Piperic
similar sites
‹ ProfileAI ReportTools

Sites similar to atema.dev

Martijn Atema's Portfolio · ranked by shared content topics & relevance
71match
eguyot.dev
Evan Guyot's Portfolio
3 shared topicsprogramming-languages
71match
lucasarden.com
Lucas Arden's Portfolio
3 shared topicsweb-development
70match
a-mkemp.com
A-M Kemp Portfolio
3 shared topicsweb-development
69match
andrewlethbridge.com
Andrew Lethbridge's Portfolio
3 shared topicsprogramming-languages
69match
lubien.dev
Lubien · Portfolio
3 shared topicsweb-development
69match
by-ced.dev
Ced's Portfolio | Web Developer
3 shared topicstechnology-and-computing
68match
looank.com
Projects - My Portfolio
3 shared topicstechnology-and-computing
68match
bruceyulin.com
Bruce Yu Lin | Portfolio
3 shared topicstechnology-and-computing
68match
simonrosset.com
Simon Rosset - Portfolio
3 shared topicsprogramming-languages
68match
anishmahajan.tech
Anish Mahajan | Portfolio
3 shared topicsweb-development
68match
jrodcode.dev
Home - JRodCode Portfolio
3 shared topicsweb-development
68match
andybarringer.com
Andy Barringer | Portfolio
3 shared topicsweb-development
68match
craigrolleston.com
Craig Rolleston - Portfolio
3 shared topicstechnology-and-computing
68match
pacrob.com
Paul Robinson — Portfolio
3 shared topicsprogramming-languages
67match
egeural.com
Ege Ural | Personal Portfolio
3 shared topicstechnology-and-computing
67match
juan-estrad.com
Juan Estrada Portfolio Website
3 shared topicsprogramming-languages
67match
juansegnana.com
Portfolio | Juan Segnana
3 shared topicsprogramming-languages
67match
cajacuadrada.dev
Alexander Richards — Portfolio
3 shared topicsprogramming-languages

How the match score works

Each match is a 0–100 similarity score — the higher it is, the more two sites resemble one another. It’s computed automatically from our own crawl data (never from what a site says about itself) by combining several independent signals, so a high score means several of them point the same way:

No single signal decides the result — they’re blended together. Treat the score as a way to rank candidates rather than an absolute percentage; the chips on each result show which signals contributed.