Back to @HackedOffHugh's profile

Hugh Grant engagement report

@HackedOffHugh - 766K followers on X

Measured over 3 original posts from a 30-day window, last computed on September 10, 2026.

Engagement

Per follower
0.057%
of 766K followers
Per impression
0.599%
74K views on a typical post
Reach
9.58%
of its followers see a post
Typical post
441
interactions (median)
Saved
0.008%
6 bookmarks on a typical post
Posting rate
0.2/day
active 13% of days
Peak time
19:00 UTC
Monday

Early reading. We have captured 3 original posts for this account, below the 8 we require before treating a median as settled. The numbers above describe what we have seen so far, not a finished profile of the account.

A typical post picks up 441 interactions against 766K followers, an engagement rate of 0.057%. Posts are seen about 74K times each, and 0.599% of those impressions turn into an interaction. That is about 9.60% of the follower count, which is the gap between an audience on paper and an audience in a timeline. Posting runs at about 0.2 posts a day over the last 30 days, though only 13% of days saw any activity at all. Most posts go out around 19:00 UTC, and Monday is the busiest day of the week. The account's strongest tracked post pulled 28K interactions. Only 3 original posts have been captured so far, fewer than the 8 posts we want behind a median before treating it as settled. Read the figures above as an early measurement of this account, not as a finished profile of it.

Measured over 3 original posts from a 30-day window, last computed on September 10, 2026.

Where this sits in the catalog

At 0.057%, Hugh Grant sits above the 25th percentile of the 204,956 accounts in this comparison. That places it in the below the median band, which runs 0.024% to 0.143%.

p100.004%
p250.024%
p50 (median)0.143%
p750.678%
p902.55%
p9982.4%
Engagement rate as a share of followers, across the 204,956 accounts we have scanned enough to measure. The axis is logarithmic, because the top and bottom of this population are about 22,894 times apart and a linear axis would flatten everything below the median into a single point.
Show the percentile table
Engagement rate percentiles
PercentileEngagement rate
10th percentile0.004%
25th percentile0.024%
50th percentile0.143%
75th percentile0.678%
90th percentile2.55%
99th percentile82.4%

This ruler is the whole measured catalog, not a size-matched group: it shows where the raw rate falls across every account we can measure, all of which are large. For a like-for-like comparison, read the size-band percentile above instead. See how the bands are built

Posting timing

This account posts most often around 19:00 UTC, and Monday is its busiest day of the week. The bars below are the catalog-wide pattern, with this account's own busiest slot marked. They do not show how this account performs at each hour: we keep one aggregate per account, not one per hour, so that measurement does not exist in our data.

Engagement by hour posted, UTCTwenty-four bars, one per UTC hour. Each bar shows how posts published in that hour compare with their own authors' median engagement. Bars above the centre line ran higher than the median, bars below ran lower. A marker flags Busiest hour: 19:00 UTC.
0003060912151821
Above the authors' own mediansBelowScale: plus or minus 111%Busiest hour: 19:00 UTC
Show engagement by hour posted, utc as a table
Engagement by hour posted, UTC
Hour (UTC)Vs author medianPosts
00:00 UTC-1%89K
01:00 UTC-2%90K
02:00 UTC-3%88K
03:00 UTC-4%94K
04:00 UTC-5%76K
05:00 UTC-4%75K
06:00 UTC-5%86K
07:00 UTC-5%93K
08:00 UTC-4%108K
09:00 UTC-4%124K
10:00 UTC-3%129K
11:00 UTC-3%141K
12:00 UTC-3%154K
13:00 UTC-3%167K
14:00 UTC-4%173K
15:00 UTC-2%176K
16:00 UTC-3%171K
17:00 UTC-3%159K
18:00 UTC-2%149K
19:00 UTC-2%141K
20:00 UTC-1%131K
21:00 UTC0%116K
22:00 UTC-2%100K
23:00 UTC-1%90K
Engagement by day of weekSeven bars, one per weekday, Sunday first. Each bar shows how posts published on that day compare with their own authors' median engagement. Bars above the centre line ran higher than the median, bars below ran lower. A marker flags Busiest day: Monday.
SunMonTueWedThuFriSat
Above the authors' own mediansBelowScale: plus or minus 111%Busiest day: Monday
Show engagement by day of week as a table
Engagement by day of week
DayVs author medianPosts
Sunday+5%393K
Monday+1%483K
Tuesday-2%520K
Wednesday-3%472K
Thursday-2%430K
Friday-3%447K
Saturday+2%393K
See what moves engagement across the whole catalogWhat counts as a good engagement rate at this size

Formats this account uses

Its own posting mix on the left, and what each of those formats does across every account we track on the right. Only formats where the effect clears our publish test appear here, so an empty row is a format we could not measure rather than one that does nothing.

This account's posting mix compared with catalog-wide effects
FormatThis accountCatalog effect95% intervalAccounts behind it
Image or video0% of posts+111%+108% to +115%34K
Outbound link0% of posts-41%-42% to -40%32K
Typical length--8%-9% to -7%41K
  • 0% of this account's sampled posts carry an image or video. Across the catalog, posts with an image or video run 111% above the same accounts' other posts.
  • 0% of its posts carry a link off X. Across the catalog, posts with an outbound link run 41% below the same accounts' other posts.
  • Its average post runs 11 characters, which falls in the under 80 characters band. Across the catalog, posts under 80 characters run 8% below the same accounts' other posts.

These are catalog-wide differences applied to this account's own posting mix, not a measurement of how each format performs for this account specifically. We keep one median per account, not one per format per account, so the second thing is not something this data can tell you.

Best tweets

  • Mar 1, 2026

    Dirty Business on @Channel4. Brilliantly made, devastating. Water must be nationalised now. The owners of the private water companies jailed.

    23K4.2K2641051.9M viewsView on X
  • Jun 20, 202621x their median

    All still suckling at the teat. https://t.co/JXIf8LAagO

    7.0K1.8K27389743K viewsView on X
  • Jul 24, 202620x their median

    ".. probably the greatest criminal fraud ever perpetrated on the people of England & Wales" @Feargal_Sharkey on the privatised water industry. The solution is simple. Prosecute the bosses, fine the companies into bankruptcy & take our water back. https://t.co/ou4aluakMD

    6.4K2.1K10758480K viewsView on X
  • Jul 19, 202613x their median

    Am also watching behind bullet proof glass.

    5.5K134735521K viewsView on X
  • Jul 19, 202612x their median

    If football was processed cheese.

    4.7K3929016187K viewsView on X
  • Jul 3, 202611x their median

    Last week I spoke at a rally about the problem of deliberate disinformation in sections of the UK corporate press. Neatly, the rally was reported in the Sunday Telegraph in an article full deliberate disinformation. https://t.co/JUDsoXfFUD

    3.7K1.1K14620100K viewsView on X
  • May 22, 20268.7x their median

    Curse of Private Equity Morrisons to close 100 stores. Blames govt, silent on PE looting. PE loaded company with £6.6bn debt, cut staff, sold-off petrol stations, indulged in sale and leaseback of assets, extracted returns. PE devouring high street. https://t.co/DB8maucyKI

    2.4K1.3K8856710K viewsView on X
  • Jun 22, 20267.9x their median

    Every British PM’s nightmare With Keir Starmer expected to fall on his sword shortly, here is my take on the conundrum facing Andy Burnham, indeed any and every British PM. The true nature of Britain’s ‘special relationship’ with the United States has far more to do with American financiers’ willingness to keep borrowing to purchase British government debt than with history, culture or Britain’s defence needs. This is the burden under which every UK Prime Minister must labour. Mike Tyson famously said, “Everyone has a plan until they get hit”. The same could be said of prospective British prime ministers, especially after Liz Truss's spectacular defenestration. They all have a plan until the guilt market hits them. Andy Burnham, Nigel Farage, my friend Zack Polanski will have to face this, if they ever move into 10 Downing Street. I think they know it. But I doubt whether they appreciate the true magnitude or nature of their predicament. Conventional wisdom has it that the bond market comprises people looking to invest their savings in a government's debt. They seek the right balance between a higher interest rate and the increased risk this implies. For example, higher bond yields may signal that the market expects future inflation to reduce the value of the fixed interest payments that their bonds will yield. Worse still, it may foreshadow a risk of government default, as occurred in Argentina and Greece. That’s more or less what first year economics and finance students are taught. And it’s all true. Except that, in the case of the United Kingdom, this story misses the most fascinating and worrying aspect of its government bond or gilt market: The British government’s ability to refinance its public debt of almost 3 trillion pounds does not depend on savers choosing to invest in gilts. In fact, the British government’s ability to sell gilts hinges heavily on the willingness of numerous US-based financial institutions to borrow substantial sums of dollars to purchase British gilts, which they then use as collateral to borrow for their own purposes within the US. And there’s the rub. There is a world of difference between needing to borrow from savers and from relying on speculators who borrow themselves to lend you. Savers who lend to you focus on your long-term ability to repay them. They may tolerate your desire to make infrastructural investments that could increase your debt in the short term, in return for future profits that will help you repay them when their bonds expire. However, speculators who borrow in order to lend are a different beast entirely. They are much jumpier and prone to margin calls: situations where, if the bonds they purchased from you begin to lose value, fearing they will not be able to repay their own creditors, they dump your bonds thus turning their decline into a crash. The question arises: Why are British bonds, or gilts, so much more reliant on American speculators borrowing money to buy them than German bunds, Japanese bonds, Italian bonds or Greek bonds? Why does every British government rely so heavily on American leveraged capital inflows? It all started in the 1950s when the City of London discovered how to avoid following the British Empire down the road to oblivion. The trick was to carve out a niche for the City within the emerging dollar empire, which was institutionalised within the Bretton Woods system. American financiers faced rigid capital controls within that system, but the City of London was able to alleviate these due to three invaluable features. First, London’s trading expertise and legal system offered American financiers efficiency with immunity from all sort of interventions, including democratic accountability. Secondly, Britain’s network of offshore jurisdictions offered fabulous tax-minimisation opportunities. And, thirdly, London quickly became the holding depository of a torrent of petrodollars and eurodollars, not to mention the shadowy dollars created outside the United States by foreign bankers. Thus, the Great British paradox: while the UK's real economy was in decline, the City of London was flourishing. When the Bretton Woods system collapsed in the 1970s, American financiers discovered another use for the City: they borrowed dollars in the US short-term to buy long-term UK government gilts, which they then sold quickly to repay their loans. They would then repeat this process again and again to profit handsomely. This is how the British government became reliant on leveraged US institutions. In order to continue operating as usual, London today requires American balance sheets that are willing to expand through borrowing and use British gilts as collateral in order to maintain liquidity in the US. Put differently, the flipside of the City’s success story is that, even though it borrows in a currency that it prints, the UK is not financially sovereign. Yes, the City occupies a strategically important position within the global dollar system but the price for this is that the UK government’s sovereignty is circumscribed by its priority to maintain the City’s central position in American finance. While this remains the priority, the occupant of 10 Downing Street is like the captain whose powers are limited to re-arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. Is there an alternative to this peculiar form of financial subservience to US-based leveraged financiers? Yes, but it requires a willingness to accept a falling pound and falling house prices while increasing public investment through a new investment bank that issues bonds supported by the Bank of England. Any Prime Minister who tries to maintain Britain’s financial servitude to US capital while also investing in public goods may well put Britain on a path towards the IMF, whose sole purpose, lest we forget, is to create the political leverage that will bring about – like it did in Greece – the permanent loss of sovereignty over tax and spending policy. The question is: Do the current contenders for Britain’s top job understand this? https://t.co/xGrWjjcudY

    2.4K8211321091.1M viewsView on X
  • Feb 2, 20266.9x their median

    Yorkshire Water and Northumbrian Water have nearly 200 criminal convictions between them. On 6 August 2024, Ofwat fined them £47m and £17m for sewage dumping. Fines not paid, will not be paid. Firms claim to have invested. No penalty for abusing laws https://t.co/WfLikuuprR

    1.9K1.0K8439991K viewsView on X
  • Jul 19, 20263.6x their median

    Prefer the band of the Royal Marines

    1.5K6151276K viewsView on X

Ranked by total interactions across everything we have tracked for this account, which is a longer history than the 30-day window the rates above use. The multiple compares each post to this account's own median.

Buy or sell Twitter (X) accounts - escrow-protected

PlayerSells is an escrow marketplace for Twitter (X) accounts. Every deal is protected, with no middleman risk.

Reading these numbers

A typical post picks up 441 interactions against 766K followers, an engagement rate of 0.057%. Posts are seen about 74K times each, and 0.599% of those impressions turn into an interaction. That is about 9.60% of the follower count, which is the gap between an audience on paper and an audience in a timeline. Posting runs at about 0.2 posts a day over the last 30 days, though only 13% of days saw any activity at all. Most posts go out around 19:00 UTC, and Monday is the busiest day of the week. The account's strongest tracked post pulled 28K interactions. Only 3 original posts have been captured so far, fewer than the 8 posts we want behind a median before treating it as settled. Read the figures above as an early measurement of this account, not as a finished profile of it.

What is Hugh Grant's engagement rate on X?
Hugh Grant (@HackedOffHugh) has an engagement rate of 0.057%, based on the median interactions across 3 original posts from the last 30 days against 766,230 followers. Replies, reposts and quote-posts of other people are excluded from that sample.
Is that a good engagement rate?
At 0.057%, Hugh Grant sits above the 25th percentile of the 204,956 accounts in this comparison. Those comparison accounts are all large ones, because our scanning cadence is weighted towards big accounts, so this is a ranking among peers of similar scale rather than a ranking across X.
Does @HackedOffHugh have real engagement?
There is not yet enough sample to rank this account against others of its size.
When does @HackedOffHugh post?
Most posts go out around 19:00 UTC, and Monday is its busiest day, at roughly 0.2 posts per day across the measured window.

Keep going