Most of its reach comes from replying under other people's posts; original posts are fewer.
Followers 246Diagnosed on 2026-10-11Followers 10-11 20:07Tweets 10-11 15:12
BScore 69
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
83
Views per post ≈ 148.6% of followers · ahead of 83% of similar-size accounts
Growth momentum
—
Needs 7 days of follower snapshots
Engagement quality
70
50.1 likes and replies per 1,000 views · ahead of 70% of similar-size accounts
Posting cadence
37
11 posts in the last 12 days, on 5 of them
Content consistency
74
The top post took 36% of 14-day views (7 posts)
Findings
Strengths
View efficiencyViews per post ≈ 148.6% of followers · ahead of 83% of similar-size accounts
Content consistencyThe top post took 36% of 14-day views (7 posts)
To improve
Posting cadence11 posts in the last 12 days, on 5 of them
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.
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.
