Piperic
similar sites
‹ ProfileAI ReportTools

Sites similar to ipater.com

Leopold Stuebner — Leo | Data & Information Design · ranked by shared content topics & relevance
78match
kwonsoyeon.com
Soyeon Kwon | Product Designer
1 shared topicsdesign
78match
sofia-belmar.com
Sofía Betrán | Product Designer
1 shared topicsdesign
75match
anhhtran.com
Hien Anh (Annie) Tran | Personal Portfolio
1 shared topicsdesign
75match
pistigam.com
PROJECTS - My Portfolio
1 shared topicsdesign
68match
bogieland.com
BogieLand: Information Design & Information Architecture Company
1 shared topicsdesign
67match
solidmotiondesign.com
Solid Motion Design
1 shared topicsdesign
67match
animationdesigncompetition.com
Animation Design Competition
1 shared topicsdesign
66match
kyletezak.com
Kyle Tezak | Information
1 shared topicsdesign
66match
5wgraphics.com
5W GRAPHICS | Information graphics, data visualization, diagrams, design and illustration
1 shared topicsdesign
66match
kultsketch.com
Perfektion Design
1 shared topicsdesign
66match
boldstudiodesign.com
Bold Studio | Architectural Designer | Detroit
1 shared topicsdesign
66match
pilotronik.com
Pilotronik | Innovation Design Studio
1 shared topicsdesign
66match
inspiredactiondesign.com
Inspired Action Design
1 shared topicsdesign
66match
ronnadel.com
Ron Nadel | Graphic designer and illustrator. Making information friendly since 1981
1 shared topicsdesign
66match
5w-creative.com
5w creative - A Design & Innovation Studio
1 shared topicsdesign
66match
groupbrightcarbon.com
Presentation Design Agency | BrightCarbon
1 shared topicsdesign
66match
pillo.dev
Pillo — Design, Labs & Curation
1 shared topicsdesign
66match
pixelrake.com
Rahul Alexander — Design Operations Lead
1 shared topicsdesign

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.