A mix of strengths and weak spots — mid-table among similar-size accounts.
Followers 23Diagnosed on 2026-10-11Followers 10-11 20:07Tweets 10-11 21:26
CScore 44
Reach check
Against the account's own previous week; not part of the score
Views look normalMedian views per post are +28% 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
60
Views per post ≈ 140.2% of followers · ahead of 60% of similar-size accounts
Growth momentum
25
Followers +0.00% in 7 days · ahead of 25% of similar-size accounts
Engagement quality
40
14.4 likes and replies per 1,000 views · ahead of 40% of similar-size accounts
Posting cadence
24
7 posts in the last 14 days, on 4 of them
Content consistency
84
The top post took 28% of 14-day views (7 posts)
Findings
Strengths
Content consistencyThe top post took 28% of 14-day views (7 posts)
To improve
Posting cadence7 posts in the last 14 days, on 4 of them
Growth momentumFollowers +0.00% in 7 days · ahead of 25% of similar-size accounts
Suggestions
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.
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.
