Back to @ScienceMagazine's profile

Science Magazine engagement report

@ScienceMagazine - 4.8M followers on X

Measured over 210 original posts from a 30-day window, last computed on October 26, 2026.

Engagement

Bottom quarter for its size
Per follower
0.002%
of 4.8M followers
Per impression
0.411%
26K views on a typical post
Reach
0.53%
of its followers see a post
Typical post
105
interactions (median)
Saved
0.069%
18 bookmarks on a typical post
Posting rate
8.57/day
active 100% of days
Peak time
18:00 UTC
Friday

A typical post picks up 105 interactions against 4.8M followers, an engagement rate of 0.002%. Measured over 210 original posts, its engagement rate beats 17% 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 26K times each, and 0.411% of those impressions turn into an interaction. That is about 0.534% of the follower count, which is the gap between an audience on paper and an audience in a timeline. Posting runs at about 8.6 posts a day over the last 30 days, with activity on almost every day in the window. Most posts go out around 18:00 UTC, and Friday is the busiest day of the week. Of the 210 posts sampled, 100% carry an image or video and 100% link out. The account's strongest tracked post pulled 13K interactions, about 125x its own typical post. Recurring topics include #sciencepodcast, #sciencereview, #scienceperspective.

Measured over 210 original posts from a 30-day window, last computed on October 26, 2026. Recurring tags: #sciencepodcast, #sciencereview, #scienceperspective.

Compared with accounts its own size

Science Magazine's engagement rate beats 17% 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 27% 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 0.002%, Science Magazine sits below the 10th percentile of the 204,491 accounts in this comparison. That places it in the bottom 25% band, which runs below 0.024%.

p100.004%
p250.024%
p50 (median)0.143%
p750.677%
p902.55%
p9982.4%
Engagement rate as a share of followers, across the 204,491 accounts we have scanned enough to measure. The axis is logarithmic, because the top and bottom of this population are about 22,891 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 percentile0.143%
75th percentile0.677%
90th percentile2.55%
99th percentile82.4%

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 18:00 UTC, and Friday 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: 18:00 UTC.
0003060912151821
Above the authors' own mediansBelowScale: plus or minus 111%Busiest hour: 18:00 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: Friday.
SunMonTueWedThuFriSat
Above the authors' own mediansBelowScale: plus or minus 111%Busiest day: Friday
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 video100% of posts+111%+108% to +115%34K
Outbound link100% of posts-41%-42% to -40%32K
Typical length-+15%+14% to +16%32K
  • 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.
  • 100% 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 323 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 19, 2026125x their median

    Deepfakes are everywhere, but digital forensics investigators are fighting back. Learn more: https://t.co/CYfOYl3Sby @NewsfromScience https://t.co/0bxVN5rIIF

    12K1.2K701374.3M viewsView on X
  • Oct 16, 202659x their median

    Researchers in @ScienceAdvances have demonstrated that brief physical contact between healthy and bleached coral can restore algae to the bleached coral, leading to their full recovery. https://t.co/xennKZbdW0 https://t.co/kPh250aWap

    5.0K98856139224K viewsView on X
  • Aug 15, 202623x their median

    Between June 2024 and January 2025, a full 62% of commercial honey bee colonies in the United States died, according to an extensive survey.⁠ ⁠ As soon as scientists at the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) caught wind of the die-offs, they sprang into action—but their efforts were slowed by a series of federal funding cuts and layoffs. 6 months later, USDA scientists finally identified a culprit.⁠ ⁠ According to a preprint posted last June, nearly all the dead colonies tested positive for bee viruses spread by parasitic mites. Alarmingly, every single one of the mites the researchers screened was resistant to amitraz, the only viable mite-specific pesticide—or miticide—of its kind left in humans’ arsenal.⁠ ⁠ Tracking the rise of miticide resistance is critical, experts say. Honey bees pollinate more than 90 commercial crops in the U.S., generate between $20 billion and $30 billion in agricultural revenue, and play a key role in keeping the U.S. food supply stable.⁠ Learn more on #NationalHoneyBeeDay: https://t.co/0EOulEPmAL

    1.6K6795770196K viewsView on X
  • Oct 4, 202622x their median

    A species of lungfish found in South America has claimed the title of the animal with the biggest genome sequenced so far. The DNA of Lepidosiren paradoxa comprises a staggering 91 billion chemical letters or “bases,” 30 times as many as the human genome, researchers reported in 2024. However, those 91 billion bases of DNA only contain about the same number of genes that humans have—roughly 20,000—with the rest consisting of noncoding, perhaps even “junk” DNA. By comparing this genome with those of other lungfishes, the researchers determined that L. paradoxa adds the equivalent of a human genome to its DNA every 10 million years. Learn more on #WorldAnimalDay: https://t.co/QekhKNSOzY

    1.8K3834073238K viewsView on X
  • Oct 14, 202617x their median

    A Spinosaurus species uncovered in northern Niger appears to have been a wading predator of fish like its close relatives, but it lived as many as 1000 kilometers inland from the Tethys Sea. The fossil find may represent a third phase of evolution for this group of massive, fish-eating dinosaurs. Learn more on #NationalFossilDay: https://t.co/VeNZ7Vktix

    1.5K2121510155K viewsView on X
  • Aug 22, 202614x their median

    In July 2023, researchers on a whale watching expedition in the Caribbean Sea encountered an unusual scene: 11 sperm whales clustered tightly at the water’s surface. The animals began to inch closer and closer together in the waters off the island of Dominica, with their attention turned to one individual, until a burst of blood tinted the water. At first, the scientists—part of @ProjectCETI, a nonprofit that studies how sperm whales interact—thought the animal had been attacked. But then they saw a tiny tail pop out of the water. The researchers quickly realized they had in fact observed a group of whales helping a calf take its first breath. Even more fortuitous, they had captured it on video from a drone. Read more: https://t.co/eeuiQfmriB @NewsfromScience

    1.3K177329140K viewsView on X
  • Oct 1, 202614x their median

    Historically, medical research has relied heavily on male participants, with findings often generalized to women and children. If women’s health is discussed at all, it’s largely framed around reproduction. This special issue of Science highlights the research that is seeking to close the critical gaps in women’s health. Learn more: https://t.co/MQDsxJ4dUq

    992435373897K viewsView on X
  • Sep 7, 202612x their median

    A psychedelic compound best known for its effects on the brain may help prevent one of chemotherapy's most debilitating side effects—chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy, researchers report in Science. In mouse models, as few as two doses of psilocybin given before treatment durably prevented CIPN through multiple cycles of chemotherapy, while preserving both nerve function and the therapies’ tumor-killing effects. 📄: https://t.co/rGxIJQdVVU #SciencePerspective: https://t.co/UX1kCc3tWe

    954228162285K viewsView on X
  • Sep 4, 202611x their median

    The creamy fruit and nectar-rich flowers of the milk fruit tree are irresistible to Xenohyla truncata, a tree frog native to Brazil. ⁠ ⁠ On warm nights, the dusky-colored frogs take to the trees en masse, jostling one another for a chance to nibble the fruit and slurp the nectar. In the process, the frogs become covered in sticky pollen grains—and might inadvertently pollinate the plants, too. It’s the first time a frog—or any amphibian—has been observed pollinating a plant, researchers reported in 2023.⁠ ⁠ Learn more on #NationalWildlifeDay: https://t.co/lu6FbqUmw6

    969189121154K viewsView on X
  • Oct 4, 202611x their median

    A recent analysis in Science of more than 116,000 bird songs has revealed that the astonishing variety of passerine birdsong is built from just eight basic acoustic motifs, like trills, whistles, and harmonic notes. The findings also reveal that local environments greatly shape how birds communicate around the world. Learn more on #WorldAnimalDay: https://t.co/3oaQ0sKQfJ

    869262121672K 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.

Recurring topics

#sciencepodcast#sciencereview#scienceperspective#scienceworkinglife#immunology

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 105 interactions against 4.8M followers, an engagement rate of 0.002%. Measured over 210 original posts, its engagement rate beats 17% 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 26K times each, and 0.411% of those impressions turn into an interaction. That is about 0.534% of the follower count, which is the gap between an audience on paper and an audience in a timeline. Posting runs at about 8.6 posts a day over the last 30 days, with activity on almost every day in the window. Most posts go out around 18:00 UTC, and Friday is the busiest day of the week. Of the 210 posts sampled, 100% carry an image or video and 100% link out. The account's strongest tracked post pulled 13K interactions, about 125x its own typical post. Recurring topics include #sciencepodcast, #sciencereview, #scienceperspective.

What is Science Magazine's engagement rate on X?
Science Magazine (@ScienceMagazine) has an engagement rate of 0.002%, based on the median interactions across 210 original posts from the last 30 days against 4,786,568 followers. Replies, reposts and quote-posts of other people are excluded from that sample.
Is that a good engagement rate?
At 0.002%, Science Magazine sits below the 10th percentile of the 204,491 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 @ScienceMagazine have real engagement?
Its engagement rate beats 17% of the tracked X accounts closest to it in follower count (20,444 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 @ScienceMagazine post?
Most posts go out around 18:00 UTC, and Friday is its busiest day, at roughly 8.57 posts per day across the measured window.

Keep going