Josh Horton engagement report
@JugglinJosh - 329K followers on X
Measured over 1 original post from a 30-day window, last computed on October 11, 2026.
Engagement
Early reading. We have captured 1 original post 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 9 interactions against 329K followers, an engagement rate of 0.003%. Posts are seen about 4.5K times each, and 0.199% of those impressions turn into an interaction. That is about 1.37% of the follower count, which is the gap between an audience on paper and an audience in a timeline. Posting runs at about 0.03 posts a day over the last 30 days, though only 3% of days saw any activity at all. Most posts go out around 03:00 UTC, and Wednesday is the busiest day of the week. Of the 1 posts sampled, 100% carry an image or video. The account's strongest tracked post pulled 7.2K interactions, about 799x its own typical post. Only 1 original post 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 1 original post from a 30-day window, last computed on October 11, 2026.
Where this sits in the catalog
At 0.003%, Josh Horton sits below the 10th percentile of the 205,374 accounts in this comparison. That places it in the bottom 25% band, which runs below 0.024%.
Show the percentile table
| Percentile | Engagement rate |
|---|---|
| 10th percentile | 0.004% |
| 25th percentile | 0.024% |
| 50th percentile | 0.143% |
| 75th percentile | 0.678% |
| 90th percentile | 2.55% |
| 99th percentile | 82.4% |
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 03:00 UTC, and Wednesday 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.
Show engagement by hour posted, utc as a table
| Hour (UTC) | Vs author median | Posts |
|---|---|---|
| 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 UTC | 0% | 116K |
| 22:00 UTC | -2% | 100K |
| 23:00 UTC | -1% | 90K |
Show engagement by day of week as a table
| Day | Vs author median | Posts |
|---|---|---|
| Sunday | +5% | 393K |
| Monday | +1% | 483K |
| Tuesday | -2% | 520K |
| Wednesday | -3% | 472K |
| Thursday | -2% | 430K |
| Friday | -3% | 447K |
| Saturday | +2% | 393K |
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.
| Format | This account | Catalog effect | 95% interval | Accounts behind it |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Image or video | 100% of posts | +111% | +108% to +115% | 34K |
| Outbound link | 0% of posts | -41% | -42% to -40% | 32K |
| Typical length | - | -3% | -3% to -2% | 54K |
- 100% 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 93 characters, which falls in the 80 - 180 characters band. Across the catalog, posts of 80 to 180 characters run 3% 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
- Apr 27, 2026799x their median
People be like. “This is normal and good for the hobby” https://t.co/s057NhVQck
- Feb 1, 202643x their median
🚨Important reminder: The YouTube algorithm actually changed, for the worse. (+Data) I’ve addressed this last year already and because we haven’t seen it being addressed, I thought it’d be a good idea to remind everyone of what happened last year. Before I begin, a direct note to all my friends at YouTube, I truly respect what you’ve been doing in the past year, and I know you’ll take this problem seriously, but urgency is key when creators are hurting. Let’s begin. Last year, creators of all sizes started noticing a significant change in the overall performance of their channels. Usually this is related to the overall behavior of audiences, however, this one felt different. It wasn’t just one or two channels, it was every single channel I was working on (and more). These are channels that pull 100 million to 1 billion views per month at times. At first, I was like: alright, let’s find out where we’re going wrong. Maybe we’re missing something. However, after weeks and months, no answers were found. This is very frustrating, not only for myself but also for the creators who are relying on these answers to maintain their channel, business and livelihood. But that’s when we made a breakthrough, a way of looking at data that we had missed. You see, this entire time we were analyzing the channel as a whole, new and old videos combined. However, we weren’t focused on isolating older content, specifically content with a publish date older than one month. That’s where, for the first time, we noticed something unusual. We saw a complete crash in short form views on content older than one month. (see image) What we found was that somewhere in the middle of September last year, YouTube had pushed a significant change in their short form algorithm which impacted nearly every short form creator across the platform. Why is this a problem? Because it affects every creator we all care about. It didn’t matter if you were a smaller creator or one of the top ten creators, we haven’t found many people who were spared. I’ll leave a brief explanation at the bottom so you can check your own channel. And these weren’t just entertainment or educational creators, it was both. What we found is that YouTube seems to have implemented a change that strongly prioritizes content uploaded in the last month, roughly 28 to 30 days, we’re still unsure. But what impact does this have, and why do I believe this is something that should be brought to light? The first impact is that we’re seeing a shift away from quality to quantity. Often, creators live off the revenue generated, not just Adsense, from these bigger content pieces. A strong portion of this revenue comes from their back catalog, meaning older content. With this change, you’re increasing the importance of high volume uploads in the first 30 days. What do I believe is happening, and why is this change going through? I believe there are two reasons why YouTube is pushing this change. First, to hit certain targets with Shorts. Plain simple, I don’t believe this is a “what’s best for the creator” type of play, it feels more like a “we want to compete with TikTok” type of play. Not unreasonable, even if the creator gets hurt by it short term. I’m just trying to think from a corporate point of view. The second reason, which I believe to be the actual leading reason, is a push for recency, freshness or novelty, whichever term they would choose to use. But if this is the reason, there’s a massive overcorrection happening. Some content needs that freshness: news, streaming highlights, medical information. However, this isn’t true for all types of content. Some content from years ago is just as good today. We have noticed that certain top content pieces, individual videos, still get a significant amount of views, so it looks more like prioritization than anything else. Regardless, while in private I find it fun to refer to this situation as “the flattening”, in reality this is a very concerning moment where simple ideas turn into a massive hit toward the creator economy. And this is just the tip of the iceberg of changes that have been affecting people. It’s important that changes on the platform aren’t just focused on the consumer, but the preservation of a healthy creator economy that allows creators to grow their business, teams, and create better content. Without a focus on both the creator and the consumer, you’ll quickly run into an issue of low quality slop that makes people want to go elsewhere. If there’s any call to action here for you, whether you’re a creator or a viewer, I strongly encourage you to leave your thoughts here to encourage YouTube to rethink this decision, or at least optimize it so that it’s also regarding the importance of keeping a healthy creator economy. Share your thoughts, and even data from your own channel, because this will be seen by people who have the power to make change. Disclaimer: I’ve left out some sensitive information. However, if you want to check this for yourself, go to Analytics, click on Advanced Mode, filter by Content Type (Shorts), filter by Publish Date (for example any short published from Jan 2025 to Jun 2025), set the data to Last 365 Days and take a look at the change happening around September last year. I think you can imagine why it took so long for us to find out where the issue began.
- Jul 30, 20266.7x their median
Alpha Clash. Video game. Incoming. https://t.co/OH2m6QljlX
- May 15, 20266.3x their median
Who wants in?! đź‘€ https://t.co/jWXVDRzcoj
- Feb 18, 20263.4x their median
One Piece singles for sale! Some have several available! Deals on multiple cards! https://t.co/gr3P3jrYKE
- Mar 1, 20243.0x their median
Presenting our CHAMPION card for the first Clashground event! https://t.co/tnd7JdCskA
- Jan 26, 20262.1x their median
Check out our Kickstarter for our new comic series! #comics https://t.co/Kf0NOvhNJ8
- Feb 9, 20261.9x their median
Scarab of Eternity is part of Ancient Alphas (Set 7)…dropping the week of February 23rd! Pre-order your boxes now #alphaclashtcg #ancientalphas #set7 https://t.co/5eqMFFT9Lc
- Aug 10, 20261.7x their median
Listed on my eBay! Hit me up here for 10% off! đź‘€ https://t.co/qvxvZTRAkO
- Sep 23, 2026
Cards for sale! Beedrill: $95 Koffing: $220 Gengar: $65 Mewtwo: $165 https://t.co/qE9F1EZQ1y
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 9 interactions against 329K followers, an engagement rate of 0.003%. Posts are seen about 4.5K times each, and 0.199% of those impressions turn into an interaction. That is about 1.37% of the follower count, which is the gap between an audience on paper and an audience in a timeline. Posting runs at about 0.03 posts a day over the last 30 days, though only 3% of days saw any activity at all. Most posts go out around 03:00 UTC, and Wednesday is the busiest day of the week. Of the 1 posts sampled, 100% carry an image or video. The account's strongest tracked post pulled 7.2K interactions, about 799x its own typical post. Only 1 original post 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 Josh Horton's engagement rate on X?
- Josh Horton (@JugglinJosh) has an engagement rate of 0.003%, based on the median interactions across 1 original posts from the last 30 days against 329,064 followers. Replies, reposts and quote-posts of other people are excluded from that sample.
- Is that a good engagement rate?
- At 0.003%, Josh Horton sits below the 10th percentile of the 205,374 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 @JugglinJosh have real engagement?
- There is not yet enough sample to rank this account against others of its size.
- When does @JugglinJosh post?
- Most posts go out around 03:00 UTC, and Wednesday is its busiest day, at roughly 0.03 posts per day across the measured window.