| Similarity | Rank | |
|---|---|---|
| high-quality | 0.788 | 7274 |
| higher-priced | 0.786 | 94220 |
| low-quality | 0.757 | 53515 |
| higher-end | 0.746 | 55830 |
| lower-priced | 0.741 | 86577 |
| lower-cost | 0.736 | 60788 |
| good-quality | 0.721 | 70460 |
| highest-quality | 0.717 | 77404 |
| quality | 0.695 | 366 |
| High-quality | 0.675 | 66159 |
| pricier | 0.670 | 52577 |
| top-quality | 0.665 | 35331 |
| costlier | 0.654 | 57014 |
| low-end | 0.653 | 36695 |
| value-added | 0.648 | 24882 |
| cheaper | 0.640 | 3859 |
| high-end | 0.637 | 9163 |
| high-volume | 0.627 | 44184 |
| cost-efficient | 0.625 | 44027 |
| low-volume | 0.622 | 95902 |
| cost-effective | 0.622 | 8865 |
| higher | 0.619 | 646 |
| high-value | 0.614 | 38940 |
| longer-lasting | 0.611 | 77679 |
| low-cost | 0.604 | 11460 |