| Similarity | Rank | |
|---|---|---|
| affordable | 0.838 | 2395 |
| inexpensively | 0.833 | 42312 |
| cost-effectively | 0.753 | 51674 |
| cost-effective | 0.751 | 8865 |
| cost-efficient | 0.745 | 44027 |
| priced | 0.735 | 4931 |
| inexpensive | 0.734 | 5701 |
| budget-friendly | 0.721 | 65613 |
| cheaply | 0.719 | 20992 |
| efficiently | 0.685 | 5313 |
| economical | 0.680 | 8601 |
| low-cost | 0.661 | 11460 |
| innovatively | 0.659 | 87859 |
| feature-rich | 0.651 | 57469 |
| top-quality | 0.641 | 35331 |
| expensively | 0.641 | 73358 |
| top-of-the-line | 0.640 | 44345 |
| expensive | 0.639 | 1462 |
| cheaper | 0.639 | 3859 |
| scalable | 0.639 | 17522 |
| hassle-free | 0.638 | 25973 |
| attainable | 0.637 | 19037 |
| low-priced | 0.636 | 30811 |
| highly-priced | 0.632 | 60858 |
| easily | 0.630 | 714 |