and refreshing nymphaea odorata root extract.

A’PIEU is enriched with the humectant butylene glycol, the emollients cetyl ethylhexanoate and dimethicone, hydrating glycerin, and many other ingredients. However, it contains denatured alcohol, which, while it can help enhance the penetration of other ingredients into the skin, can be sensitising.

Texture

These 2 blushes have different textures.

Rare Beauty isn’t a runny liquid and has a very airy consistency. It genuinely feels weightless. It blends out seamlessly without going patchy. Plus, it can be layered without going cakey or disturbing other makeup products.

A’PIEU has a runnier consistency and feels hydrating. But it’s not going to drip down your face on application, so you’ve got time to buff it in. While it feels very light on the skin, it’s not as airy as Rare Beauty. This blush blends out and can be built up seamlessly. You won’t experience any patchiness or a cakey look with this blush either.

Pigmentation

Rare Beauty Soft Pinch Liquid Blush is undoubtedly the more pigmented blush. Like it’s seriously pigmented. 1 dot is enough to cover both cheeks. You can easily overdo it with this blush, so always go in with a small amount first and add more if you need to. The beauty of a liquid blush is that it’s easy to clean up if you do apply too much product, as you can soften the pigmentation by buffing it out lightly with foundation or concealer.

A’PIEU Juicy-Pang Water Blusher is fairly pigmented but takes a few layers to achieve the same colour payoff as Rare Beauty. However, the dupe is more beginner friendly, as it’s difficult to overdo it with application. It also offers a more natural look with a soft flush of colour.

Shade range

These blushes offer quite a similar shade range.

Rare Beauty just wins on shade range, with 13 shades available offering both matte and dewy finishes. Expect muted peach, cool pink, rosy mauve, true red, deep berry, and terracotta.

A’PIEU still offers a broad shade range, with 12 colours to pick from. Think natural taupe, bright coral, neutral pink, soft raspberry, vivid cherry, and cool lilac.

Swatches

To show you what these blushes look like next to one another, I swatched them. These were done on my bare arm without primer.

Rare Beauty, on top, is slightly warmer than A’PIEU. But both are soft nude pink shades that offer very similar depth. While the shades aren’t identical, they’re definitely similar.

I will say that it took me multiple dips into A’PIEU to achieve the same colour payoff as Rare Beauty. That Rare Beauty swatch was just 1 dip into the blush. It’s so pigmented!

On the cheeks

And now for the real test: what do these blushes look like side by side on the cheeks? I kept the rest of my makeup the same and simply applied 1 blush on 1 side of my face and the other blush on the other side.

On the right-hand side of my face, Rare Beauty is a bit warmer, has a soft matte finish, and looks more vivid. On the left-hand side of my face, A’PIEU is softer, dewier, and a bit cooler. But these shades look so similar on my cheeks. Unless you were inspecting my cheeks with a microscope, you wouldn’t be able to tell a difference between the 2!

Again, it took several layers of A’PIEU to get this level of pigmentation, whereas Rare Beauty was just half a dot. But A’PIEU layers beautifully, so it was no trouble at all.

Longevity

Both blushes lasted well for a solid 8 hours. Rare Beauty remained unchanged and looked like I’d just applied it. A’PIEU had faded a bit after 8 hours but was still visible and didn’t go patchy at all.

Honest thoughts on the Rare Beauty blush dupe

I think the A’PIEU Juicy-Pang Water Blusher in #PK03 Guava is a great dupe for the Rare Beauty Soft Pinch Liquid Blush in Bliss. While there are some differences between the blushes, on the cheeks, they almost look identical.

A’PIEU has a gorgeous dewy finish, offers a slightly cooler nude pink tone, and buffs into the skin effortlessly. It’s not quite as pigmented as Rare Beauty but is certainly easier to work with. It’s very hydrating, easy to layer, and super wearable. And at £8.16, it’s an absolute steal.

If you want the Rare Beauty blush effect without spending £22, the A’PIEU Juicy-Pang Water Blusher is a sure win. I’ve fallen in love with it!

Use my code CONFIDENCE10 for up to 5% off YesStyle. For new customers, use the code YESSTYLE for 10% off with a minimum £28.70 ($35 USD) purchase. Shop the Rare Beauty blush dupe here.

The post I’m in love with this £8 Rare Beauty blush dupe that has a soft, dewy finish appeared first on A Woman's Confidence.

Have you been seeing the Benefit Benetint Rose-Tinted Lip & Cheek Stain everywhere? Yep, me too. This lip and cheek tint has become a social media sensation, with people using it to add a natural flush of colour to their complexion. It’s a subtle product that makes a big impact.

But can we find a dupe that’s just as good as Benetint for a fraction of the price?

The MACQUEEN Jelly Plumping Water Tint only costs £6.64, instead of Benefit’s starting price of £17.50, and is supposed to be a dupe for the high-end version.

In this honest review, I do a side-by-side comparison of these 2 lip tints’ textures, lasting power, pigmentation, ingredients, and swatches, as well as what they look like on the lips. Find out whether MACCQUEEN Jelly Plumping Water Tint is truly an identical dupe for Benefit Benetint.

Use my code CONFIDENCE10 for up to 5% off YesStyle. For new customers, use the code YESSTYLE for 10% off with a minimum £28.70 ($35 USD) purchase. Buy your £6.64 Benefit Benetint dupe here.

** This post contains some affiliate links. This means at no extra cost to you, I earn some commission if you purchase a product through my link. All thoughts are my own, though, as always. If you want to find out more, visit my affiliate disclosure page **

About the Benefit Benetint Rose-Tinted Lip & Cheek Stain

The Benefit Benetint is a watery tint that provides a natural rosy flush of colour to the lip or cheeks. It’s subtle, non-sticky, lightweight, long-lasting, and smooth. The fast-absorbing tint enhances your complexion for a very minimal look.

About the MACQUEEN Jelly Plumping Water Tint in #03 Red Orange

The MACQUEEN Jelly Plumping Water Tint in #03 Red Orange is a pigmented red orange for your lips. It’s bold and vibrant with a watery gel texture. The formula is lightweight, hydrating, soothing, and quick drying. This tint stains your lips, which means it’ll stay put even after eating and drinking!

The comparison

Price

Of course, MACQUEEN wins on price. It costs £6.64 for 9.5g, while Benefit Benetint costs either £17.50 for 6ml or £25.50 for 20ml.

While it’s difficult to directly compare grams and millilitres, as they measure different things, the 9.5g MACQUEEN tint is a bit bigger than the 6ml Benetint. This means MACQUEEN is nearly one-third of the price of Benefit for more product. It’s way better value for money.

Packaging

These tints have very similar packaging. Both come in dainty pots with a small doe-foot applicator. They’re lightweight, have a transparent pot so you can see the colour of the tint inside, and have white lids.

Ingredients

MACQUEEN has a longer INCI list. Other than preservatives and cleansing agents, these tints don’t share any notable ingredients.

Benefit features skin-softening maltodextrin and the antioxidant BHT. It’s comprised of multiple fragrant and potential skin-sensitising ingredients, like perfume, geraniol, linalool, hexyl cinnamal, and citronellol. But it doesn’t really have any standout skin-loving ingredients.

MACQUEEN is enriched with multiple skin-loving ingredients like hydrating glycerin, the humectant butylene glycol, and moisture-binding 1, 2-Hexanediol. This lip tint also features perfume but far fewer fragrant ingredients than Benefit, meaning fewer chances to irritate the skin. MACQUEEN wins on the INCI list.

Texture

These tints have surprisingly different consistencies.

Benefit is runnier and thinner. It’s very watery and will drip if you’re not careful. It’s best to wipe excess product off the applicator back into the pot to avoid making a mess. Otherwise, you’ll end up with the tint streaking down your face. And it will stain. You’ve been warned.

MACQUEEN is still quite a watery formula but isn’t particularly runny and feels thicker. You’ve got more leeway with this tint, as it won’t drip. It’s a little bit stickier than Benetint and sits somewhere in between a water and a gel.

Pigmentation

MACQUEEN is way more pigmented than Benefit. It doesn’t matter how many times you layer Benetint, it will never have the saturated colour payoff that MACQUEEN does. The dupe is more vibrant, while the luxury tint is subtler. Both tints can be layered for more intensity.

Shade range

MACQUEEN has 5 shades available, which include reds, oranges, corals, and pinks.

Benefit has 6 shades available, including the original Benetint. The other 5 are the Playtint Pink-Lemonade, mango ChaCha Tint, bright cherry GoGo Tint, fiery red Love Tint, and desert rose FloraTint.

Swatches

To show you how these lipsticks compare to one another, I swatched them. These were done on my bare arm, without primer. I did 2 swatches.

The first swatch, below, shows you what these tints look like directly on the arm.

MACQUEEN, on the bottom, only took 2 layers to achieve this level of pigmentation. I did 4 layers of Benefit, on top, and the colour is nowhere near as saturated.

As you can see, the colour and texture of these 2 tints aren’t the same. MACQUEEN is much more of a red orange and has a thicker water-gel consistency. Benefit is more of a rosy pink and has a very light watery texture.

The second swatch, below, was taken after I tried removing the tints with an oil-based cleansing balm. I wanted to show you how much these tints stain and what the colours look like when they’ve worn off a bit.

Both noticeably stained my arm, but their intensity decreased dramatically. The 2 colours look more alike if you wipe off excess product. But you can still tell that these are different shades.

On the lips

And now for the real test: how does MACQUEEN Jelly Plumping Water Tint in #03 Red Orange compare to the Benefit Benetint Rose-Tinted Lip & Cheek Stain on the lips? In the picture below, Benefit is on the right-hand side of my lips, and MACQUEEN is on the left.

It was difficult to get an exact straight-down-the-middle comparison shot, as the tints have a watery consistency and naturally spread a bit on application. But they’re different shades.

MACQUEEN is way more vivid with a bold red orange tone. I achieved this in just 1 coat. Benefit is way more subtle and looks closer to the natural tone of my lips. It’s a rosy pink with purple undertones and is not as pigmented as the dupe, even with 2 layers.

Honestly, I think I slightly prefer Benefit. Because it’s more of a ‘my lips but better’ shade, it’s more versatile and wearable. I could pair this rosy tint with a simple eye in 20 minutes and be out the door. The rose tone is super flattering. It was also very comfortable.

But I still love the boldness of MACQUEEN. If I wanted a more impactful lip, this is the tint I’d opt for. I love the shade and also think the formula is very flattering. It doesn’t emphasise dryness and feels more hydrating than Benefit.

Longevity

While both lip tints have exceptional lasting power, MACQUEEN wins. Hands down. Benefit faded more throughout the day after 8 hours of wear but still left a rosy tint. Although MACQUEEN did fade a bit, the red orange tone was still vivid and noticeable at the end of the day.

In fact, I found it challenging to fully remove the MACQUEEN tint. My oil-based cleansing balm normally quickly dissolves all traces of makeup, but MACQUEEN is powerful. All I can say is good luck removing it in a single go! You’ll need to use an oil-based cleanser multiple times to fully remove it.

Honest thoughts on the Benefit Benetint dupe

MACQUEEN Jelly Plumping Water Tint in #03 Red Orange shares some similarities with Benefit Benetint Rose-Tinted Lip & Cheek Stain, but these are ultimately different products.

Benefit Benetint is softer, has a rosy tone, and looks more natural. The consistency is runnier and thinner. It will work with just about any makeup look because it simply enhances your complexion with a subtle tint of colour. I love how wearable it is and that it can be used on the lips and cheeks.

MACQUEEN is way better value for money, super pigmented, and offers vibrant colour. I prefer working with the MACQUEEN lip tint, because it’s not as runny – meaning it’s less likely to drip down your face – and feels more hydrating. It also has a better INCI list with fewer potentially sensitising ingredients. I actually think #05 Coral Pink would be a closer match to the rosy tone of Benetint.

The final verdict: MACQUEEN is not a perfect dupe for Benefit Benetint but is much more budget-friendly, has incredible lasting power, and still offers a hydrating juicy tint. It’s a beautiful product.

Use my code CONFIDENCE10 for up to 5% off YesStyle. For new customers, use the code YESSTYLE for 10% off with a minimum £28.70 ($35 USD) purchase. Buy your £6.64 Benefit Benetint dupe here.

The post Looking for an affordable alternative to the Benefit Benetint? This pigmented £7 dupe could be your answer! appeared first on A Woman's Confidence.

Although the Clinique Almost Lipstick Black Honey has been around for years, this glowy balmy lipstick went viral on TikTok and Instagram recently. It’s one of my fave lip products because it’s so versatile. The soft berry-brown shade works with just about any makeup look and enhances your natural lip shade. It’s definitely worth the hype.

But at £24 for a sheer product, it’s not exactly budget-friendly.

The peripera Ink Mood Glowy Blam in #04 Mauve Promenade is supposed to be a dupe for the Clinique Black Honey lipstick. At £9.13, it’s less than half the price and claims to deliver the same glossy finish.

This honest review looks at how peripera’s formula compares to Clinique, side-by-side swatches, and whether it’s an exact shade match.

Use my code CONFIDENCE10 for up to 5% off YesStyle. For new customers, use the code YESSTYLE for 10% off with a minimum £28.70 ($35 USD) purchase. Get your £9 Clinique Black Honey dupe here.

** This post contains some affiliate links. This means at no extra cost to you, I earn some commission if you purchase a product through my link. All thoughts are my own, though, as always. If you want to find out more, visit my affiliate disclosure page **

About the Clinique Almost Lipstick Black Honey

Clinique Almost Lipstick Black Honey has become a holy grail for many people. It’s a sheer lipstick that works with the natural tone of your lips to create a custom colour. With a balmy texture, the berry-brown shade is buildable from sheer to medium coverage. It’s comfortable, hydrating, and looks sleek. The texture sits somewhere in between a balm, gloss, and lipstick.

About peripera Ink Mood Glowy Balm in #04 Mauve Promenade

peripera Ink Mood Glowy Balm in #04 Mauve Promenade is a vegan glossy lip balm in a purplish-mauve shade. It’s non-sticky, smooth, hydrating, and comfortable on the lips. The balm delivers a dewy glassy finish with sheer, buildable colour payoff.

The comparison

Price

peripera wins on price at a very affordable £9.13. Clinique costs almost 3 times as much at £24. The dupe presents better value for money.

Packaging

The packaging for these 2 lipsticks is alike. Both come in traditional bullet formulas with a twisting mechanic to push up the product. They even have similar silver packaging. They feel lightweight.

Clinique is slimmer and taller. The thinness of the lipstick itself means you can get precise application on the lips. This thin lipstick packaging is pretty iconic too – it’s instantly identifiable in my lipstick drawer.

peripera is shorter and wider. The thicker lipstick means you get all-over colour quicker on the lips, as it covers a larger surface area. Although I personally feel precision wins when it comes to lipstick packaging, so Clinique takes the win here.

Ingredients

Besides colouring agents and ingredients that don’t deliver particular benefits but are rather necessary in formulas, like texture enhancers and stabilisers, these lipsticks actually don’t share any common ingredients.

Clinique features nourishing castor seed oil, the emollients glyceryl triacetyl ricinoleate and cetyl ricinoleate, hydrating candelilla wax, and glossy carnauba wax.

peripera is enriched with skin-replenishing caprylic/capric triglyceride, the emollients bis-diglyceryl polyacyladipate-2, octyldodecanol and hydrogenated polyisobutene, and moisturising pentaerythrityl tetraisostearate.

Texture

These lipsticks have fairly similar textures, but there are some noticeable differences.

Clinique Almost Lipstick Black Honey is glossier, balmier, and more slippery. It’s softer and silkier. The formula literally melts over the lips. This feels very similar to your fave lip balm! It’s also a bit shinier and more hydrating than peripera.

peripera Ink Mood Glowy Blam in #04 Mauve Promenade, while still soft and smooth, feels more like a traditional lipstick. It’s balmier than a standard lipstick but is firmer than Clinique’s offering. However, it still glides over the lips easily and feels comfortable.

Shade range

peripera has the better shade range with 4 colours available. You can choose from romantic pink, warm coral, natural rose, or purplish mauve. Clinique Almost Lipstick comes in just the 1 shade: Black Honey. It makes sense that there isn’t a tonne of colours available in either lipstick, as they’re designed to be sheer and natural.

Swatches

To show you how these lipsticks compare to one another, I swatched them. These were done on my bare arm, without primer. Without peeking at the captions, can you tell which one is which?

The shades are very close! On top, peripera only took 1 swipe to get this colour payoff, while Clinique, on the bottom, took 3 layers to get the same pigmentation.

On close inspection, peripera is cooler than Clinique. The dupe also has a more distinct purple undertone while Clinique has more of a pinky-red undertone. But the dupe is definitely a very good shade match in the swatches.

On the lips

And now for the real test: how do these lipsticks look side by side on the lips? In the picture below, on the right-hand side of my lips is Clinique Black Honey and on the left-hand side of my lips is peripera #04 Mauve Promenade.

Interestingly, these balmy lipsticks look more different on the lips compared to the swatches. Clinique is visibly warmer and redder, while peripera is cooler with more purple undertones. Although these 2 lipsticks are from the same colour family, you can tell that I’m wearing different shades on my lips.

Because Clinique reacts to the natural tone of your lips to create a custom shade, there will naturally be variations in how this lipstick looks on different skin tones. I’ve seen this lipstick pull cooler on complexions that are light like me. So there’s a chance that peripera will be a closer match to Clinique on your lips.

Longevity

After about 5 hours of eating, drinking, and talking, I could fairly assess how well these lipsticks last.

peripera faded more than Clinique, particularly in terms of glossiness. The colour had worn off significantly but was still visible. It just looked like a very soft mauve tint. It still felt hydrating and comfortable, despite almost all of the glossiness fading.

Clinique had some more visible colour and shine left. However, due to the balmier texture, when this colour faded, it became quite patchy. Some areas of my lips looked more pigmented and glossier than other. It still felt hydrating and comfortable, though.

So even though Clinique has better lasting power than peripera, the dupe wears in a more flattering and natural way. You’d probably want to top up Clinique to avoid the patchiness.

Honest thoughts on the Clinique Almost Lipstick Black Honey dupe

peripera Ink Mood Glowy Blam in #04 Mauve Promenade is like Clinique Almost Lipstick Black Honey’s more affordable little sister.

They’re both balmy, hydrating, and comfortable while offering sheer buildable coverage. Clinique is glossier and warmer, while peripera is cooler and wears better. The shades are closely related but still different. I think Clinique suits me more, but both are beautiful and very wearable colours.

I’d highly recommend peripera’s Ink Mood Glowy Balm if you want a similar effect to Black Honey, prefer cooler lip colours, or simply don’t want to spend £24 on what is essentially a tinted lip balm (can’t say I blame you!). £9.13 is an excellent price for a glossy lip balm that’s sure to impress. It’s also more pigmented than Clinique, so it’ll last you longer – result!

Use my code CONFIDENCE10 for up to 5% off YesStyle. For new customers, use the code YESSTYLE for 10% off with a minimum £28.70 ($35 USD) purchase. Get your £9 Clinique Black Honey dupe here.

The post Is this £9 Clinique Black Honey lipstick dupe as good as the original? A side-by-side comparison appeared first on A Woman's Confidence.

The Benefit Hoola Matte Bronzer is a classic for a reason. This iconic bronzer is known for giving a natural sun-kissed finish without looking orange. It’s soft, effortless to blend, and offers buildable coverage.  

The peripera Ink V Shading is a much more affordable option, costing almost 3 times less than Benefit’s Hoola bronzer. The dupe is supposed to deliver the same benefits as the famous Hoola bronzer at a fraction of the price. And who doesn’t love a high-performing bargain?!

This post provides a detailed insight into how peripera’s bronzer compares to Benefit. Find out whether the £12.40 dupe has the same texture, pigmentation, effortless blendability, and lasting power as the expensive alternative in this honest review.

Use my code CONFIDENCE10 for up to 5% off YesStyle. For new customers, use the code YESSTYLE for 10% off with a minimum £28.70 ($35 USD) purchase. Grab your affordable Hoola dupe here.

** This post contains some affiliate links. This means at no extra cost to you, I earn some commission if you purchase a product through my link. All thoughts are my own, though, as always. If you want to find out more, visit my affiliate disclosure page **

About the Benefit Hoola Matte Bronzer

The Benefit Hoola Matte Bronzer is silky smooth and gives a very natural-looking bronze to the skin. It doesn’t look orange and gives the effect of sun-kissed skin without any of the sun damage! The formula is buttery, effortless to blend, and can be easily layered without going patchy or cakey. You can use it lightly all over the face for a soft bronzed finish or sweep it across the cheeks for a more sculpted appearance.

About the peripera Ink V Shading in #01 Natural Brown

peripera Ink V Shading in #01 Natural Brown is an ultra-fine powder that absorbs excess sebum. Although this is described as a contouring product, #01 Natural Brown offers more of a neutral tone, which can be used for either bronzing or contouring. The compact contains 3 different shades for a customised colour that sculpts the face. It offers a blurring effect, feels super silky, and blends out effortlessly.

The comparison

Price

peripera wins on price. It costs £12.40 for 9.5g. Benefit Hoola costs £30 for 8g. This means the Korean dupe is roughly one-third of the price for more product! We love a budget-friendly icon. There’s also a mini version of Hoola available, which costs £15.50 for 2.5g. peripera is still more affordable than the mini Hoola bronzer for far more product!

Packaging

I have the older packaging for peripera INK V Shading, which is circular and plastic, with a clear front so you can see the cool V-shaped bronzer pattern. The newer packaging is a square transparent case that houses a circular-shaped bronzer. I think the newer packaging looks more modern and sleeker.

Hoola comes in sturdy square cardboard packaging. It has the word “Hoola” engraved on the bronzer itself. The packaging also comes with a mirror on the inside, which is very convenient for when you’re on the go.

Ingredients

Looking at the INCI lists, outside of colouring agents, these bronzers only share 2 ingredients: talc, which helps absorb excess sebum, and hydrating dimethicone.

Benefit Hoola contains the emollient ethylhexyl palmitate and the absorbent boron nitride. peripera features hydrating pentaerythrityl tetraethylhexanoate, nylon-12 which can have mattifying properties, the emollient diisostearyl malate, the absorbent silica, skin-softening ethylhexylglycerin, and more.

peripera has a stronger INCI list overall, as it features more skin-loving ingredients.

Texture

These bronzers have similar textures. Both are very soft, finely milled, and silky smooth. They have very minimal fallout and feel buttery on the skin.

Sometimes, cheaper powder formulas have an unpleasant chalky texture that don’t melt into the skin and end up looking like a stripe of powder. If anything, peripera is even softer and smoother than Benefit. The powder is super silky and doesn’t feel cheap or chalky at all.

Pigmentation

Benefit wins on pigmentation. It offers a richer colour. But it’s not so pigmented where the bronzer becomes difficult to work with. It blends out beautifully and is still buildable.

peripera is softer than the Benefit formula. It takes more building and layering to achieve the same level of pigmentation. But it’s absolutely still visible on the skin if you dip your brush into bronzer once, so there are no pigmentation concerns.

Shade range

Benefit wins on shade range – just – with 4 options. There’s the original Hoola for light complexions, Hoola Lite for fair complexions, Hoola Caramel for medium to deep complexions, and Hoola Toasted for deeper complexions.

peripera Ink V Shading comes in 3 shades. There’s #01 Natural Brown for fair to light complexions, #02 Deep Brown for light to medium complexions, and #03 Grayish Cool for fair to light complexions. #01 and #02 could be used as contouring or bronzing shades, while #03 is only for contouring due to its cool grey tones.

While Benefit has 1 shade for deeper complexions, it still lacks a shade for deep rich complexions. peripera could do with multiple deeper shades for medium to deep complexions. I think both brands should expand their shade range to be more inclusive of deep skin tones.

Swatches

To show you what these bronzers look like next to one another, I swatched them. These were done on my bare arm without primer.

Benefit Hoola, on top, is warmer, a bit deeper, and more pigmented. It only took 2 dips into the bronzer to achieve that colour payoff.

On the bottom, peripera is cooler, lighter, and softer. It took 4 dips into this product to achieve this pigmentation. As the shade is quite light, it’s less visible on my arm. For the peripera swatch, I swirled my finger around all 3 shades in the bronzer together, which is how I’d use the bronzer. It has a neutral tone.

Both are matte but not flat.

On the cheeks

And now for the real test: how do these bronzers compare when applied on my cheeks? I kept the rest of my makeup the same and simply applied 1 bronzer on 1 side of my face and the other bronzer on the other side using a fluffy brush.

Without looking at the caption, can you tell which side is which?!

Interestingly, when applied to my cheeks, you can hardly tell any difference between these 2 bronzers! Again, I swirled my brush around all 3 of the shades in peripera for this look.

If you used a microscope, you’d be able to tell that peripera is slightly lighter and more cool-toned. It also took more layers to achieve the same level of pigmentation as Benefit. Hoola is warmer, more pigmented, and a bit deeper. But on my face, you genuinely can’t tell a difference at all! I was so impressed.

If anything, I prefer peripera. It’s silkier and softer, so it blended out a bit better than Hoola. I found it easier to get the exact placement I wanted because it melted into my skin effortlessly. But both bronzers apply like a dream and are very buttery.

Longevity

The bronzers had great lasting power and stayed put equally. After about 7 hours of wear, they’d both faded a bit but were still clearly visible. Neither went patchy nor looked muddy.

They also did a fantastic job at controlling any excess sebum. My oily skin can become quite greasy if I wear certain products, but I didn’t look like an oily mess on either side of my face. I tend to find that powder products wear better on my oily skin compared to cream or liquid products.

Honest thoughts on the Benefit Hoola Matte Bronzer dupe

Despite not looking particularly similar in the swatches, peripera Ink V Shading in #01 Natural Brown is an excellent dupe for the Benefit Hoola Matte Bronzer. They look identical on the skin, have a very similar silky texture, keep excess oil at bay, and wear beautifully. Both blend seamlessly and are buttery smooth.

But at only £12.40, peripera is the clear winner, because it’s way more affordable and delivers the same results as the pricey £30 Hoola bronzer. Plus, it has an even better INCI list than Benefit.

I can’t recommend peripera’s bronzer enough because the formula is stunning and delivers luxury results without the luxury price tag.

Use my code CONFIDENCE10 for up to 5% off YesStyle. For new customers, use the code YESSTYLE for 10% off with a minimum £28.70 ($35 USD) purchase. Grab your affordable Hoola dupe here.

The post This £12 Benefit Hoola Matte Bronzer dupe is even better than the original appeared first on A Woman's Confidence.

The DIOR Backstage Rosy Glow blush in 001 Pink went viral on Instagram. You couldn’t scroll for more than a couple of seconds without seeing the vivid pink blush. I still see it loads even now, with so many people hailing it as their holy grail.

But at £36 for 4.4g, it’s expensive, despite being really pretty. So we need a good dupe.

Enter The Saem Saemmul Single Blusher. This K-beauty blush only costs £6.13 and promises to be a dupe for the famous DIOR blush.

But just how similar are these products? This honest comparison post tells you everything you need to know about the affordable dupe, including what the blushes look like side by side, and whether it lives up to its expensive counterpart.

Use my code CONFIDENCE10 for up to 5% off YesStyle. For new customers, use the code YESSTYLE for 10% off with a minimum £28.70 ($35 USD) purchase. Get your £6 Dior blush dupe here!

** This post contains some affiliate links. This means at no extra cost to you, I earn some commission if you purchase a product through my link. All thoughts are my own, though, as always. If you want to find out more, visit my affiliate disclosure page **

About DIOR Backstage Rosy Glow in 001 Pink

The DIOR Backstage Rosy Glow blush in 001 Pink is a luxury cool-toned bubblegum pink blush that had social media going wild. It’s designed to give a soft glow to your cheeks while adapting to your skin’s pH for a custom flush of colour. It claims to be long-wearing, buildable, and lightweight for a second skin feeling.  

About The Saem Saemmul Single Blusher in #PP04 Blueberry Milk

The Saem Saemmul Single Blusher in #PP04 Blueberry Milk is a Korean pastel pink powder blush with blue undertones. It provides a soft, silky, and matte finish. It’s very pigmented, finely milled, and contains sebum control properties to prevent makeup from going greasy. The blush provides a natural flush of colour.

The comparison

Price

The Saem easily wins on price. It only costs £6.13 for 5g, whereas Dior costs £36 for 4.4g. This means Dior costs almost 6 times as much for even less product, making The Saem a much more affordable alternative.

Packaging

The packaging for both products is somewhat different, although both are plastic.

Dior is rectangular, features a mirror on the inside of the compact, and has fancy “Dior” embossing on the blush itself. It also features silver around the outside of the packaging and for the ”Dior” wording on the front.

The Saem is circular, doesn’t have a mirror, and has a simpler design. There’s no embossing on the blush or different coloured accents on the packaging.  

They both feel pretty equal in terms of weight. The Saem is slightly larger overall.

Ingredients

The INCI lists quite a few of the same ingredients, but The Saem’s is much longer than DIOR’s.

Both contain skin-softening dimethicone, the absorbent powder silica, glow-giving mica, skin-softening ethylhexylglycerin, the emollient stearic acid, and conditioning caprylyl glycol.

DIOR features absorbent boron nitride, skin-softening lauroyl lysine, and vitamin E tocopherol. The Saem incorporates absorbent talc, hydrating diisostearyl malate, and skin-conditioning safflower flower extract, among many other ingredients.

Texture

When it comes to texture, the blushes are like sisters but not identical twins. Both have a powdery and almost chalky texture.

However, DIOR’s blush is smoother but chalkier, while The Saem is silkier but more powdery. The Saem has a fair bit of fallout when you dip your brush into the powder. However, you have to dip your brush into DIOR multiple times to pick up enough product to brush over your cheeks. The Saem offers more saturated colour.

Shade range

The Saem wins on shade range with a phenomenal 37 shades. Whether you’re looking for cool contour tones, warm bronzer tones, bright highlighting shades, pastel pinks, nudes, muted tones, wearable oranges and reds, or even yellow, this K-beauty brand has it.

DIOR recently expanded its Backstage Rosy Glow range to 6 shades. Expect bubblegum pink, wearable coral, bold cherry, deep berry, rosy nude, and rich mahogany.

Swatches

To show you what these blushes look like next to one another, I swatched them. These were done on my bare arm without primer. Without looking at the captions, can you tell which one is which?

These blushes look so similar in the swatches. DIOR has a bit more glow and is perhaps cooler-toned, while The Saem is more matte and a touch warmer.

On the cheeks

And now for the real test: what do these blushes look like side by side on the cheeks? I kept the rest of my makeup the same and simply applied 1 blush on 1 side of my face and the other blush on the other side.

Interestingly, there is more of a visible difference between these blushes when they’re on my cheeks.

On the right-hand side of my face is DIOR Backstage Rosy Glow blush in 001 Pink. While it looks quite cool-toned in the swatch, on my cheeks this blush looks much warmer. It offers more radiance than The Saem and melts in with the rest of my makeup. However, to achieve this level of pigmentation with DIOR, I had to swirl my brush in the blush 3 times.

On the left-hand side of my face is The Saem Saemmul Single Blusher in #PP04 Blueberry Milk. This colour truer to the swatch: pastel pink with blue undertones. Compared to DIOR, this blush is more matte and brighter. But this blush is far more pigmented than DIOR. I only had to tap my brush into the blush once to get this much colour payoff.

It’s worth noting that because the DIOR blush adjusts to the pH of your skin, it looks different on everyone. I’ve seen a blog post where these 2 blushes look almost identical on the reviewer’s face. In that same post, the DIOR blush also looked cooler on their cheeks than it does on mine.

Longevity

These blushes have the same lasting powder. After 8 hours of wear, both stayed on really well and had barely faded. No patchiness was detected! I tend to find that powder formulas last longer on my oily skin, as they’re less prone to breaking down and becoming greasy. I experienced no greasiness with either, and they were still clearly visible by the end of the day.

Honest thoughts on the DIOR Backstage Rosy Glow blush dupe

The Saem Saemmul Single Blusher in #PP04 Blueberry Milk is pretty similar to the viral DIOR blush, but there are some differences.

On me, the £6 dupe is cooler and a bit brighter. It’s also got a matte finish. The texture is more powdery, and there is some fallout when you apply The Saem blush. However, it’s way more pigmented than DIOR, so as well as being far more bank account-friendly, it will also last longer, as a little bit of product will deliver serious colour payoff.

DIOR has a unique natural glowy finish and looks warmer on my cheeks. I think it blends in with my makeup a bit better and perhaps looks a touch smoother overall. However, with way less colour payoff than The Saem, I don’t think DIOR is worth 6 times the price.

Despite some differences, I think The Saem is a pretty good dupe for the DIOR rosy blush. It’s also a great affordable blush in its own right. It’s absolutely worth checking out, especially with the incredible shade range.  

Use my code CONFIDENCE10 for up to 5% off YesStyle. For new customers, use the code YESSTYLE for 10% off with a minimum £28.70 ($35 USD) purchase. Get your £6 Dior blush dupe here!

The post This DIOR Backstage Rosy Glow blush dupe is only £6 appeared first on A Woman's Confidence.

Charlotte Tilbury is one of the most duped luxury Western beauty brands of all time. The products are known to look and feel amazing while delivering exceptional quality. But this high-end brand comes with a high price tag, so more affordable alternatives are sought after.

Dupes are a fantastic way to experience your fave products without breaking the bank. However, not all dupes are created equal, and some simply don’t live up to their expensive counterpart.

I’ve found a K-beauty dupe for the iconic Charlotte Tilbury Charlotte Tilbury Matte Revolution Pillow Talk lipstick. The best part? It only costs £9! Once applied, the peripera INK The Velvet looks the exact same as the luxury brand.

This review looks at how peripera’s formula compares to Charlotte Tilbury, side-by-side swatches, and what both lipsticks look like applied next to one another. You won’t be able to tell the difference!

Use my code CONFIDENCE10 for up to 5% off YesStyle. For new customers, use the code YESSTYLE for 10% off with a minimum £28.70 ($35 USD) purchase. Grab your Charlotte Tilbury Pillow Talk dupe today!

** This post contains some affiliate links. This means at no extra cost to you, I earn some commission if you purchase a product through my link. All thoughts are my own, though, as always. If you want to find out more, visit my affiliate disclosure page **

About Charlotte Tilbury Matte Revolution in Pillow Talk Original

Charlotte Tilbury Matte Revolution in Pillow Talk Original is perhaps the brand’s most iconic product. One of these lipsticks sells every 2 minutes! It’s a flattering nude-pink lipstick that feels creamy and hydrating while delivering lasting pigment. This is easily one of my most-loved lipsticks because it’s like my lips but better.

About peripea INK The Velvet in #22 Bouquet Nude

peripera INK The Velvet in #22 Bouquet Nude is a moisturising airy lip tint that delivers lasting vibrant colour. This Korean lip product is super smoothing and has a luxe soft whipped texture. The formula doesn’t cling to dryness or sink into lines either. You can use this popular formula to create a gradient lip or all over colour. #22 Bouquet Nude is the perfect ‘my lips but better’ shade.

The comparison

Price

It goes without saying that peripera wins on price. This affordable dupe retails for £8.86, while the Charlotte Tilbury lipstick costs over 3x that price at £27. peripera offers excellent value for money while still delivering great brilliant quality.

Packaging

Charlotte Tilbury’s rose gold lipstick packaging is undeniably iconic and photographs beautifully. It screams opulence. It has a traditional bullet formula, where you simply twist up the lipstick and apply.

But I also really enjoy peripera’s sleek, minimal vibe. This is a liquid formula and comes with a wand applicator, meaning you can get real precision around the cupid’s bow.

Ingredients

The INCI lists are pretty different. They both contain softening dimethicone, but that’s just about where the similarities end, outside of colouring agents.

peripera is formulated with moisture-binding agent 1,2-Hexanediol and hydrating diisostearyl malate. Charlotte Tilbury features hydrating Diisostearoyl Trimethylolpropane Siloxy Silicate and skin-replenishing caprylic/capric triglyceride.

Texture

The texture of these products is where they differ the most.

peripera INK The Velvet is an airy liquid lip tint. It honestly feels weightless and is super velvety. It almost feels like a cloud gliding over your lips. It’s got a soft whipped texture and is smoothing.

Charlotte Tilbury Charlotte Tilbury Matte Revolution is a creamy bullet lipstick. It’s very comfortable and hydrating on the lips. The texture is very soft, light, and nourishing.

Shade range

peripera wins on shade range with a very impressive 39 colours. There are so many colours to choose from like rosy nudes, vivid corals, smoky reds, warm beiges, cool pinks, and deep wines. Whether you want something natural or a bold statement lip, peripera has got you covered.

Charlotte Tilbury comes in a respectable 16 shades. Expect pinky nudes, Hollywood reds, deep berries, cool browns, and neutral taupes. But peripera has over double the number of shades.

Swatches

To show you how these lipsticks compare to one another, I swatched them. These were done on my bare arm, without primer.

As you can see, peripera looks a bit deeper, warmer, and more pigmented. Charlotte Tilbury is paler, not as warm-toned, and looks a bit softer. While not identical, the shades are similar when swatched.

On the lips

And now for the real test: how do these lipsticks look side by side on the lips? In the picture below, on 1 side is Pillow Talk Original and on the other side is #22 Bouquet Nude. Without looking at the caption, can you tell which side is which?!

They’re so similar. Without looking in really closely, the shades look identical. My partner couldn’t tell that I was wearing 2 different lip colours.

On the right-hand side of my lips is peripera. Charlotte Tilbury is on the left-hand side of my lips.

On really close inspection, peripera is slightly more pigmented, warmer, and a little bit deeper. But the shade match is uncanny! They look much more similar on the lips compared to the swatches. Plus, the soft matte finish is identical.

Longevity

Both wear really well. However, I’ve got to give this round to peripera. After 6 hours of wear, which included drinking and eating, they stayed on my lips well but had noticeably faded. But the peripera one was more visible and left a very natural tint.

Honest thoughts on the Charlotte Tilbury dupe

peripera INK The Velvet in #22 Bouquet Nude is an excellent match for Charlotte Tilbury’s Pillow Talk lipstick. It’s less than 3 times the price, lasts longer, is easier to apply, and delivers an identical finish.

If anything, I actually prefer the peripera lipstick. It’s super comfortable, feels velvety, and looks beautiful. I love that it’s slightly warmer than Pillow Talk. It dries down to a very flattering matte that doesn’t sink to dryness or look dull. I find myself reaching for this formula regularly.

While both of these are stunning and completely valid, peripera is way more affordable and achieves the same result. It’s a no-brainer!

Use my code CONFIDENCE10 for up to 5% off YesStyle. For new customers, use the code YESSTYLE for 10% off with a minimum £28.70 ($35 USD) purchase. Grab your Charlotte Tilbury Pillow Talk dupe today!

The post This £9 Charlotte Tilbury Matte Revolution Pillow Talk dupe is identical to the original! appeared first on A Woman's Confidence.

I can’t be the only one that has seen countless videos on Instagram and TikTok saying that the e.l.f. Cosmetics Halo Glow Liquid Filter is a dupe for the iconic Charlotte Tilbury Hollywood Flawless Filter. They’re supposedly pretty identical. Even from the packaging alone, you can tell that these look very similar.

I’ve been an avid lover of the Hollywood Flawless Filter for years. It’s one of my makeup holy grails, and I wouldn’t be without it! But it’s undeniably expensive, so I tend to use it sparingly so it lasts. When I heard that e.l.f. Cosmetics’ dupe is supposed to be just like the Charlotte Tilbury one, I knew I had to try it.

Is e.l.f. Cosmetics Halo Glow Liquid Filter really a dupe for Charlotte Tilbury Hollywood Flawless Filter? This in-depth post covers everything you need to know, with side-by-side swatches, a discussion around texture and application, and how they compare on the skin.

** This post contains some affiliate links. This means at no extra cost to you, I earn some commission if you purchase a product through my link. All thoughts are my own, though, as always. If you want to find out more, visit my affiliate disclosure page **

Need-to-knows

Before I start comparing these 2 products, I wanted to give you a run-down of how I tested them. I’ve got oily skin with mild rosacea. Whenever I swatched or applied either product, everything else was the exact same for a true comparison. This includes skincare, makeup products, and time of day. Both products were purchased with my own money.

They’re both described as a complexion enhancer and can be used as a primer/by themselves for a soft-focus glowy finish, mixed in with foundation or moisturiser for added luminosity, or over makeup on the high points of the face for a radiance boost.

The comparison

Price

One of the biggest sells for the e.l.f. Cosmetics Halo Glow Liquid Filter is price. It’s way cheaper than Charlotte Tilbury Hollywood Flawless Filter. e.l.f. costs £14 for 31.5ml, while Charlotte Tilbury costs £39 for 30ml. This means e.l.f.’s offering is less than half the price for slightly more product.

Packaging

The packaging is remarkably similar. Although, please excuse the fact the lettering and design on my Charlotte Tilbury bottle has completely worn off over the years! e.l.f. is slightly bigger, but Charlotte Tilbury is weightier. Both feel sturdy. I think Charlotte Tilbury’s one is prettier with the rose gold cap and bottle design (when not worn off), but both are attractive designs.

They both have doe foot applicators, but the e.l.f. one (right side) is considerably bigger and therefore picks up more product. Both applicators are soft, but the Charlotte Tilbury one is a bit more flexible.

Ingredients

These complexion enhancers both contain hydrating ingredients like glycerin and squalane. Hollywood Flawless Filter contains dewy propanediol while Halo Glow Liquid Filter contains hydration hero hyaluronic acid. The INCI lists, overall, are pretty similar.

Texture

Hollywood Flawless Filter has a runnier and lighter consistency while Halo Glow is thicker and not as wet. On the skin, Hollywood Flawless Filter absorbs better and feels more weightless. Halo Glow is still quite light but you can feel it more on the skin. It also takes more rubbing in for a seamless blend. Halo Glow also feels a bit oilier.

Shade selection

e.l.f. Cosmetics offers 8 shades with a pretty even split between fair, light, medium, tan, deep, and darker complexions. Charlotte Tilbury offers 12 shades with a fairly even split between fair, light, medium, tan, deep, and darker complexions. However, Charlotte Tilbury offers slightly more options for fairer complexions.

Swatches

I’ve got the shade 2 in both products. e.l.f.’s shade 2 is called Fair/Light and is a warm, golden colour. Charlotte Tilbury’s shade 2 is called Fair and is called Fair and described as a golden beige.

See my swatches below:

As you can see, Charlotte Tilbury is quite a lot lighter and is more of a neutral champagne tone. Whereas e.l.f.’s is a deeper golden tone with more warmth. Shade 2 is definitely not the same across both brands, so they’re not dupes in this respect.

On bare skin

I wanted to test how these products look side by side on my bare skin. On the left-hand side, I applied Charlotte Tilbury, and I applied e.l.f. Cosmetics on the right-hand side. These were applied directly over my skincare routine without primer. I blended both sides in with my fingertips.

When applied to bare skin, these actually look very similar. e.l.f. Cosmetics offers a bit more coverage and is slightly warmer, while Charlotte Tilbury has a softer finish. Charlotte Tilbury is a bit dewier overall and e.l.f. Cosmetics clings to texture a bit more. Overall, they’re very similar when applied directly over skincare and rubbed in.

As a highlighter

I also wanted to test how these products look as a highlighter, which is typically how I wear this product. Usually, I apply this product to the high points of my face, including the bridge of my nose, brow bone, cheekbone, and cupid’s bow. However, as my base was already very glowy from applying these 2 directly to my skin, I only applied this as a highlighter to my cheekbones.

I tested both on top of powder products and after setting my base to see how well they played with powder.

Charlotte Tilbury is 100% more luminous than e.l.f. I also used less product than on the Charlotte Tilbury side and it went further. The lighter Charlotte Tilbury consistency blended over the powder products effortlessly without going cakey or congealing.

e.l.f. Cosmetics glow is duller but still visible. I found this did congeal a bit on top of my powder products but still didn’t look bad. It required more blending.

Longevity

Both products have good longevity. However, Charlotte Tilbury’s shine didn’t wear off at all after 8 hours, whereas e.l.f. Cosmetics’ glow became a bit duller as the day went on. However, on both sides of my face, there was still visible luminosity, so I feel these products last well.

Is this a perfect a dupe? My honest thoughts

I think the e.l.f. Cosmetics Halo Glow Liquid Filter is a pretty good dupe for the Charlotte Tilbury Hollywood Flawless Filter, but they’re not as identical as certain videos make out. There are differences between the 2 products both in terms of how they look, apply, and feel on the skin. While most of these differences are subtle, they’re still noticeable.

I still think Charlotte Tilbury is better. It’s lighter, more luminous, absorbs better, I prefer the shade, and it offers a natural lit-from-within glow. I also think it’s easier to blend and works more effortlessly over powder products.

That’s not to say e.l.f. Cosmetics isn’t good. Because it is. I really enjoy it. And the price point is way lower. I wouldn’t say Charlotte Tilbury is twice as good as e.l.f. Cosmetics, yet Halo Glow Liquid Filter is less than half the price.

Overall, the OG high-end Charlotte Tilbury Hollywood Flawless Filter is still the clear winner in my eyes. But e.l.f. Cosmetics Halo Glow Liquid Filter is fairly similar and a good drugstore alternative.

Have you tried either of these products? Let me know in the comments!

The post Is e.l.f. Cosmetics Halo Glow Liquid Filter really a dupe for Charlotte Tilbury Hollywood Flawless Filter? A side-by-side comparison appeared first on A Woman's Confidence.