Most of its reach comes from replying under other people's posts; original posts are fewer.
Followers 8,470Diagnosed on 2026-11-03Followers 11-03 08:07Tweets 11-03 09:37
AScore 74
Reach check
Against the account's own previous week; not part of the score
Views look normalMedian views per post are +15% 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
56
Views per post ≈ 111.3% of followers · ahead of 56% of similar-size accounts
Growth momentum
93
Followers +18.81% in 7 days · ahead of 93% of similar-size accounts
Engagement quality
83
36.5 likes and replies per 1,000 views · ahead of 83% of similar-size accounts
Posting cadence
100
500 posts in the last 14 days, on 14 of them
Content consistency
26
The top post took 74% of 14-day views (124 posts)
Findings
Strengths
Posting cadence500 posts in the last 14 days, on 14 of them
Growth momentumFollowers +18.81% in 7 days · ahead of 93% of similar-size accounts
To improve
Content consistencyThe top post took 74% of 14-day views (124 posts)
Suggestions
Views are concentrated in a few hitsWhat to doTurn a hit's topic into a series so ordinary posts carry more of the reach.How to checkIn two weeks, see whether the top post's share of views has come down.
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.
