Arnaud Bertrand engagement report
@RnaudBertrand - 415K followers on X
Measured over 25 original posts from a 30-day window, last computed on September 27, 2026.
Engagement
A typical post picks up 858 interactions against 415K followers, an engagement rate of 0.208%. Measured over 25 original posts, its engagement rate beats 82% of 20,444 tracked accounts of a similar size. Comparing inside a size band matters here: engagement rate falls as accounts grow, so a raw rate would mostly just re-measure the follower count. Posts are seen about 113K times each, and 0.758% of those impressions turn into an interaction. That is about 27.3% of the follower count, which is the gap between an audience on paper and an audience in a timeline. Posting runs at about 5.5 posts a day over the last 30 days, with activity on roughly 77% of days. Most posts go out around 04:00 UTC, and Sunday is the busiest day of the week. Of the 25 posts sampled, 92% carry an image or video and 32% link out. The account's strongest tracked post pulled 14K interactions, about 16x its own typical post.
Measured over 25 original posts from a 30-day window, last computed on September 27, 2026. Recurring tag: #boom.
Compared with accounts its own size
Arnaud Bertrand's engagement rate beats 82% 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 40% 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 0.208%, Arnaud Bertrand sits above the 50th percentile of the 204,798 accounts in this comparison. That places it in the above the median band, which runs 0.143% to 0.678%.
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 04:00 UTC, and Sunday 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 | 92% of posts | +111% | +108% to +115% | 34K |
| Outbound link | 32% of posts | -41% | -42% to -40% | 32K |
| Typical length | - | +15% | +14% to +16% | 32K |
- 92% 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.
- 32% 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 873 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
- Sep 26, 202616x their median
🇺🇸🇨🇳 Elon Musk says "China has prospered immensely" under President Xi Jinping. "He seems like a great leader." https://t.co/f5cdPwvr0r
- Aug 27, 202615x their median
It is now clear that the Nepal disaster was caused by a natural trigger (cryospheric collapse) but amplified by Chinese hydrological modifications and infrastructure footprint along the Tibetan side of the border. In other words, China's upstream actions did not cause the glacier failure but contributed to the disaster's severity and cascading impacts downstream. Worse, despite a deepening relationship with Kathmandu, Beijing did not send an emergency notification to Nepal of sudden water-level spikes, debris-dam formation or other upstream anomalies. An immediate notification, by compelling authorities to evacuate vulnerable people, could have potentially reduced the death toll. Scientific studies have long warned that human alterations to rivers and mountain landscapes can exacerbate natural disasters.
- Aug 26, 202614x their median
As per initial report, a development project in China caused glacier to collapse in the Himalayas, which could trigger 10,000 deaths. https://t.co/nEk73tIAMR
- Aug 31, 202610x their median
If you can watch only one video to understand current geopolitics, make it this one by George Yeo, one of Singapore's longest-serving cabinet ministers (23 years!) As Yeo explains, current global geopolitics is fundamentally driven by US "retreat" and "decline", forced by a financial reality that no US administration can reverse: its debt servicing already exceeding its entire defense budget. To Yeo, this explains why the US insists so much that its "allies" in Europe and Asia spend more of their GDP on defense - to basically pick up the tab for an empire America can no longer afford - but it also means that, inevitably, "once your allies begin to have their own military capabilities, they will think differently, and they will not follow you in everything that you want to do." As such, American decline becomes self-reinforcing: the more it asks allies to carry their own weight, the less reason they have to follow its lead. Still, Yeo says that a similar dynamic to one that happened after the fall of Rome could occur where America - like Byzantium did - sheds its empire and consolidates around its own hemisphere, allowing it to remain self-sustaining and powerful for a very long time. He believes it's the direction things are heading - which would also explain Trump's obsession with Canada and Greenland. It remains however obviously an open question whether an American "Byzantium strategy" is even achievable: Canada, for one, clearly wants no part of it. Full video available here: https://t.co/99APyQjG3q
- Sep 2, 20267.0x their median
Wow. François Fillon, the 2nd longest serving Prime Minister in France's 5th republic, just said that "the most significant foreign interference" that Europe faces is "first and foremost, that of the Americans," and that "the Americans are constantly interfering in the organization of European countries." We all knew it, of course, but it's quite stunning for someone of Fillon's stature to say it out loud. Full transcript: "When I was Prime Minister [2007-2012], I already had the opportunity to say this: the most significant foreign interference was, first and foremost, that of the Americans. Here in our country, the Americans are of course constantly interfering in the organization of European countries, and in particular through a very insidious mechanism that allows them to sanction Western companies. That is how, for example, BNP was ordered to pay several billion in fines to America. That is how America can sanction a Western company like Airbus, for instance, to give an advantage to Boeing. So the most effective interference - and I'm not even talking about social media, about big tech which are all American, and so on - I'm speaking simply about the actions of the American government." Full interview here (from 2 days ago): https://t.co/adAGp5xTfs
- Aug 27, 20265.7x their median
An incredibly well-timed Landsat 9 pass captured the effects of yesterday’s catastrophic glacier collapse near the Nepal–Tibet border. The event was so massive that it was detected by seismometers around the world. https://t.co/COBTJXsiIb
- Sep 9, 20265.6x their median
If you really want to understand where the world is at and where it's going, you probably cannot get anything more meaningful than the OECD's PISA study - a global test given every 3 years to an insane 760,000 15-year-olds across 91 countries. No report globally, by any institution, better captures whether countries are building or squandering their future. The latest PISA results just came out yesterday (https://t.co/FbHx266LH4) and the results are genuinely fascinating, and in some way pretty depressing. Why depressing? Because, sadly, the numbers show that the world is getting dumber: as you can see on the first graph below 👇, since roughly 2012 scores in science, reading, and mathematics have been in continuous decline across OECD countries. The reading score is particularly concerning: it literally cratered, dropping 28 points since 2015, the equivalent of almost 1.5 years of schooling lost according to the report. To make matters even worse, the reading skill that's dropped the most across the board is precisely the one we most desperately need: the capacity to critically assess what you read, cross-reference sources, and tell signal from noise. On average, sadly, 15-year-old kids globally are - more and more - incapable of slowing down and actually thinking about what they're reading. Interestingly though, when you look into the details, this great "dumbing down" isn't across the board: it's overwhelmingly concentrated in wealthy Western countries, while many developing countries are actually getting significantly smarter. For instance rich countries like Finland, the Netherlands, and Norway are in freefall, while countries like Cambodia, Türkiye, and the UAE are posting big gains. To be clear, this doesn't mean that developing countries are now "smarter" than rich ones: save for one notable exception, that's still not the case. But they are catching up fast, both because rich countries are getting "dumber" and because they're themselves getting smarter. The one exception is, as you'd expect, the "smartest" of them all, by a huge margin: China. It is pretty much in a league of its own: just look at the ranking in the table (only kids in Beijing, Shanghai, Jiangsu and Zhejiang got tested - 4 regions covering 200 million people). China's maths results are particularly insane: according to the report, the best level in maths - level 5, where "top performers" begins - starts at 607. The AVERAGE kid in China is 612: "normal" Chinese kids are at a level that is considered elite in the rest of the world. In fact, and that's probably the funniest number in the entire report, look at the column called "Share of low performers in science, reading and mathematics": China is only at 1.8% 😅 Which means that only 1.8% of Chinese kids are rated as low performers in all 3 subjects, almost a rounding error. Even Singapore, the second best and generally considered best-in-class in education, is at 6.8% - almost 4 times worse. My country France, is at 21.3% - almost 12 times worse 😢 All of this - incidentally - dispels the common myth that there would be some kids who are just genetically beyond redemption and simply can't be taught: China proves that with the right system, virtually every child can reach proficiency. So what does this all say about the world and where it's going, besides the fact that, if the future belongs to those who can think, China has never been better positioned to own it? I think the more general picture is this: there is nothing inevitable about any country's trajectory. Finland was the world's education darling fifteen years ago - now it's in complete freefall (see the last graph 👇). Cambodia was at the bottom of every table - now it's posting the biggest gains ever recorded in the study. What changed wasn't the children: it's still Finnish kids (Finland has one of the lowest levels of immigration in the West), and it's still Cambodian kids. It also doesn't matter much - or at least it matters less - if a country is wealthy or not. For instance in Southeast Asia, both Malaysia and Indonesia - the 2 biggest ASEAN economies after Singapore - are faring very badly, while Thailand and Vietnam, both poorer, have better educated kids whose scores are continuing to improve. So that's the final takeaway: the kids don't change, they all have potential, always, as China's 1.8% proved. What does change is what adults decide to do with that potential. It's both hopeful - because it means any country can choose to turn things around at any time - and also sad given the results - because it means so many countries are choosing to fail their children.
- Sep 6, 20265.3x their median
This 👇 is insane and really illustrates how far France has fallen. France's Foreign Minister, Jean-Noël Barrot, now says that anyone "who is distrustful of the European Union" is basically a useful idiot for Putin. The implication being that distrust or criticism of the EU is not a legitimate democratic position anymore but a form of collaboration with "the enemy." Which is absolutely insane given France's recent history: De Gaulle was famously opposed to the very kind of supranational Europe that the EU has become, and so have been a number of major French political figures both on the right (like Philippe Séguin) or the left (like Jean-Pierre Chevènement). Not to mention the 55% of French voters who rejected the EU Constitution in 2005 (and whose vote was ignored because that very constitution was adopted later on regardless under the Treaty of Lisbon). In effect, by Barrot's criteria - heck, by the current French government criteria since he is speaking as the government's Foreign Minister - De Gaulle, Séguin, Chevènement and 55% of the French population would be classified as Russian agents 🤦 The craziest aspect of it, if you take a step back, is that, fundamentally, people like De Gaulle who opposed EU integration did so because they cared first and foremost about France - about its independence, its sovereignty, its right to govern itself. Calling that a form of foreign allegiance is just absurd and a complete inversion of reality: love of country and patriotism is being rebranded as treason. More worryingly, this also shows the current state of the "democratic debate" in France, which is neither democratic, nor a debate. Not democratic because this is the French government treating legitimate and reasonable positions as treason. And not a debate because there's nothing left to debate: the EU has become a dogma, and distrust of it has become disloyalty and taboo. One can legitimately be afraid that this is the road to a form of totalitarian ideology across Europe, dressed up as centrism, where the only acceptable position is unquestioning loyalty to supranational institutions whose defenders, tellingly, would rather question the patriotism of their critics than submit themselves to the verdict of the people.
- Sep 22, 20264.3x their median
This blew my mind: between 1403 and 1407, the Ming Dynasty emperor commissioned an encyclopedia - now called the Yongle encyclopedia, after the emperor - that was so vast in scale (around 400 million Chinese characters) that the only other encyclopedia that finally exceeded it was Wikipedia in 2007, 6 years after its launch! This is yet another example of West-centric our sense of intellectual history is: in French education we're taught that encyclopedias as a concept started with Diderot and d'Alembert's "Encyclopédie" in the mid-18th century, which we're told was the first attempt in history to gather all of human knowledge in one place. Not only was the Yongle encyclopedia completed 350 years earlier, and not only is it 20 times larger than L'Encyclopédie, but it was itself a very late entry in a Chinese tradition of encyclopedias which started with the Huanglan - more than 8 million characters in length - compiled around 220 AD (https://t.co/jlWoDrDzwa). Unfortunately much of the encyclopedia has been lost: out of the original 11,095 volumes, only around 400 are known to have survived (300-ish of which are in China). But we sometimes find new ones, like two volumes that surfaced in 2020 in the attic of a French family, descendants of a naval officer who had received them as a gift from corrupt Chinese officials in the 1870s. They went to auction in Paris with a starting price of 5,000 euros and sold for 8.12 million to a Chinese textile entrepreneur, Jin Liang, who donated them to China's National Archives of Publications this summer (https://t.co/2bRD4or98r).
- Sep 24, 20263.8x their median
🚨 India overtakes China in global AI talent, taking a 16% share versus China’s 12%. (Bain & Company) https://t.co/TQHZ9sO1yX
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.
Recurring topics
The most frequent hashtags in the sampled posts. They describe what this account writes about; they are not a performance signal, and the catalog-wide breakdown on the hub shows how little hashtag count moves.
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 858 interactions against 415K followers, an engagement rate of 0.208%. Measured over 25 original posts, its engagement rate beats 82% of 20,444 tracked accounts of a similar size. Comparing inside a size band matters here: engagement rate falls as accounts grow, so a raw rate would mostly just re-measure the follower count. Posts are seen about 113K times each, and 0.758% of those impressions turn into an interaction. That is about 27.3% of the follower count, which is the gap between an audience on paper and an audience in a timeline. Posting runs at about 5.5 posts a day over the last 30 days, with activity on roughly 77% of days. Most posts go out around 04:00 UTC, and Sunday is the busiest day of the week. Of the 25 posts sampled, 92% carry an image or video and 32% link out. The account's strongest tracked post pulled 14K interactions, about 16x its own typical post.
- What is Arnaud Bertrand's engagement rate on X?
- Arnaud Bertrand (@RnaudBertrand) has an engagement rate of 0.208%, based on the median interactions across 25 original posts from the last 30 days against 415,032 followers. Replies, reposts and quote-posts of other people are excluded from that sample.
- Is that a good engagement rate?
- At 0.208%, Arnaud Bertrand sits above the 50th percentile of the 204,798 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 @RnaudBertrand have real engagement?
- Its engagement rate beats 82% of the tracked X accounts closest to it in follower count (20,444 accounts), which puts it in the top 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 @RnaudBertrand post?
- Most posts go out around 04:00 UTC, and Sunday is its busiest day, at roughly 5.47 posts per day across the measured window.