Anders Åslund engagement report
@anders_aslund - 331K followers on X
Measured over 3 original posts from a 30-day window, last computed on September 15, 2026.
Engagement
Early reading. We have captured 3 original posts for this account, below the 8 we require before treating a median as settled. The numbers above describe what we have seen so far, not a finished profile of the account.
A typical post picks up 299 interactions against 331K followers, an engagement rate of 0.09%. Posts are seen about 18K times each, and 1.70% of those impressions turn into an interaction. That is about 5.31% of the follower count, which is the gap between an audience on paper and an audience in a timeline. Posting runs at about 0.17 posts a day over the last 30 days, though only 10% of days saw any activity at all. Most posts go out around 17:00 UTC, and Sunday is the busiest day of the week. Of the 3 posts sampled, 100% link out. The account's strongest tracked post pulled 38K interactions, about 128x its own typical post. Only 3 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.
Measured over 3 original posts from a 30-day window, last computed on September 15, 2026.
Where this sits in the catalog
At 0.09%, Anders Åslund sits above the 25th percentile of the 204,956 accounts in this comparison. That places it in the below the median band, which runs 0.024% to 0.143%.
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 17:00 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 | 0% of posts | +111% | +108% to +115% | 34K |
| Outbound link | 100% of posts | -41% | -42% to -40% | 32K |
| Typical length | - | no effect | -2% to -1% | 42K |
- 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 219 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
- Jul 28, 2026128x their median
BREAKING 🚨: oh my goodness -- Ted Lieu played Rubio a video of Trump sleeping while Rubio tried to talk to him during a cabinet meeting. Then this exchange happened: RUBIO: I've never seen him fall asleep LIEU: I'm gonna show you a video that shows you just lied to Congress https://t.co/cCtV9UDazX
- Aug 9, 202670x their median
Periodista: "Señor presidente, ¿por qué esperar a que el Congreso publique los archivos de Epstein? ¿Por qué no hacerlo ahora mismo?" Trump: "Sabe, no es la pregunta lo que me molesta, es su actitud. Creo que usted es una reportera terrible. Es la forma en que hace estas preguntas. Empieza abordando a un hombre muy respetado para hacerle una pregunta horrible, insubordinada y simplemente pésima. Podría haber hecho esa misma pregunta de manera educada. Están todos exaltados, alguien los predispone desde ABC, los van a predisponer... Es una persona terrible y una reportera terrible. En cuanto a los archivos de Epstein, no tengo nada que ver con Jeffrey Epstein..." Para no decir por qué no abre los archivos, Trump se toma uno de esos largos desvíos a los que ya nos tiene acostumbrados. Pasa por el tono de la pregunta, los modales, ABC y la calidad profesional de la periodista. Incluso la llama “insubordinada”, como si trabajara para él. Al final llega al único lugar al que nadie lo había mandado y suelta un “no tengo nada que ver con Jeffrey Epstein”. Ella no le había preguntado eso. Trump tuvo que inventarse una pregunta para poder responder algo. La escena está dirigida, además, al resto de los periodistas. Trump trabaja sobre la próxima pregunta. Los insultos, la pérdida de acceso, las demandas y las amenazas contra el medio van marcando hasta dónde conviene llegar. Si el próximo corresponsal mide el tono antes de abrir la boca, la estrategia ya funcionó. Los archivos, por supuesto, siguen cerrados. Trump agrede a toda la prensa, pero con las mujeres suele reservarse una humillación más personal. Les cuestiona el cuerpo, la cara, la voz, los modales y hasta si sonríen. El matón siempre elige cuidadosamente con quién hacerse el valiente. Dios, qué decadencia. Presidentes, gobernadores e intendentes que se hacen los malos y no pueden hacer una O con un vaso.
- Aug 1, 202645x their median
BREAKING: The New York Times is reporting that at least seven states have had their water infrastructure targeted by Iranian cyberattacks. Yesterday, Trump baselessly blamed Minnesota for the attack instead of Iran because he doesn’t like Tim Walz. https://t.co/mU2dcQUGRY
- Aug 13, 202639x their median
🚨 BREAKING: As of July 17, 2026, Donald Trump had made 85,654 false statements during his presidency, averaging approximately 169 lies per day. https://t.co/irtxsfTsgE
- Aug 2, 202639x their median
In March of last year Donald Trump sued Capital One for closing over 300 of the Trump Organization’s bank accounts in 2021. Trump and his sons claimed it was political. Capital One Financial hit back on Friday this week. In court filings they stated that they closed the accounts after a review by anti-money laundering experts. In their filing Capital One stated “documents and Plaintiffs’ own allegations make clear that Capital One closed Plaintiffs’ accounts for anti-money laundering (“AML”) reasons. The closures were the result of months of analysis and a careful review by Capital One’s AML team in accordance with bank policies and regulatory guidance.” This should be a surprise to no one. Donald Trump has been laundering money for years for Russian and Chinese entities and his hotel in Panama is known as Narco-a-lago after a Global Witness investigation revealed that Trump had made millions laundering money for Colombian drug cartels through the property. #truth #news #america #President #UnitedStates #governmentplaylist
- Aug 7, 202637x their median
$4 BILLION. That’s how much the Trump Administration has now spent paying companies to cancel offshore wind projects that would have lowered your electric bill. Yes, you heard that right: they are PAYING to keep more energy off the grid and your bills higher. The latest deal hands a foreign energy company $1.2 billion to abandon offshore wind projects off New York, California, and Louisiana. And we've seen them pull this scam before. They paid a company nearly $1 billion to invest in gas projects, and it turned out the company was already planning to make those investments anyway. Trump got nothing for you in return. He hates wind power so much that he has now spent nearly $4 billion of your money making it disappear. Twelve leases canceled, billions of taxpayer dollars gone, and power for millions of homes wiped away just like that. You’re paying for this twice: once when the government spends your tax dollars to block the cheapest energy available, and again on your electric bill when utilities have no choice but to keep running expensive coal instead. https://t.co/t2Z2DpbNDZ
- Aug 12, 202631x their median
Trump’s decided to keep the National Guard deployed in DC until January 2029. Guess how much it’ll cost? $200 million? $500 million? Not even close, it’ll cost roughly $1.4 BILLION. And that’s all taxpayer money being spent. https://t.co/YrKvGk0MW2
- Aug 16, 202624x their median
BREAKING: Frustration with Trump is growing across the Persian Gulf, where U.S. allies are increasingly concerned he can’t manage the diplomacy needed to end the war with Iran, according to The Washington Post. Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Qatar, Kuwait and Bahrain are reportedly increasingly frustrated with Trump after months of conflict and continued Iranian missile and drone strikes. Trump has repeatedly threatened Iran, only to back off and cite progress in talks. Some Gulf countries are now even questioning whether they should continue hosting large U.S. military bases. “Trump started this war,” one Gulf official said, “and we are paying the price.”
- Aug 7, 202620x their median
The US war on Iran is presumably the most stupid war in US history: 1. Trump started it for no good reason, whether to detract from the Epstein files or because he was carried away by Netanyahu. It was a lose-lose war & remains so. 2. Apart from wishful thinking that the Iranian regime would collapse, Trump had no strategy. When the regime did not collapse, Trump had lost. 3. The US has effectively given Iran control of the Strait of Hormus. 4. The US has facilitated Iran's acquisition of nuclear arms out of sheer stupidity. 5. With incredible thoughtlessness, the US has wasted on minor targets its most expensive & important missiles, Tomahawks and Patriots, which cannot be replaced for years. 6. Through its attack on Iran, then US has exposed its Gulf allies & its own bases in the region with little defense. 7. Through his outrageous & unjustified attacks on European allies, Trump has weakened whatever remains of the Western alliance. Is there any greater enemy of the Western alliance than Trump?
- Aug 9, 202620x their median
How can anybody support Trump given all that we know about him? Are there really that many morally rotten Americans?
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 299 interactions against 331K followers, an engagement rate of 0.09%. Posts are seen about 18K times each, and 1.70% of those impressions turn into an interaction. That is about 5.31% of the follower count, which is the gap between an audience on paper and an audience in a timeline. Posting runs at about 0.17 posts a day over the last 30 days, though only 10% of days saw any activity at all. Most posts go out around 17:00 UTC, and Sunday is the busiest day of the week. Of the 3 posts sampled, 100% link out. The account's strongest tracked post pulled 38K interactions, about 128x its own typical post. Only 3 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 Anders Åslund's engagement rate on X?
- Anders Åslund (@anders_aslund) has an engagement rate of 0.09%, based on the median interactions across 3 original posts from the last 30 days against 331,003 followers. Replies, reposts and quote-posts of other people are excluded from that sample.
- Is that a good engagement rate?
- At 0.09%, Anders Åslund sits above the 25th percentile of the 204,956 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 @anders_aslund have real engagement?
- There is not yet enough sample to rank this account against others of its size.
- When does @anders_aslund post?
- Most posts go out around 17:00 UTC, and Sunday is its busiest day, at roughly 0.17 posts per day across the measured window.