Reach is modest, but the people who see it engage.
Followers 2.3MDiagnosed on 2026-10-11Followers 10-11 20:07Tweets 10-11 20:45
AScore 71
Reach check
Against the account's own previous week; not part of the score
Views look normalMedian views per post are −0% versus the previous 7 days — no sign of a sharp drop.
Scores by dimension
Out of 100 · 50 = the median of similar-size accounts
View efficiency
37
Views per post ≈ 9.6% of followers · ahead of 37% of similar-size accounts
Growth momentum
67
Followers +0.14% in 7 days · ahead of 67% of similar-size accounts
Engagement quality
96
44.5 likes and replies per 1,000 views · ahead of 96% of similar-size accounts
Posting cadence
100
61 posts in the last 14 days, on 14 of them
Content consistency
91
The top post took 10% of 14-day views (59 posts)
Findings
Strengths
Posting cadence61 posts in the last 14 days, on 14 of them
Engagement quality44.5 likes and replies per 1,000 views · ahead of 96% of similar-size accounts
To improve
View efficiencyViews per post ≈ 9.6% of followers · ahead of 37% of similar-size accounts
Suggestions
Views lag behind the follower countWhat to doLook at the top tweets by views and reuse their topics and openings.How to checkIn two weeks, see whether views per post ÷ followers has gone up.
The reach check compares the medians of the last two weeks; it shows a change in views, not its cause. The diagnosis uses only public data collected by this site: the account's own original posts (no retweets or replies), counted once a tweet is past 24h. View efficiency, growth and engagement are scored by rank among similar-size accounts (⅓–3× the followers); cadence and consistency by the account's own posting. A dimension without enough data is not scored and stays out of the total. For reference only — it says nothing about the account's standing on X.
