I generated 21k astrology pages with Swiss Ephemeris, open sourced
github.com · 1 day on the radar
Where is the demand coming from?
Leans on the founder
The founder's audience is a large part of it. This is the read that decides whether the traction would transfer to you.
Roughly what does it earn?
Not disclosedNo basis to estimateWe do not publish a figure until we have something to base it on. When we do, the method that produced it is shown alongside the range.
Could you build it?
Yes, in about 8 days
Nothing patented, no network effect, and no proprietary data set standing in the way.
What it is
A Python-based programmatic SEO generator that produces 21,000+ static astrology content pages (daily horoscopes, zodiac guides, planetary aspects) using Swiss Ephemeris data, open-sourced on GitHub. The project appears designed to power search-driven traffic for astrology SaaS; it received minimal traction with 1 HN point on launch.
The one thing to knowZero monetization evidence, no founder signal, and a single HN point suggest this is either a tool for the founder's own tianji-astrology.com or an unclaimed/dormant OSS project, making fast-follow risk low but organic demand uncertain.
Proof we found, with sources
The scores behind the verdict
Directional reads from public signals, 0 to 100▸ Show the four scores
TractionWeak5 / 100
How much demand shows up from people outside the founder's own circle.
CopyabilityEasy to match75 / 100
How feasible it is for a competent builder to ship something comparable.
Wedge potentialFair35 / 100
How much room is left for a new entrant: gaps, ignored segments, pricing openings.
MonetizationUnproven0 / 100
How much evidence there is that people actually pay: visible pricing, revenue claims, a paid tier in use.
Unlock the full brief
How it works under the hood, how it gets customers, where it is weak, and the opening we would take, with a bottom-line verdict.
Sign in to unlockOne-time payment. Delivered in about a minute. Yours to keep.
Revenue, user and tactic numbers are evidence we found and attributed, with a confidence rating.
They are directional reads, never verified guarantees.