Piperic
similar sites
‹ ProfileAI ReportTools

Sites similar to cratefires.com

HOME | Cratefires Publishing · ranked by shared content topics & relevance
75match
junipernova.com
Home | Juniper Nova Publishing
2 shared topicsbooks-and-literature
73match
efacepublishing.com
Home - eFace Publishing
2 shared topicsbooks-and-literature
73match
alexparkerpublishing.com
Alex Parker Publishing
2 shared topicsbooks-and-literature
73match
terrytoler.com
BeHoldings Publishing
2 shared topicsbooks-and-literature
72match
kahukupublishing.com
Kahuku Publishing
2 shared topicsbooks-and-literature
72match
lourhousepublishing.com
Lour House Publishing
2 shared topicsfiction
72match
byjbmpublishing.com
Home - BYJBM Publishing
2 shared topicsfiction
71match
bubbleeyespublishing.com
Bubble Eyes Publishing
2 shared topicsbooks-and-literature
71match
luckytitan.com
Lucky Titan Publishing
2 shared topicsfiction
71match
1kfaces.com
Thousand Faces Publishing
2 shared topicsfiction
70match
adventuresofhattiehedgehog.com
Home - Petal Point Publishing
2 shared topicsbooks-and-literature
70match
bullybookspublishing.com
Bully Books Publishing
2 shared topicsbooks-and-literature
70match
bullpenpublishing.com
Bullpen Publishing
2 shared topicsfiction
70match
atheisttales.com
Epic Saga Publishing
2 shared topicsfiction
69match
eerieriverpublishing.com
Eerie River Publishing | Canadian Publishing Hosue
2 shared topicsfiction
69match
juliemahoney.com
Julie Mahoney's Publishings
2 shared topicsbooks-and-literature
69match
2ning.net
The Great Bear & Pleiades Publishing
2 shared topicsfiction
69match
muabooks.com
Muabooks · A Curated Digital Publishing House
2 shared topicsbooks-and-literature

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.