July 5, 2011

Make Up For Ever VS. MAC: Face & Body Foundation comparison!

Hello, Beautiful!

I've gotten several emails asking which waterproof foundation I preferred: MAC's Face and Body Foundation or Make Up For Ever's Face & Body Liquid Makeup. Up until very recently I only had Make Up For Ever's version so I couldn't make any comment's on MAC's version. But now that I own both I'm finally able to answer that question.

Check out the links below for a full review and more swatches on each foundation individually.

Make Up For Ever Face & Body Liquid Makeup - OR - MAC Face and Body Foundation?

COVERAGE: Both versions offer sheer to light buildable coverage; practically identical in coverage level and the finish.

PACKAGING: I prefer Make Up For Ever's packaging/bottle over MAC's. Make Up For Ever has a pump-top (the older versions do not) and MAC has a squeeze bottle top.

CONSISTENCY: I prefer Make Up For Ever's consistency over MAC's. Make Up For Ever's is a water based gel foundation, which is lumpy in the bottle but when shaken is smooth and nice (blends in like a dream). MAC's consistency is smooth, but very runny; also blends in nicely.

SHADES: Shade selection is a little better with Make Up For Ever, having 16 shades. MAC has 13 shades. Those three extra shades may be the ones that suit you, but really you are likely to find a match with either brand due to how sheer the formulas are.

COST: MAC offers more product for your money, costing just $32.50 for 4 ounces. Make Up For Ever costs $38 for 1.69 ounces. You get more than twice that amount of product with MAC's version for less than the cost of Make Up For Ever's version (this would be a great money saver if you wanted to mainly use this on your body). For those like that like to see the numbers, if MAC offered the same sized bottle it would be priced around $13.71 - making it the much more affordable option between the two.

WEAR: Everyone's skin is different, so I can only speak on my personal experience with both versions. For my skin, Make Up For Ever's version works a lot better. It fully sets and feels dry on my skin, without using a setting powder. Whereas MAC's version doesn't ever feel fully set on my skin. I need to set it with a setting powder or it will not stay still on my skin; it will move. Make Up For Ever's version is slightly more transfer-proof, but they are pretty comparable in that area. On me, Make Up For Ever's version lasts way longer, looking consistent.

PRODUCT LONGEVITY: Overtime both formulas will separate in their bottles, but Make Up For Ever's can be shaken back to normal. I've heard (but do not know based on personal experience) that MAC's formula will not go back to normal after it separates (which can happen in about a year or if left in the heat it could happen sooner). I've only had my MAC Face and Body Foundation for about a month now so I have no idea if and when it would separate. I guess I'll have to report back in a year.

IN CONCLUSION: If I had to only buy one I would buy the Make Up For Ever version.


  1. I love MAC's Face and Body Foundation result! :)


  2. Thank you for this review. I have been wanting to try MAC F&B and unsure of my shade. I'm a NC25-NC30. C3 should work fine for me too huh?

  3. Yes Sm Ink, If you are an NC25/NC30 then C3 will work great for you - which is what was recommended to me by MAC. C2 may work too, but I would go with C3.

  4. Great comparison...although it looks like your skin might have been a bit more clear when you tested MAC...do you have a picture from a same day comparison?

  5. @ Anonymous: I don't have a picture from same day comparison, unfortunately.

  6. Hello Crystal,

    although you prefer Makeup For Ever, I think you look a way better with MAC. Indeed.


  7. @ Anonymous (Adriana): Thanks! Although I really should do a compare with my skin in the same condition. My acne was much worse at the time I took the photos for the Make Up For Ever one than it was when I did the MAC photos. I still prefer the Make Up For Ever because I feel it sets on my face and lasts longer, but the MAC is still nice to use. I just don't really use either of them except in the summer because I like full coverage but in the summer I need something that sticks - especially at amusement parks!

  8. Question, I am looking for the right shade online. I'm about a MAC nc20-25. Would #32 be ideal for my skin? I'm MUFE HD 120- 127 shade. Would appreciate your help. :)

  9. @ Julie P.: In MAC I'm NC30/NC25 so I'm slightly darker than you but not by much. Both these foundations, the MUFE and MAC, are very sheer so you can get away with choosing the wrong shade if it's within a shade or two of your perfect shade. But yes, in the MUFE I think #32 will work well for you if you have yellow undertones. If you don't have yellow undertones then you'll want to choose another shade... such as #20, or Porcelain 2 or Soft Beige 1 - which are for light to medium skin and they have other undertones.

  10. Hello! Can you tell me how you applied these foundations? Thank you!

  11. How do you feel either of them would hold up with oily skin?

  12. @7km88: What I used is listed in each post (the review post on each of these is linked), but I did use the same brush - the e.l.f. Studio Powder Brush (basically a flat top kabuki).

  13. @Anonymous: I had oily skin at the time I wrote both reviews. They hold up good.


All comments are set for me to approve them before they post. I do this so I can read each & every one, answering any questions that may be in a comment. Please share your thoughts and questions below :)