Understanding Similarity Scores
When GleanMark finds potential conflicts, each result includes information about how it was discovered and how similar it is to your mark. This guide explains the matching methods and how to interpret the results.
How Similarity Is Measured
GleanMark uses multiple matching methods to find potentially conflicting marks, mirroring how a USPTO examining attorney searches:
Phonetic Matching (Double Metaphone)
Finds marks that sound alike, even with different spelling. This catches the most common source of trademark confusion — consumers hearing a brand name and confusing it with another.
Examples: FONE ↔ PHONE, KOOL ↔ COOL, LITE ↔ LIGHT
Trigram (Visual Similarity)
Compares the character patterns of two marks to find ones that look alike on paper. Uses overlapping 3-character sequences to measure visual resemblance.
Examples: STRIPES ↔ STRIPS, GOOGLE ↔ GOGLE, NETFLIX ↔ NETFLEX
Semantic / Foreign Equivalents
Applies the Doctrine of Foreign Equivalents — if your mark contains a foreign word, GleanMark finds the English equivalent and vice versa. Also catches synonym relationships.
Examples: SOLEIL ↔ SUN, AQUA ↔ WATER, BLANC ↔ WHITE
Component Analysis
For multi-word marks, breaks the name into parts and checks if individual words appear in other marks, either alone or combined with other terms.
Examples: BLUE MOUNTAIN → checks BLUE, MOUNTAIN, and existing marks containing either word
Consonant Skeleton
Strips vowels to find marks with the same consonant structure, catching variations that preserve the "backbone" of a word.
Examples: STRIPE → STRP, STRIPS → STRPS
Discovery Method Badges
In Knockout Search and Clearance Report results, each conflict shows badges indicating which methods found it:
- Exact — direct text match
- Phonetic — sounds-alike match
- Trigram — visual similarity match
- Component — word-level match
- Semantic — meaning-based or foreign equivalent match
- Design — design code match
A conflict found by multiple methods is stronger. If a mark triggers phonetic AND trigram AND component matches, it's a more significant risk than one found by a single method.
Risk Levels in Knockout Search
Knockout Search combines mark similarity with commercial overlap (how related the goods/services are) to produce a risk level:
| Risk Level | What It Means |
|---|---|
| Very High | Near-identical match. Extremely likely to cause issues. |
| High | Strong similarity with commercial overlap. This mark is likely to cause issues. |
| Medium | Moderate similarity or partial class overlap. Worth investigating further. |
| Low | Minor resemblance or different commercial space. Lower concern. |
Near-identical marks always score High regardless of class distance — an obvious look-alike is a risk even in a different product category.
Tips
- Phonetic matches are the most important — the USPTO weighs sound similarity heavily in Section 2(d) refusals
- Don't ignore medium-risk results — a mark with moderate phonetic similarity in the same class can still be cited
- Check the discovery method badges — multiple methods finding the same conflict = stronger risk
- Foreign equivalents matter — SOLEIL for a sunscreen brand will conflict with SUN-based marks in the same class
Related Features
- Knockout Search — See similarity scoring in action
- Confusion Analysis (DuPont) — Deep-dive into factor-by-factor comparison
- Running a Clearance Report — Comprehensive analysis with scored conflicts
Need Help?
Click the chat icon in the bottom right or email support@gleanmark.com.