similar sites

Browse

AI Report Tools

Sites similar to irpress.de

Irpress alternatives & similar sites

International Research Press – Affordable Peer-reviewed Publishing — 18 websites ranked by shared content topics, category and on-page relevance.

Each result shows its full tech stack, contacts and AI-policy — not just a name · Browse all sites in Publishing Industry →

Domain	Match	Title	Country/Lang	Category	AI files	Contact	AI-protection
decentralized-publishing.com ↗	66 match 1 shared topics	Decentralized Publishing	de	publishing-industry	robotsllmsaihumans	emailphone	partial · 8
neo-publishing.com ↗	65 match 1 shared topics	Neo Publishing	de	publishing-industry	robotsllmsaihumans	emailphone	none
exakta.at ↗	65 match 1 shared topics	Exakta GmbH - Professional Publishing Services	AT de	publishing-industry	robotsllmsaihumans	emailphone	none
begutachtet.at ↗	64 match 1 shared topics	begutachtet.at - peer-review.eu - Startseite	AT de	publishing-industry	robotsllmsaihumans	emailphone	none
fahrrad-vergleich.at ↗	64 match 1 shared topics	qmedia GmbH \| Digital Publishing House	AT de	publishing-industry	robotsllmsaihumans	emailphone	none
neolism.ai ↗	64 match 1 shared topics	Neolism — KI-natives Digital Label \| Publishing, Musik, Produkte	de	publishing-industry Gumroad	robotsllmsaihumans	emailphone	none
neolism.com ↗	64 match 1 shared topics	Neolism — KI-natives Digital Label \| Publishing, Musik, Produkte	de	publishing-industry Gumroad	robotsllmsaihumans	emailphone	none
fauthors.com ↗	64 match 1 shared topics	Fauthors - Für Autoren - Fauthors Publishing	de	publishing-industry WordPress	robotsllmsaihumans	emailphone	none
upscore.com ↗	64 match 1 shared topics	Upscore \| The Platform for Data-Driven Publishing	de	publishing-industry	robotsllmsaihumans	emailphone	none
hgv-online.de ↗	64 match 1 shared topics	HGV Hanseatische Gesellschaft für Verlagsservice mbH – publishing services	DE de	publishing-industry WordPress	robotsllmsaihumans	emailphone	none
hgv-webservices.de ↗	64 match 1 shared topics	HGV Hanseatische Gesellschaft für Verlagsservice mbH – publishing services	DE de	publishing-industry WordPress	robotsllmsaihumans	emailphone	none
floedl.at ↗	63 match 1 shared topics	Corporate Publishing & Kundenmagazine - Matthias Flödl	AT de	publishing-industry	robotsllmsaihumans	email phone	none
neobooks.com ↗	63 match 1 shared topics	neobooks - dein Self-Publishing-Partner für E-Books	de	publishing-industry	robotsllmsaihumans	emailphone	none
buchbinderei-kaspar.at ↗	63 match 1 shared topics	Buchbinderei KASPAR – Express Abschlussarbeiten – Restaurationen, Digitaldruck, uvm.	AT de	publishing-industry WordPress	robotsllmsaihumans	email phone	none
architekturjournal.at ↗	62 match 1 shared topics	AW Architektur-Verlags GmbH \| Publikationen aus der Welt der Architektur und des Bauens	AT de	publishing-industry WordPress WooCommerce	robotsllmsaihumans	emailphone	none
aw-v.at ↗	62 match 1 shared topics	AW Architektur-Verlags GmbH \| Publikationen aus der Welt der Architektur und des Bauens	AT de	publishing-industry WordPress WooCommerce	robotsllmsaihumans	emailphone	none
cvdocuments.com ↗	62 match 1 shared topics	Practitioner Brochures/Flyers – Google Drive	de	publishing-industry	robotsllmsaihumans	emailphone	none
4-press.com ↗	62 match 1 shared topics	4PRESS - Bindeglied zwischen Verlagen & Presse-Einzelhandel	de	publishing-industry WordPress	robotsllmsaihumans	email phone	none

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:

shared topics how many of the same fine‑grained content topics (IAB sub‑categories) both sites cover — the main signal.
same category whether they sit in the same business / industry category.
content & title how closely their titles and page descriptions line up in wording and meaning.

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.