Moz engagement report
@Moz - 528K followers on X
Measured over 18 original posts from a 30-day window, last computed on October 16, 2026.
Engagement
A typical post picks up 4 interactions against 528K followers, an engagement rate of 0.001%. Measured over 18 original posts, its engagement rate beats 9% of 20,444 tracked accounts of a similar size. That is a reason to look at how the audience behaves - reply depth, saves, whether the followers are recent - rather than a conclusion about it on its own. Posts are seen about 2.2K times each, and 0.161% of those impressions turn into an interaction. That is about 0.412% of the follower count, which is the gap between an audience on paper and an audience in a timeline. Posting runs at about 0.63 post a day over the last 30 days, though only 37% of days saw any activity at all. Most posts go out around 15:00 UTC, and Tuesday is the busiest day of the week. Of the 18 posts sampled, 44% carry an image or video and 72% link out. The account's strongest tracked post pulled 77 interactions, about 19x its own typical post.
Measured over 18 original posts from a 30-day window, last computed on October 16, 2026.
Compared with accounts its own size
Moz's engagement rate beats 9% of the tracked X accounts closest to it in follower count (20,444 accounts, accounts of similar size (decile 10 of 10)). A percentile is spread evenly by construction, so 50 really is the middle of that group and 90 really is its top tenth.
On engagement per impression rather than per follower it beats 11% of the same group. When those two numbers disagree, the gap is about how far its posts travel rather than how people react to them.
Where this sits in the catalog
At 0.001%, Moz sits below the 10th percentile of the 205,676 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 | 0.679% |
| 90th percentile | 2.56% |
| 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 15:00 UTC, and Tuesday 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 | 44% of posts | +111% | +108% to +115% | 34K |
| Outbound link | 72% of posts | -41% | -42% to -40% | 32K |
| Typical length | - | +15% | +14% to +16% | 32K |
- 44% 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.
- 72% of its posts carry a link off X. Across the catalog, posts with an outbound link run 41% below the same accounts' other posts, so a large share of this account's output sits in the weakest bucket we measure.
- Its average post runs 284 characters, which falls in the over 280 characters band. Across the catalog, posts over 280 characters run 15% above 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
- Jul 21, 202619x their median
Here is the really hard part about SEO... when client feature pages are going to zero and you have to explain why. The default thinking is accusatory. THE SEO TEAM MUST HAVE DONE SOMETHING WRONG! But no... Google is simply rewarding other types of websites and pages. In this example, the buyer intent has shifted to downmarket / SMB / free tracking tools instead of more complex platform solutions. We used to be able to capture demand in this field with "one-off" feature pages linked from the footer. Today, we cannot beat the cheap free time tracking competitors with their homepage theme specifically going after employee time tracking.
- Aug 26, 202612x their median
Does schema markup actually improve your rank in search engines? In a 10-week controlled study @hundleyjake looked 29 local business websites, with all other SEO efforts paused, to isolate the direct effect of LocalBusiness schema markup. Key findings: 🔹 Google Ranking Impact: 0% direct effect on organic SERP positions. 🔹 Search Visibility: The control group without schema performed equally well or better on average. True Value: Schema is essential for rich snippet eligibility (like job posts and products) and providing clean entity context. Treat schema as a tool for user experience and clarity, not as a standalone ranking tactic. Learn how to effectively align structured data with your broader search strategy on the Moz Blog. https://t.co/PUyChn2PlX
- Aug 26, 20265.8x their median
What Is WebMCP? How to Prepare Your Website to Serve AI Agents, by Matt Hollingshead https://t.co/rqU9xeN4Ym
- Aug 21, 20264.8x their median
How does Google expand a single query? 10 ways, actually. In this popular Whiteboard Friday, Tom Capper breaks down all 10 fan-out types you need for better prompt research. https://t.co/Aib9ZJDuyS https://t.co/mVRgIousuJ
- Aug 4, 20264.8x their median
Does schema markup actually improve your rank in search engines? In a 10-week controlled study Jake Hundley looked 29 local business websites, with all other SEO efforts paused to isolate the direct effect of LocalBusiness schema markup. Key findings: 🔹 Google Ranking Impact: 0% direct effect on organic SERP positions. 🔹 Search Visibility: The control group without schema performed equally well or better on average. True Value: Schema is essential for rich snippet eligibility (like job posts and products) and providing clean entity context. Treat schema as a tool for user experience and clarity, not as a standalone ranking tactic. Learn how to effectively align structured data with your broader search strategy on the Moz Blog. https://t.co/LfAIPbMRRk
- Sep 4, 20264.5x their median
Just two query fan-out types accounted for 97% of brand mentions. Can you guess what they are? Read more on the Moz Blog https://t.co/vbiqt7oGRx
- Jul 23, 20264.5x their median
This is what the "TikTokification" of search looks like. @miknaraujo https://t.co/pNxgSliqm2 https://t.co/MLi3D8GNQ1
- Sep 9, 20264.3x their median
"The surface area of search as a marketing activity has gotten a lot larger... Suddenly, how you appear on Reddit, Wikipedia, YouTube, review sites, and local news directly impacts what AI tools tell your customers." Tom Capper, Director of Search Product Strategy at Moz, in conversation with @genemarks in this new @Paychex Thrive interview. https://t.co/zPXNYq5Dtj
- Jul 17, 20262.1x their median
AI citation building is the strategic process of ensuring your brand is referenced in AI-generated answers. In this Whiteboard Friday, Charlie Marchant explains how to move from being unknown to a primary source by: - Researching the specific prompts your customers use. - Analyzing the publications and URLs AI platforms frequently cite. - Outreaching for brand mentions in the context that matters most. Is your brand being cited? https://t.co/N5XgvXzxCb
- Sep 1, 20264.0x their median
What Is WebMCP? How to Prepare Your Website to Serve AI Agents, by Matt Hollingshead on the Moz blog ✨ https://t.co/tgoAO8kqWo https://t.co/ocIs5DQOCL
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 4 interactions against 528K followers, an engagement rate of 0.001%. Measured over 18 original posts, its engagement rate beats 9% of 20,444 tracked accounts of a similar size. That is a reason to look at how the audience behaves - reply depth, saves, whether the followers are recent - rather than a conclusion about it on its own. Posts are seen about 2.2K times each, and 0.161% of those impressions turn into an interaction. That is about 0.412% of the follower count, which is the gap between an audience on paper and an audience in a timeline. Posting runs at about 0.63 post a day over the last 30 days, though only 37% of days saw any activity at all. Most posts go out around 15:00 UTC, and Tuesday is the busiest day of the week. Of the 18 posts sampled, 44% carry an image or video and 72% link out. The account's strongest tracked post pulled 77 interactions, about 19x its own typical post.
- What is Moz's engagement rate on X?
- Moz (@Moz) has an engagement rate of 0.001%, based on the median interactions across 18 original posts from the last 30 days against 528,469 followers. Replies, reposts and quote-posts of other people are excluded from that sample.
- Is that a good engagement rate?
- At 0.001%, Moz sits below the 10th percentile of the 205,676 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 @Moz have real engagement?
- Its engagement rate beats 9% of the tracked X accounts closest to it in follower count (20,444 accounts), which puts it in the bottom 10% for its size group. Ranking inside a size band matters because engagement rate falls as accounts grow, so a raw rate would mostly re-measure the follower count. It is a starting point for a look at follower quality, not a verdict on it.
- When does @Moz post?
- Most posts go out around 15:00 UTC, and Tuesday is its busiest day, at roughly 0.63 posts per day across the measured window.