Similarity | Rank | |
---|---|---|
low_cost | 0.819 | 7473 |
a_low-cost | 0.803 | 67746 |
inexpensive | 0.790 | 10926 |
a_low_cost | 0.714 | 52787 |
affordable | 0.694 | 3667 |
cost-effective | 0.676 | 12088 |
cheap | 0.673 | 1957 |
cost-efficient | 0.662 | 81922 |
cost_effective | 0.649 | 15101 |
an_inexpensive | 0.648 | 61517 |
a_cost-effective | 0.640 | 69744 |
an_affordable | 0.626 | 35923 |
more_affordable | 0.619 | 30101 |
at_low_cost | 0.602 | 43994 |
less_expensive | 0.600 | 25381 |
very_cheap | 0.578 | 94283 |
at_a_low_cost | 0.570 | 57241 |
provide_affordable | 0.570 | 95082 |
reasonably_price | 0.568 | 55852 |
high-quality | 0.565 | 8965 |
cost_efficient | 0.560 | 94706 |
scalable | 0.560 | 14958 |
more_cost-effective | 0.553 | 72275 |
widely_available | 0.552 | 65913 |
low-tech | 0.549 | 78478 |