Does anyone else feel that for the same elo, chess.com players are better ?

A brief explanation can be found here: https://lichess.org/page/rating-systems

On chess.com people start at 800 I believe

@M0r1 Thanks, that answers all.

It's not just the rating system
The player pool is bigger in chess.com too

@lildasx
No you have options to start at 400,800,1200 ,1600 and 2000

It is like saying I just feel 1 mile is longer than 1 km. Of course it is, the measuring system is different. And also the player pool is bigger on chess dot com.

well, chess.com uses glicko1 and people can choose their starter rating. On lichess, my blitz rating is more less 2150 while on chess.com, I managed to reach 2050 in blitz. While in rapid, I was only rated 1850 on chess.com. Chess.com has a much greater number of players. So the pool os different. I would say that depending on the player, your chess.com rating should more or less 300/400 points below your lichess rating (ex: a 2000 lichess should be more or less 1600/1700)

All you guys miss the point. And I am not talking about the difference of systems, glicko, elo issues etc. I am talking about statistical rating distribution. Right now 840 rapid chesscom = 1500 rapid lichess = 50th percentile in rapid pool. 1400 chesscom = 2000 lichess = 93rd percentile. Now read carefully, because magic happens. I was in the 65th percentile about 6 months ago on chesscom with about 1400 rapid rating there, but now I am in a very high 93rd percentile there with the same rating!! I am somehow highly overrated on chesscom (I've had the same rating there for years) and now I lose in series, even with opponents 100 points below my rating. What is going on??

is it like the time china kept is currency artificially low so that they could boos their economy.... is lichess 'using a different rating system' in order to do something that we all cant figure out??