WWF engagement report

Where this sits in the catalog

At 0.004%, WWF sits above the 10th percentile of the 204,583 accounts in this comparison. That places it in the bottom 25% band, which runs below 0.024%.

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 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.

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.

• 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.
• 0% 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 274 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.

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.

Reading these numbers

A typical post picks up 154 interactions against 3.4M followers, an engagement rate of 0.004%. Posts are seen about 12K times each, and 1.34% of those impressions turn into an interaction. That is about 0.34% of the follower count, which is the gap between an audience on paper and an audience in a timeline. Posting runs at about 0.2 posts a day over the last 30 days, though only 20% of days saw any activity at all. Most posts go out around 09:00 UTC, and Sunday is the busiest day of the week. Of the 6 posts sampled, 100% carry an image or video. The account's strongest tracked post pulled 1.5K interactions, about 9.5x its own typical post. Recurring topics include #livingplanetreport, #lpr, #ourliving. Only 6 original posts have been captured so far, fewer than the 8 posts we want behind a median before treating it as settled. Read the figures above as an early measurement of this account, not as a finished profile of it.

What is WWF's engagement rate on X?

WWF (@WWF) has an engagement rate of 0.004%, based on the median interactions across 6 original posts from the last 30 days against 3,400,040 followers. Replies, reposts and quote-posts of other people are excluded from that sample.

Is that a good engagement rate?

At 0.004%, WWF sits above the 10th percentile of the 204,583 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 @WWF have real engagement?

There is not yet enough sample to rank this account against others of its size.

When does @WWF post?

Most posts go out around 09:00 UTC, and Sunday is its busiest day, at roughly 0.2 posts per day across the measured window.