Urban Decay 24/7 Waterproof Liquid Eyeliners versus Stila Sparkle Waterproof Liquid Eye Liners

As a fan of Urban Decay's 24/7 Glide-on Eye Pencils, I was excited when Urban Decay decided to release a new line of 24/7 Waterproof Liquid Eyeliners. The packaging is virtually identical to Stila Sparkle Waterproof Liquid Eye Liners and MAC Superslick Liquid Eye Liners, except that that Urban Decay version comes with a slim brush applicator instead of a tapered sponge applicator.

I've swatched the Urban Decay eyeliners in this earlier post and the Stila eyeliners in this post. In Singapore, both the Urban Decay and Stila eyeliners retail at S$32 each for 1.7ml whereas in the US, the Urban Decay eyeliners retail at US$20 versus US$22 for the Stila eyeliners.


After trying out the UD eyeliners for the past week, I still prefer the tapered applicator of the Stila and MAC eyeliners over UD's slim brush which is slightly more difficult to control. The advantange of Stila's tapered applicator is that the lack of bristles means that there is no risk of splaying, resulting in splotches or an uneven line. It took me a few tries before I was able to draw an even line with the UD brush. It doesn't splay excessively but it does require a steady hand.

The UD brush is slim enough to get really close to the lashline and allows you to build up the thickness of the eyeliner quite easily. But if you are a novice or you don't have steady hands, the Stila and MAC eyeliners are just easier to use.

Urban Decay's Retrograde and Siren are quite different from Stila's Royal and Electric, which are more sheer and watery. Even when layered a few times, Royal and Electric tend to look semi-translucent whereas the two UD shades have a more opaque finish. Compared to Siren, Stila's Electric is a more vivid emerald. UD's Retrograde is a deeper, more intense royal purple than Stila's Royal, which has a brighter tone.

Below is a look that I did yesterday with UD's Retrograde along the upper lashline and the 24/7 Glide-on Shadow Pencil in Delinquent from the upper lashline to the crease and along the lower lashline. Although I like the richness and sparkle of Delinquent, it is just impossible to blend. I don't know if the other UD Shadow Pencils are easier to blend as I only purchased Delinquent. It glides on with just a bit of tugging at the skin, and sets like iron pretty much immediately, unlike the slimmer UD Eye Pencils which allow for about 30 seconds for blending before they set.

In the end, I resorted to using my fingertip to rub the Shadow Pencil and then gently smudging it onto my eyelid with my fingertip instead of applying it directly using the Shadow Pencil. I blended a purple eyeshadow from the YSL Ombres 5 Lumieres #11 Midnight Garden palette into the crease to soften the look. After about 7 hours of wear (without any primer), there was a bit of creasing of the Shadow Pencil at the inner corners.

The UD liquid eyeliners have slightly better lasting power than the Shadow Pencil but they are still not completely crease-proof. They wear quite well for about 8 hours, after which I start to see some creasing (or rather some skin showing between the lashes and the liner) in the outer half of the lashline. It's not very noticeable unless one looks very closely.


Below is another look that I did with UD's Retrograde eyeliner paired with the YSL Midnight Garden palette.



Another look with UD's Siren eyeliner.


When I ran the swatches under water, Stila's Electric was the only shade that ran and stained my hand. But when worn on the eyelids, the Stila eyeliners generally have better lasting power in my experience although they apply more sheer than the UD liners. Both brands are easy to remove with either a bi-phase eye makeup remover or cleansing oil.

Overall, although the wearing power isn't perfect, I do like the UD eyeliners as the shades are well-pigmented with a lovely metallic glint, and not dupes of shades that have already been released by other brands.