Most of its reach comes from replying under other people's posts; original posts are fewer.
Followers 432Diagnosed on 2026-10-11Followers 10-11 20:07Tweets 10-11 21:21
BScore 60
Reach check
Against the account's own previous week; not part of the score
Views look normalMedian views per post are −36% 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
71
Views per post ≈ 108.2% of followers · ahead of 71% of similar-size accounts
Growth momentum
31
Followers +0.46% in 7 days · ahead of 31% of similar-size accounts
Engagement quality
79
60.6 likes and replies per 1,000 views · ahead of 79% of similar-size accounts
Posting cadence
45
11 posts in the last 14 days, on 8 of them
Content consistency
88
The top post took 21% of 14-day views (10 posts)
Findings
Strengths
Content consistencyThe top post took 21% of 14-day views (10 posts)
Engagement quality60.6 likes and replies per 1,000 views · ahead of 79% of similar-size accounts
To improve
Growth momentumFollowers +0.46% in 7 days · ahead of 31% of similar-size accounts
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.
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.
