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
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%.
Show the percentile table
| Percentile | Engagement rate |
|---|---|
| 10th percentile | 0.004% |
| 25th percentile | 0.024% |
| 50th percentile | 0.142% |
| 75th percentile | 0.673% |
| 90th percentile | 2.54% |
| 99th percentile | 82.6% |
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.
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 | 1% of posts | +111% | +108% to +115% | 34K |
| Outbound link | 99% 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.”
- 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
- 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
- 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
- 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
- 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
- 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
- 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
- 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
- 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
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.