Back to @RANDCorporation's profile

RAND engagement report

@RANDCorporation - 262K followers on X

Measured over 91 original posts from a 30-day window, last computed on September 24, 2026.

Engagement

Bottom quarter for its size
Per follower
0.003%
of 262K followers
Per impression
0.23%
3.9K views on a typical post
Reach
1.50%
of its followers see a post
Typical post
9
interactions (median)
Saved
0.051%
2 bookmarks on a typical post
Posting rate
3.23/day
active 103% of days
Peak time
13:00 UTC
Wednesday

A typical post picks up 9 interactions against 262K followers, an engagement rate of 0.003%. Measured over 91 original posts, its engagement rate beats 13% of 20,183 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 3.9K times each, and 0.23% of those impressions turn into an interaction. That is about 1.49% of the follower count, which is the gap between an audience on paper and an audience in a timeline. Posting runs at about 3.2 posts a day over the last 30 days, with activity on almost every day in the window. Most posts go out around 13:00 UTC, and Wednesday is the busiest day of the week. Of the 91 posts sampled, 99% link out. The account's strongest tracked post pulled 272 interactions, about 30x its own typical post.

Measured over 91 original posts from a 30-day window, last computed on September 24, 2026.

Compared with accounts its own size

RAND's engagement rate beats 13% of the tracked X accounts closest to it in follower count (20,183 accounts, accounts of similar size (decile 9 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 14% 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 0.003%, RAND sits below the 10th percentile of the 202,566 accounts in this comparison. That places it in the bottom 25% band, which runs below 0.024%.

p100.004%
p250.024%
p50 (median)0.142%
p750.673%
p902.54%
p9982.6%
Engagement rate as a share of followers, across the 202,566 accounts we have scanned enough to measure. The axis is logarithmic, because the top and bottom of this population are about 22,933 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 percentile0.142%
75th percentile0.673%
90th percentile2.54%
99th percentile82.6%

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 13:00 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.

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: 13:00 UTC.
0003060912151821
Above the authors' own mediansBelowScale: plus or minus 111%Busiest hour: 13:00 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: Wednesday.
SunMonTueWedThuFriSat
Above the authors' own mediansBelowScale: plus or minus 111%Busiest day: Wednesday
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 video1% of posts+111%+108% to +115%34K
Outbound link99% of posts-41%-42% to -40%32K
Typical length-no effect-2% to -1%42K
  • 1% 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.
  • 99% 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 210 characters, which falls in the 180 - 280 characters band. Across the catalog, posts of 180 to 280 characters match the same accounts' other posts almost exactly.

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

  • Sep 15, 202630x their median

    A U.S. Strategy for Superintelligence Leading U.S. AI companies are calling for pacing the frontier. Whether and how government should take action remains contested. In a new paper, RAND researchers outline a U.S. strategy for navigating an uncertain path to artificial superintelligence. The stakes are high—not only for geopolitics, but for humanity’s survival and agency. The authors assess seven archetypal strategies currently dominating the AI debate. Each has its own coherent win state, theory of victory, and structural weaknesses. They also identify key uncertainties that make it impossible to objectively rank these strategies. The authors argue that committing prematurely to any of these strategies forecloses options on the path to superintelligence. The same is true of succumbing to paralysis in the face of uncertainty. Given these dynamics, the authors recommend that the United States instead adopt a "Freedom of Action" strategy. This approach would build and preserve the capacity to pursue whichever strategy the evidence eventually comes to favor. That would mean investing in 1️⃣ building a human-AI ecosystem that preserves human survival and agency 2️⃣ an AI security architecture 3️⃣ adaptations of legacy national security enterprises for the AI era 4️⃣ the capacity of citizens, firms, and governments to respond. “The possible emergence of superintelligence is a strategic challenge without precedent,” the authors write. “Freedom of action is the guiding policy rather than the goal; the ends remain U.S. geopolitical advantage and humanity’s survival with agency, and preserving the capacity to choose is, under present uncertainty, the most reliable means of securing them.”

    2005411726K viewsView on X
  • Sep 19, 202619x their median

    New paper: Russian activities in Latin America create persistent challenges to U.S. influence. The most significant implications arise from the convergence of Russia's activities in the region with those of China and Iran. https://t.co/yxW4YJUxir

    104563514K viewsView on X
  • Sep 13, 20266.0x their median

    Russia's engagement in Latin America and the Caribbean has important implications for U.S. hemispheric interests. This new paper explores: https://t.co/hs9K4Tkho2

    3417128.1K viewsView on X
  • Sep 21, 20265.6x their median

    The transformative potential of superintelligence demands proactive strategy-making. This new paper outlines a U.S. approach that builds and preserves freedom of action to secure geopolitical advantage and ensure humanity's survival with agency. https://t.co/suCXcDVZVo

    3012627.6K viewsView on X
  • Sep 22, 20264.9x their median

    "The U.S. must lead humanity to build two things: (1) the foundations for an ecosystem in which advanced AI and humans with agency can coexist, and (2) a security architecture providing sufficient stability to build this ecosystem." https://t.co/xHmg9WVPXK

    368004.9K viewsView on X
  • Aug 27, 20264.1x their median

    Our report details a U.S. strategy to prevent the creation of mirror life—a new form of synthetic life—while there's still time. https://t.co/K9loDC5lBr

    249316.4K viewsView on X
  • Aug 24, 20263.8x their median

    "AI capabilities in biology are advancing really fast, but luckily most dangerous thresholds have not yet been crossed," says RAND's Steph Guerra. Given the nature of the threat, we need a "layered system of mutually reinforcing approaches" to defense. https://t.co/UGLhnaTph1

    21110212K viewsView on X
  • Sep 17, 20263.1x their median

    The potential emergence of superintelligence demands a proactive strategy for navigating uncertainty, say RAND experts. In a new paper, they recommend a path forward: https://t.co/3kKmEUaB70

    198104.1K viewsView on X
  • Sep 22, 20263.0x their median

    "Developing a resilient defensive strategy against the misuse of AI and biology requires dedicated resources, technological breakthroughs, and sustained political leadership." https://t.co/UH41Ld2taJ

    179013.6K viewsView on X
  • Aug 23, 20263.0x their median

    Once a viable mirror organism exists, the knowledge to reproduce and modify it could spread quickly, making containment impossible. The only reliable defense is prevention. https://t.co/9YBdtNm0xq

    179105.8K 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 9 interactions against 262K followers, an engagement rate of 0.003%. Measured over 91 original posts, its engagement rate beats 13% of 20,183 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 3.9K times each, and 0.23% of those impressions turn into an interaction. That is about 1.49% of the follower count, which is the gap between an audience on paper and an audience in a timeline. Posting runs at about 3.2 posts a day over the last 30 days, with activity on almost every day in the window. Most posts go out around 13:00 UTC, and Wednesday is the busiest day of the week. Of the 91 posts sampled, 99% link out. The account's strongest tracked post pulled 272 interactions, about 30x its own typical post.

What is RAND's engagement rate on X?
RAND (@RANDCorporation) has an engagement rate of 0.003%, based on the median interactions across 91 original posts from the last 30 days against 262,249 followers. Replies, reposts and quote-posts of other people are excluded from that sample.
Is that a good engagement rate?
At 0.003%, RAND sits below the 10th percentile of the 202,566 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 @RANDCorporation have real engagement?
Its engagement rate beats 13% of the tracked X accounts closest to it in follower count (20,183 accounts), which puts it in the bottom quarter 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 @RANDCorporation post?
Most posts go out around 13:00 UTC, and Wednesday is its busiest day, at roughly 3.23 posts per day across the measured window.

Keep going