ufind.best ufind.best

Searching our database...

Navigate Select
Search by name or category
Name 100 Women Game Logo

Name 100 Women Game

Challenge yourself to name 100 real women

Screenshot 1 of Name 100 Women Game

A placing, not a percentage: #17 of the 20 tools that launched that week. First place reads 90, last reads 35, and the scores compare only within one week.

Judged 6 October 2026 under measure 2026-09-08.v25. Scores compare products within one launch week. We keep making the judges' questions stricter, so a score from another week was set against a different measure.

Market signal

Early or weak signal

Public evidence does not yet show both strong need and a distinct answer.

Existing Jury ratings
Demand Mercury
41
Differentiation Uranus
55
Product strength Execution, UX, Trust & Practical value
61
Market scope Global market

Similar tools found

The current public evidence is not sufficient for an honest alternative count. This is not treated as proof that no competitors exist.

Research coverage Thin coverage
30

There is not enough varied public evidence for a confident market read.

Demand 3

Specialist score profile

All six ratings
Demand 41 Uniqueness 55 Execution 61 UX 73 Trust 61 Value 49

Each spoke is one independent specialist. A smaller side makes the main constraint visible immediately.

This report explains the published specialist ratings and 3 public sources across 3 platforms. Research coverage is not an extra score and adds no points.

Execution

Mars specialist · 15%

#11 of 20 61/100

Total 4/5. The game page itself is the product: timer, progress, input box, submit button, and validation explanation are all visible. It ranks below P6 because the capture shows no entered guesses or other stronger proof beyond the interface.

  • Game page shows a live timer area, progress counter, guess input, and Submit button for the challenge. Product page

User experience

Venus specialist · 10%

#7 of 20 73/100

Eighth at 4/5. It places above P2 because the game itself is directly on the homepage first screen with timer, input, and “Submit,” but its single-sentence explanation is weaker and requires some surrounding text to fully frame the challenge.

  • Eighth at 4/5. It places above P2 because the game itself is directly on the homepage first screen with timer, input, and “Submit,” but its single-sentence explanation is weaker an... Product page

Trust

Saturn specialist · 10%

#11 of 20 61/100

Above P5 because the game’s main promise is reachable and the page explains validation rules in detail. It ranks below P6 because the ‘checked against Wikidata/Wikipedia’ validation claim is harder to verify from the visible evidence alone.

  • Largest claim is naming 100 real women with instant answer validation; page shows timer, input, counters, rules, and FAQs. Product page
  • Page says each guess is checked against Wikidata and rejects fictional or duplicate answers, but that backend validation is not independently visible. Product page

Uniqueness

Uranus specialist · 30%

#13 of 20 55/100

Total 1/5. Its clearest difference is a timed challenge to name 100 real women with instant answer validation, tied to a specific cultural prompt. It sits below AI Face Cutout because the mechanic is easy to copy and evidence of durable differentiation is thin.

  • Product page centers on naming 100 real women against the clock with instant answer validation. Product page
  • Supporting source ties it to the viral 'name a woman' challenge and women’s visibility theme. name100women.org
  • Available comparison evidence is sparse, so uniqueness cannot be strongly supported beyond the narrow prompt. apps.apple.com nameawoman.co.uk

Practical value

Jupiter specialist · 10%

#15 of 20 49/100

Total 2.5/5. The output is mainly a score/progress state in a browser game, with instant validation and no signup. It places below P14 because the result is mostly the experience of playing rather than a reusable artifact or decision support asset.

  • Total 2.5/5. The output is mainly a score/progress state in a browser game, with instant validation and no signup. It places below P14 because the result is mostly the experience o... Product page

Market demand

Mercury specialist · 25%

#18 of 20 41/100

Once-ever or occasional job: playing a challenge to name 100 women is a viral game prompt, not a recurring practical need. Total 2.5/5. It stays above the fake food simulator because the challenge has some independent cultural evidence beyond pure novelty ritual simulation.

Every specialist function rates every launch. A weekly category leader label marks the highest score in that measure, can be shared on an exact tie, and adds no extra points.

Public research trail

3 relevant sources across 3 platforms. Every link used by the report remains inspectable.

How weekly voting works

No Deals Available

Currently, there are no special deals or discounts available for this tool.

Asking Price

$17,000

Contact Seller

TTM Revenue

$0

TTM Profit

$0

Last month revenue

$0

Business Details

Date founded
2025-04-01
Team Size
1
Contact Email
[email protected]
Tech Stack
Wasp, React, Shadcn-UI + TailwindCSS, Prisma + Postgres, hosted on fly.io