Most of its reach comes from replying under other people's posts; original posts are fewer.
Followers 3,572Diagnosed on 2026-11-03Followers 11-03 14:07Tweets 11-03 09:04
CScore 36
Reach check
Against the account's own previous week; not part of the score
Views look normalMedian views per post are +55% 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
42
Views per post ≈ 39.8% of followers · ahead of 42% of similar-size accounts
Growth momentum
15
Followers -0.20% in 7 days · ahead of 15% of similar-size accounts
Engagement quality
64
23.6 likes and replies per 1,000 views · ahead of 64% of similar-size accounts
Posting cadence
20
7 posts in the last 14 days, on 3 of them
Content consistency
34
The top post took 71% of 14-day views (7 posts)
Findings
Strengths
No dimension stands clearly above similar-size accounts yet.
To improve
Growth momentumFollowers -0.20% in 7 days · ahead of 15% of similar-size accounts
Posting cadence7 posts in the last 14 days, on 3 of them
Suggestions
Growing slower than similar-size accountsWhat to doReply under bigger accounts in your field to reach people who don't follow you yet.How to checkIn two weeks, see whether the 7-day growth rate has gone up.
Posting is patchyWhat to doSettle into at least one post a day before adding volume.How to checkIn two weeks, see whether more of the 14 days had a post.
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.
