Most of its reach comes from replying under other people's posts; original posts are fewer.
Followers 10.3KDiagnosed on 2026-11-03Followers 11-03 08:07Tweets 11-03 09:10
CScore 36
Reach check
Against the account's own previous week; not part of the score
Can't compare yetNeeds at least 3 tweets past 24h in each of the last two weeks.
Scores by dimension
Out of 100 · 50 = the median of similar-size accounts
View efficiency
20
Views per post ≈ 13.9% of followers · ahead of 20% of similar-size accounts
Growth momentum
39
Followers +1.48% in 7 days · ahead of 39% of similar-size accounts
Engagement quality
—
Needs at least 3 tweets past 24h in the last 14 days
Posting cadence
62
33 posts in the last 13 days, on 6 of them
Content consistency
—
Needs at least 5 tweets past 24h in the last 14 days
Findings
Strengths
No dimension stands clearly above similar-size accounts yet.
To improve
View efficiencyViews per post ≈ 13.9% of followers · ahead of 20% of similar-size accounts
Growth momentumFollowers +1.48% in 7 days · ahead of 39% 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.
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.
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.
