now is the lichess as strong as chesscom?

I play in both sites and my rating here was always easy make 2000, 2050, etc.. But in chess.com I stuck sometimes in 1800 mark. But now I cant reach more 2000... Interesting is my actual rating in chess.com is 2027, the first time my blitz rating was greatter in chess.com than lichess...

Did you realized something like that too? Is lichess too strong now as chesscom? Or that is just my personal impression? Or that is just for 1800~2000 mark?

Your conclusions about changes over time of ratings on lichess and chesscom may be correct, but, because lichess and chesscom use completely different rating systems with different numbers and different formulas, saying "My lichess rating is now the same as my chesscom rating, therefore the player pool on lichess is now just as strong as the one on chesscom." is a lot like saying "The temperature indoors in Celsius is now equal to the temperature outside in Fahrenheit, therefore I can go outside in my t-shirt and shorts and will not feel cold." or "My height in feet is equal to that of this giraffe in metres, therefore I should now be just as tall as it.".

Please post
Your difference between default rating at the beginning and current rating for both sites.

Still better: Learn to understand that ratings are relative. No one has ever had a goal that lichess ratings would much some other rating. Rating is the way to find opponent of roughly equal ability.

As differences. Different formulast have nothing to do with it. Botha actually use the same. But even old Elo would converge to same differences between two players. Model is the same but adaptation is different. Biggest difference is
- what is the default rating of new player in particular when pool was started
- what is the average strenght of players
- random fluctuations

To make example. Assume one would start a site with chess.com defaults and got GM players. Then the GM rating in that pool would 1200. Likewise assume you get kindergarten kids unable deliver checkmate with just rook. Then the grandmaster in this pool woudl somewhre round 3700. There is no absolute yardstick in chess (well soem cp/move could be almost it)

@petri999 The formulas between the two are absolutely different and to claim otherwise is simply false. There is a variable that Lichess’ Glicko system uses that the ELO system does not.

What makes you think chess.com use Elo (it not acronym so not ELO)?
www.chess.com/article/view/chess-ratings---how-they-work.
Very few online use original Elo and certainly no chess.com

But even then elo and Glicko would converge to same point differences. So would Glicko -2 which has a small advantage on population with lots rapidly developing/declining players

I can’t click your link so I’ll take your word for it that the other site doesn’t use ELO, I don’t play there. But you’ve failed to address my point, namely that your claim the two use the same formula is false.

You’re right that rating pools are independent of one another and ratings are relative, but the different formulas are yet another reason comparing between the two is foolish.

Well they use the almost the same formula. Lichess uses Glicko-2 and chess.com Glicko. Difference is really small. The volatility parameter added does not really do much for stable players. Has small effect for those really developing quickly.

And it does affect final ratings it affect only how quickly someone reaches the new rating i.e you read the "the best chess book, 400 pts guaranteed" and in actually works. In any meaningfull algorithm you would get the 400 pts. In Elo it would take longes. Glicko it woudl take lot less. Glicko-2 woudl be still bit faster. But lets assume you would read then chapters of the book on monthly rate. Then your monthly rate would be wtill whopping 40 points in a montsh. Elo would cope with this on online games, estimate would more noisy but still fine. glicko and Glicko-2 would be just as good in online environment. In otb assuming a weekend tournament/month Glicko-2 would converge faster and would be more likely to keep up in the change.

so intitial pool strentght and intial rating assigned to new comers matter way more than the adaptatioin formula used

Anyway, I think those people who are looking for a free website in chess.com and not in Lichess are not aware of lichess.
chess.com has a facebook app, advertisement makes it more popular I think.

Yes, chesscom likes to advertise that it is "free online chess" and then show you ads, limit puzzles to five per day, limit the opening book, limit how much you can analyze with the engine running on your own computer, and try to sell you a membership when you hit the limit. Also, a member perk of chesscom is more time off correspondence games, sounds a lot like pay to win to me.
The main advantages chesscom has now is the bigger player base (network effect) making it easier to find opponents (I don't really have trouble with that here, but I hear it is sometimes an issue at higher levels) and the domain name (and site rankings) making it the first site people find when looking for a place to play chess online.