Back to @WIREDScience's profile

WIRED Science engagement report

@WIREDScience - 1.8M followers on X

Measured over 121 original posts from a 30-day window, last computed on October 25, 2026.

Engagement

Bottom 10% for its size
Per follower
0%
of 1.8M followers
Per impression
0.08%
3.8K views on a typical post
Reach
0.21%
of its followers see a post
Typical post
3
interactions (median)
Saved
0%
0 bookmarks on a typical post
Posting rate
4.03/day
active 100% of days
Peak time
09:00 UTC
Wednesday

A typical post picks up 3 interactions against 1.8M followers, an engagement rate of 0%. Measured over 121 original posts, its engagement rate beats 3% 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 3.8K times each, and 0.08% of those impressions turn into an interaction. That is about 0.209% of the follower count, which is the gap between an audience on paper and an audience in a timeline. Posting runs at about 4 posts a day over the last 30 days, with activity on almost every day in the window. Most posts go out around 09:00 UTC, and Wednesday is the busiest day of the week. Of the 121 posts sampled, 100% link out. The account's strongest tracked post pulled 286 interactions, about 95x its own typical post.

Measured over 121 original posts from a 30-day window, last computed on October 25, 2026.

Compared with accounts its own size

WIRED Science's engagement rate beats 3% 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 5% 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 under 0.001%, WIRED Science 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 09:00 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: 09:00 UTC.
0003060912151821
Above the authors' own mediansBelowScale: plus or minus 111%Busiest hour: 09:00 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 video0% of posts+111%+108% to +115%34K
Outbound link100% of posts-41%-42% to -40%32K
Typical length--3%-3% to -2%54K
  • 0% 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 175 characters, which falls in the 80 - 180 characters band. Across the catalog, posts of 80 to 180 characters run 3% below 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

  • Mar 18, 202595x their median

    Welcome to WIRED Health 2025, where we will bring you the best insights from a fascinating array of speakers – from neurologists to biogerontologists, a former chief medical officer and an award-winning author. Follow #WIREDHealth for the latest. https://t.co/tXv2CCcjSi

    6220517297K viewsView on X
  • Aug 16, 20266.3x their median

    An object observed by the James Webb Space Telescope lends credence to a strange explanation for the mysterious red spots in the early universe. https://t.co/3D3euAr0vq

    1151211K viewsView on X
  • Sep 27, 20266.0x their median

    By deactivating a gene, researchers were able to cause cells in the pancreatic ducts to produce insulin to regulate blood sugar. https://t.co/YpLR6oyZ7B

    135008.0K viewsView on X
  • Aug 18, 20265.7x their median

    Proton’s CEO is a champion of encryption for everyone. So why is he going all in on un-encryptable AI? https://t.co/9DEbPrelKD

    124106.7K viewsView on X
  • Aug 10, 20265.3x their median

    Two-thirds of an octopus’s neurons are in its arms—each operating independently—including the one it uses to have sex. https://t.co/idPDYZM4ef

    1230110K viewsView on X
  • Oct 6, 20264.7x their median

    Bridge Neurotech is planning to build a wearable brain-computer interface that uses ultrasound. https://t.co/c5pNzHErla

    93206.9K viewsView on X
  • Oct 4, 20264.7x their median

    A global network of detectors are reporting some of the most substantial measurements yet of neutrinos created deep underground by the radioactive elements that power our planet’s tectonic activity. https://t.co/yqU8WYKPLd

    77008.0K viewsView on X
  • Sep 12, 20264.7x their median

    And if your tap water is undrinkable, you have no “constitutional right to truthful information” about it. https://t.co/v2apZx7NIG

    842010K viewsView on X
  • Aug 11, 20264.0x their median

    Mini human brains are being grown in labs all over the world. Soon, they could outthink neural networks. https://t.co/Yx3T4MFINC

    73116.6K viewsView on X
  • Oct 9, 20263.7x their median

    Brenden Cuni, an ICE supervisor, has been accused of excessive force and tackling a pregnant woman to the ground. Several of his arrests were later found to be unlawful in federal court. https://t.co/2eL7BYEDOo

    64104.2K 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 3 interactions against 1.8M followers, an engagement rate of 0%. Measured over 121 original posts, its engagement rate beats 3% 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 3.8K times each, and 0.08% of those impressions turn into an interaction. That is about 0.209% of the follower count, which is the gap between an audience on paper and an audience in a timeline. Posting runs at about 4 posts a day over the last 30 days, with activity on almost every day in the window. Most posts go out around 09:00 UTC, and Wednesday is the busiest day of the week. Of the 121 posts sampled, 100% link out. The account's strongest tracked post pulled 286 interactions, about 95x its own typical post.

What is WIRED Science's engagement rate on X?
WIRED Science (@WIREDScience) has an engagement rate of 0%, based on the median interactions across 121 original posts from the last 30 days against 1,805,507 followers. Replies, reposts and quote-posts of other people are excluded from that sample.
Is that a good engagement rate?
At under 0.001%, WIRED Science 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 @WIREDScience have real engagement?
Its engagement rate beats 3% 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 @WIREDScience post?
Most posts go out around 09:00 UTC, and Wednesday is its busiest day, at roughly 4.03 posts per day across the measured window.

Keep going