Auric Citrine Glow Lust Radiant Luminizer ($45.00 for 1.13 oz.) is a medium, peachy brown with strong, warm undertones–more orange-leaning relative to most shades in the range–with a luminous sheen. The finish was pearly without being overtly shimmery, and the shimmer itself was subtle, but it had a light to moderate glow depending on how much it was used.
The pigmentation was “adjustable” as the brand described and ranged from more semi-sheer to mostly opaque, depending on technique and amount of product applied. When mixed it, the product felt like it sheered out and I didn’t have to have an “exact” match to have it work, whereas when used alone, it was more medium coverage when applied and blended out. This is the more mid-depth shade, but there’s a big jump in depth between this shade and the one down from it (Pyrite).
It had a smooth, lightly creamy and fluid consistency that was spreadable and easy to work with on bare skin, over foundation, or mixed in, as it didn’t feel too thin or runny but wasn’t overly thick. It stayed on well for nine hours before fading visibly on my skin when used as a highlighter/bronzer (on my skin tone) and didn’t impact the longevity of my base products when mixed in.
FURTHER READING: Formula Overview for details on general performance and characteristics (like scent).
- Giorgio Armani No. 03 (P, $62.00) is more shimmery (90% similar).
- Becca Topaz (P, $41.00) is more shimmery, darker, warmer (90% similar).
- Auric Goldstone (P, $45.00) is darker, warmer (90% similar).
- Giorgio Armani No. 14 (P, $62.00) is more shimmery, darker (85% similar).
- Charlotte Tilbury Tan/Dark (6.5) (P, $44.00) is less shimmery, darker, cooler (80% similar).
- Kevyn Aucoin Sunlight (P, $52.00) is more shimmery, darker, warmer (80% similar).
- Becca Borealis (5.5) (-, $30.00) is less shimmery, darker, cooler (80% similar).
- Charlotte Tilbury Dark (7) (P, $44.00) (80% similar).
$45.00/1.13 oz. - $39.82 Per Ounce
The formula is supposed to have buildable coverage so it can be used "alone" or "blended" with skincare/foundation or "used as a highlighter on top of foundation."
The consistency was creamy, slightly thicker than a lot of liquid luminizers (but not heavy or overly thick), and it seemed more pigmented in its base compared to other liquid luminizers as well.
It had very fine pearl throughout that added luminosity and a subtle-to-light glow to skin with light dewiness. The shimmer was nearly undetectable when applied and diffused as a standalone product but still delivered a noticeable uptick in glowiness to my skin whether used alone or mixed in.
It was easy to mix in with moisturizer, primer, and foundation, and it also worked well patted on top of the high points of the face, whether my skin was bare or it was on top of foundation. I didn't have issues with it lifting up my base products--set and unset--when applied on top. It dried down for the most part, retained light dewiness to the eye, and wasn't tacky.
As a standalone highlighter, it wore well for nine hours before fading a bit, and I didn't notice any impact to longevity when combined with base products.
It felt more like a cross between Charlotte Tilbury's Hollywood Flawless Filter (which is thinner, a little runnier in comparison, and has more pronounced pearl/shimmer) and Natasha Denona's original Face Glow formula (which was a thicker, cream consistency that squeezed out of a tube and was very glowing but not as visibly shimmery).
The reality is that if you're someone who mixes these types of products with moisturizers or foundations, differences get more and more minimized (as they tend to sheer out, as they are supposed to). I wouldn't expect that if you're still working your way through something else and enjoy that that you'd have to run to get this, but it is certainly worth trying in the future if you like the idea of a subtler sheen but like this type of product.
Browse all of our Auric Glow Lust Radiant Luminizer swatches.