Piperic
similar sites
‹ ProfileAI ReportTools

Sites similar to kateforster.com

Kate Forster · ranked by shared content topics & relevance
64match
futureforestletters.com
The Future Forest
1 shared topicsbooks-and-literature
64match
jsam.com
JSam — A Site for Sore Hearts
1 shared topicsbooks-and-literature
64match
fuentefountain.com
Fuente Fountain Books
1 shared topicsbooks-and-literature
63match
simonsoul.com
Simon Soul
1 shared topicsbooks-and-literature
63match
sisterhoodmadrid.com
sisterhood
1 shared topicsbooks-and-literature
63match
fwbookclub.com
Fort Worth Book Club – Website for members
1 shared topicsbooks-and-literature
63match
c4um.org
Centre for Urban Mythologies
1 shared topicsbooks-and-literature
63match
cakeforbreakfasteveryday.com
Cake for Breakfast Every Day
1 shared topicsbooks-and-literature
63match
abrookeforthebooks.com
Home | A Brooke for the Books
1 shared topicsbooks-and-literature
63match
buffalobooks.com
buffalobooks.com: official site for Western New York Wares, Inc.
1 shared topicsbooks-and-literature
63match
ebooklister.com
Ebooklister
1 shared topicsbooks-and-literature
63match
eidosforge.com
Eidos Forge
1 shared topicsbooks-and-literature
63match
lookingforamonster.com
Looking for a Monster - Home
1 shared topicsbooks-and-literature
63match
sienna-buch.com
Sienna Buch
1 shared topicsbooks-and-literature
63match
simonmawer.com
Simon Mawer
1 shared topicsbooks-and-literature
63match
simonunwin.com
Simon Unwin
1 shared topicsbooks-and-literature
63match
pagemaster.app
Pagemaster — Summer Reading Challenge for Kids
1 shared topicsbooks-and-literature
63match
rebeccamunderwood.com
Rebecca Underwood VanderVorste
1 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.