I'd look at engagement ratio before interest score when comparing Workspaces and Ghost 5.0. A product can buy visibility. It can't buy sustained discussion.
Side-by-side comparison of Workspaces and Ghost 5.0 based on community engagement data.
A collection of workspaces from creative individuals
Publishing, newsletters, memberships & subscriptions
I'd look at engagement ratio before interest score when comparing Workspaces and Ghost 5.0. A product can buy visibility. It can't buy sustained discussion.
| Category | Workspaces | Ghost 5.0 |
|---|---|---|
| Home office | Yes | - |
| News | - | Yes |
| Newsletters | Yes | Yes |
| Open Source | - | Yes |
| Remote Work | Yes | - |
This is super cool and super dig the side project beginnings! Congrats!!!! @ryangilbert
This looks really cool! Getting all sorts of ideas, and I'm subscribing now!
Cool, there is a similar section at macvitamin.com where mac users can share their workstation pictures
This is an awesome tool! Relevant to every company and creator nowadays since everyone readily uses all these features. Definitely going to try this out.
Really nice update, good news for no-code community
Jamstack is the future of the web, and Ghost is an integral enabler of it. Great to see it evolving and becoming better and better. Congrats on the launch @johnonolan 🚀
Workspaces leads on raw interest score. Workspaces leads on engagement ratio. Workspaces leads on both metrics. That doesn't happen often.
These products share 1 categories: Newsletters. Moderate overlap suggests they target related but distinct use cases.
Workspaces is also tagged in Home office, Remote Work, which Ghost 5.0 isn't. That suggests Workspaces positions itself more broadly or targets an adjacent audience.
Ghost 5.0 has unique category tags in News, Open Source. Different positioning can mean a different buyer profile, even within the same space.
Workspaces launched Aug 2022. Ghost 5.0 launched May 2022. Both launched the same year, meaning they faced similar market conditions and competition levels.
Workspaces has a 0.17 engagement ratio (average), based on 110 discussion threads across 647 interest points. Middle of the pack for Newsletters. Enough discussion to suggest real usage, but not the kind of buzz that indicates a category-defining product.
Ghost 5.0 has a 0.14 engagement ratio (below average), based on 92 discussions across 644 interest points. The low ratio suggests a launch that got attention but didn't convert that attention into sustained interest.
Within the Newsletters category (417 total products), Workspaces ranks #5 and Ghost 5.0 ranks #6 by interest score. Workspaces sits in the top 10 for the category.
Workspaces is in the top 1% of Newsletters by interest. Ghost 5.0 is in the top 1%.
Pick Workspaces if you want the product with the larger community behind it; sustained discussion and active users are your priority; you need something that also covers Remote Work.
Pick Ghost 5.0 if community size matters less to you than engagement depth; you need something that also covers News.
Workspaces: Workspaces gives you a behind-the-scenes tour of the desk setups of inspiring creatives, designers, developers, entrepreneurs, etc. every week. Delivered to your inbox every Saturday and Sunday.
Ghost 5.0: Ghost 5.0 is the latest major release of Ghost, now with support for member analytics, multiple newsletters, custom tiers, simple design settings, and much more.
These products also compete in the Newsletters category:
CuratedLetters — Build your newsletter in minutes (Interest: 772, Engagement: 0.21)
Internet Is Beautiful — Discover the most interesting, weird and awesome websites (Interest: 544, Engagement: 0.17)
Daily Nugts — The first dynamic newsletter, tailored for you (Interest: 490, Engagement: 0.18)
Premarket Bell — Get ready for the trading day in 5 minutes (Interest: 395, Engagement: 0.30)
Thread Hunt — Quality Twitter threads from undiscovered creators (Interest: 378, Engagement: 0.41)
Microns — Discover micro-startups for sale (Interest: 354, Engagement: 0.24)
Each product's data reflects its launch period. The comparison shows both products' engagement metrics from when they launched. The build date at the bottom of the page shows when the index was last refreshed.
Not yet. Current comparisons use launch-period data only. Post-launch tracking is on our roadmap.
Generally, yes. Engagement ratio is hard to fake. A product can generate artificial interest, but sustained discussion threads require people who actually used the product and had something to say about it.
Automatically. We compare products that share at least one category and have similar interest scores. Products too far apart in traction don't make for useful comparisons.
No. Interest is launch-day attention. Engagement ratio is a better quality signal. The product with more discussions per interest point usually has stronger product-market fit.
How directly these products compete. Three or more shared categories means they're going after the same user. One shared category means they approach the space from different angles. Zero overlap and they probably shouldn't be compared.