Piperic
similar sites
‹ ProfileAI ReportTools

Sites similar to natewake.dev

Portfolio | Nate Wakefield · ranked by shared content topics & relevance
76match
aidensanders.dev
Portfolio | Aiden Sanders
2 shared topicssoftware-and-applications
76match
kiannoctor.com
Kian's Portfolio
2 shared topicstechnology-and-computing
74match
andriyoga.com
Andri Yoga | Portfolio
2 shared topicstechnology-and-computing
72match
abosh.me
Andrew Abosh — Portfolio
2 shared topicstechnology-and-computing
72match
andre-leonor.com
André Leonor - Developer Portfolio
2 shared topicssoftware-and-applications
71match
aldodev.org
Aldo Lucchetta - Portfolio
2 shared topicssoftware-and-applications
71match
kiarashzamani.com
Kiarash Zamani - Portfolio
2 shared topicstechnology-and-computing
71match
aryankashyap.com
Aryan's Portfolio
2 shared topicstechnology-and-computing
71match
arulg.tech
Arul G | Software Engineer | SDE Portfolio
2 shared topicssoftware-and-applications
70match
devonbray.com
Portfolio
2 shared topicstechnology-and-computing
70match
devsofie.com
Portfolio
2 shared topicstechnology-and-computing
70match
namir.dev
Namir Ahmed | Portfolio & Blog
2 shared topicstechnology-and-computing
70match
anikettiwari.com
Portfolio | Aniket Tiwari
2 shared topicstechnology-and-computing
70match
dev-shamim.com
Shamim Portfolio
2 shared topicssoftware-and-applications
70match
andrewmcguckin.com
Andrew McGuckin - Portfolio
2 shared topicstechnology-and-computing
70match
alexmccairel.dev
Alex McCairel | Portfolio
2 shared topicstechnology-and-computing
69match
anasalakkad.com
Anas Alakkad | Portfolio
2 shared topicssoftware-and-applications
69match
patrickjose.com
Patrick Jose Portfolio
2 shared topicstechnology-and-computing

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.