Two product types, two saved edits, or up to four actual products. A type score is not a formula score. What is missing stays missing.
Different jobs
Pressed powder compact
Pressed powder compact fits this profile by 11 points. No base at all is not a worse object — it is being asked to do a job this profile did not ask for.
These fill different roles — unassigned and setting — so the higher score is not a reason to drop the other. Compare them only if you were going to buy one of the two.
The catalog prior is relatively favorable for sebum-related wear.
Adds zero complexion-opacity load in this catalog model.
Against
Sheerer than the desk's default assumes — local spot work is one option, or set a coverage.
Bare skin cannot deliver the amount of evening you asked the model for.
Evidence · signed weights (they add up to 38)
+50 · Neutral start — Every product type starts here. Above 50 the model has more reasons for it; below, more reasons against.
-13 · Coverage match — Delivers 0 against an assumed appetite of 30.
+7 · Sebum behavior — How this texture is modeled against combination skin — the desk's assumption, not your answer.
-7 · Coverage asked for — You asked for visible evening.
+1 · Scale and rounding — Each weight is rounded to a whole point, and the score is held inside 0–100. This row is the difference, so the column adds up to the score the rest of the desk shows. It is not a reason for or against the product.
The order you apply things in, what each film is intended to do, and where the evidence is uncertain — argued long-form rather than scored. This is the reading behind the sequence this desk just gave you.