Piperic
similar sites
‹ ProfileAI ReportTools

Sites similar to paulhoffer.com

Paul Hoffer · ranked by shared content topics & relevance
68match
paulhoule.com
Paul Houle home page
1 shared topicsprogramming-languages
67match
paulabers.com
Paul Abers
1 shared topicsprogramming-languages
67match
paulgalasti.com
Paul Galasti
1 shared topicsprogramming-languages
66match
paulalwin.dev
Hey there! Paul here.
1 shared topicsprogramming-languages
66match
paul-nameless.com
Paul Nameless
1 shared topicsprogramming-languages
64match
paulmueser.com
Paul Müser | Homepage
1 shared topicsprogramming-languages
64match
paulmathis.dev
Paul Mathis's Jots
1 shared topicsprogramming-languages
64match
paullassen.com
Home - Paul Lassen's Blog
1 shared topicsprogramming-languages
64match
paulzuradzki.com
Home - Paul Zuradzki
1 shared topicsprogramming-languages
64match
paulisaris.com
Paul Isaris | A Developer's Journey
1 shared topicsprogramming-languages
64match
adambarnhard.com
adam barnhard
1 shared topicsprogramming-languages
64match
paulness.com
Blog of Paul Ness | C#, SQL, MongoDB, React, Java, programming, ...
1 shared topicsprogramming-languages
63match
andywhittle.dev
Andy Whittle
1 shared topicsprogramming-languages
63match
pashafateev.com
Pasha Fateev | Software Engineer
1 shared topicsprogramming-languages
63match
paulgieskeblog.com
Paul's Page
1 shared topicsprogramming-languages
63match
paulweichhart.com
The education of Paul Weichhart
1 shared topicsprogramming-languages
63match
pault.com
Paul Tchistopolskii homepage
1 shared topicsprogramming-languages
63match
kirbydoestech.dev
qurb e muhammad syed — backend & systems
1 shared topicsprogramming-languages

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.