Boris Cherny engagement report
@bcherny - 628K followers on X
Measured over 5 original posts from a 30-day window, last computed on October 12, 2026.
Engagement
Early reading. We have captured 5 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 3.3K interactions against 628K followers, an engagement rate of 0.546%. Posts are seen about 298K times each, and 1.10% of those impressions turn into an interaction. That is about 47.4% of the follower count, which is the gap between an audience on paper and an audience in a timeline. Posting runs at about 1.8 posts a day over the last 30 days, with activity on roughly 63% of days. Most posts go out around 17:00 UTC, and Monday is the busiest day of the week. Of the 5 posts sampled, 60% carry an image or video, 20% are part of a thread and 80% link out. The account's strongest tracked post pulled 24K interactions, about 7.8x its own typical post. Only 5 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 5 original posts from a 30-day window, last computed on October 12, 2026.
Where this sits in the catalog
At 0.546%, Boris Cherny sits above the 50th percentile of the 204,491 accounts in this comparison. That places it in the above the median band, which runs 0.143% to 0.677%.
Show the percentile table
| Percentile | Engagement rate |
|---|---|
| 10th percentile | 0.004% |
| 25th percentile | 0.024% |
| 50th percentile | 0.143% |
| 75th percentile | 0.677% |
| 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 Monday 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 | 60% of posts | +111% | +108% to +115% | 34K |
| Outbound link | 80% of posts | -41% | -42% to -40% | 32K |
| Typical length | - | no effect | -2% to -1% | 42K |
- 60% 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.
- 80% 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 184 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
- Jun 28, 20267.8x their median
As engineering, product, design, DS, etc. melt into a new kind of role, I was reflecting on what roles might look like in the future. For example, when I look at the Claude Code team I see what I think is five archetypes: 1. Prototyper: comes up with brand new ideas; churns out many ideas, most of which don't ship 2. Builder: quickly turns a prototype/idea into production-grade product/infra 3. Sweeper: cleans up the UI, simplifies the code and system, unships, optimizes performance 4. Grower: takes a product that has been built and iterates on it to improve Product-Market Fit 5. Maintainer: owns a mature system to make it secure, reliable, fast, and efficient as it scales Many people span across 2 roles, and sometimes 3 roles. I also notice that these roles are not really tied to job function -- eg. across Anthropic, some designers match category 1, some 2, some 3; same for engineers, PM, DS. A healthy team needs a mix of these, depending on the product: - A product that is new and pre-PMF needs people that are strong at 1+2+3 - A product that is growing and has found PMF needs 2+3+4 and some 5 - A product that has strong PMF needs 3+4+5 and some 2 Maybe product roles of the future will look more like this, and less like the domain-specific roles of today?
- Jul 8, 20264.3x their median
New in Claude Code: /checkup Run /checkup to: 1. Clean up unused skills/MCPs/plugins and save context 2. Dedup your local CLAUDE.md against the checked in CLAUDE.md 3. Break up root CLAUDE.md into nested CLAUDE.md's + skills 4. Turn off slow hooks 5. Update your Claude Code to the latest version 6. Enable auto mode by default 7. Pre-approve frequently denied read-only commands .. And a few other goodies. /checkup confirms with you before making any changes. Enjoy!
- Jul 17, 20263.6x their median
I talk to engineers at other companies every day and hear the same thing: one person is 10x'ing their output with Claude but the rest of the org hasn't caught up. Watching teams adopt AI, I keep seeing the same 4 steps. I mapped them out here: Steps of AI Adoption https://t.co/kQnRAUMKpP
- Jul 15, 20263.5x their median
Something I have been thinking about: in the past, the best engineers I knew spent a lot of time automating their work in various ways. Better vim/emacs automations, writing lint rules to catch repeat code issues, building up a suite of e2e tests so they don't need to smoke test the app manually. These kinds of things were the highest leverage activities an engineer could do, because it multiplied their own output, which in turn meant they could build more things. I think many of these automations have become even more important now. This is true for a number of reasons. First, infra and DevX automation speeds you up. And if you are running an army of agents, each of those agents will be sped up also. More automation == more output per unit of time. Second, moving things to code improves efficiency. Your agent could fix an issue every time it sees that issue happen, but that uses tokens and might miss cases. If Claude instead writes a lint rule, CI step, or routine, that class of issue can be fully automated forever. This is really what people are talking about when they talk about loops -- it's about automating entire types of busywork rather than solving them one off. This isn't a new idea at all. Engineers have been doing this for a long time! Third and most importantly, automation makes it possible for others to contribute to the codebase more easily. Increasingly what I am seeing is engineers are contributing to codebases on day one because Claude can navigate the codebase for them, and that non-engineers are able to contribute to a codebase as effectively as engineers can. What gets in the way of both of these is domain knowledge that lives in peoples' heads rather than in automation -- the stuff you used to have to learn when ramping up. What has changed thanks to agents is the domain knowledge that can be encoded as infrastructure is no longer limited to what is expressible in lint rules and types and tests; it can now capture nearly all domain knowledge, encoded as code comments and skills and CLAUDE.md rules and memories. If I put up a PR for an iOS codebase I don't know and a code reviewer rejects it because it doesn't use the right framework, or if a designer builds a new feature and it gets rejected because it doesn't follow the right architectural patterns, these are failures of automation. Every team should be writing the CLAUDE.md's, REVIEW.md's, skills, and docs that enable agents to productively work in their codebase with zero additional context from the prompter. This sounds crazy, and at the same time is a natural extension of the stuff engineers have always done: automate, and encode domain knowledge as infrastructure. As the model gets smarter and as the harness matures, this task becomes easier. In the meantime, it is on every team to look for ways to convert their domain knowledge to infra so that Claude can write code better, so that code review catches issues automatically, and so the next person working on your codebase can contribute more easily.
- Jun 29, 20263.6x their median
In the next version of Claude Code: subagents run in the background by default, so you can keep talking to Claude while your subagents work If you want your agent to run in the foreground, just tell Claude
- Jun 30, 20263.1x their median
Claude Desktop is now available on Linux (Ubuntu and Debian) in beta. Alongside the browser and terminal, you now get a first-class desktop experience with Claude Code, Claude Cowork, and chat on all paid plans. https://t.co/m0K9t198t4
- Aug 13, 20261.8x their median
A weird experiment I've been trying the last few weeks is having Claude take over day-to-day maintenance of our apps. Seeing early signs of life that this might be possible. The setup is straightforward: we have a Slack channel called proj-claude-maintains-apps. In it, Claude Tag runs a bunch of daily routines across iOS, Android, Desktop, web, CLI, and Agent SDK: - Crash fuzzer: open the app in a simulator and tap around to find ways to crash it, then root cause and fix the crashes - Dup unifier: scans the codebase for similar-yet-slightly-divergent abstractions, and puts up PRs to unify them - Dead-code remover: removes statically unreachable code, and adds logging to suspected dead code to check if it's really dead and if so, remove it the next day - Abstraction police: fixes leaky abstractions - a bunch more.. Results have been surprisingly positive. Over the last few weeks, these routines have opened 388 PRs across our repos, 180 of which we merged after Claude Code Review + human review. We're now thinking about how to streamline this to make merging these kinds of mechanical changes easier. Claude generally gets these PRs right on the first shot, and if it doesn't, we ask Claude to tune its routines so it's better the next day. Sometimes it takes a few days of tuning. To try a similar workflow, ask Claude Code or Tag, or create some routines directly at https://t.co/Z70hStEBH6. A few of the actual prompts I used below. Has anyone experimented with similar workflows?
- Dec 29, 20251.6x their median
I'm hearing from many folks across finance industry that Claude for Excel is blowing their minds. The agentic coding takeoff but for other fields is coming in 2026.
- Sep 3, 2026
We're exploring a new way to let you extend and customize Claude Code: Function Hooks. Here's a couple videos showing what you'd be able to do. It hasn't shipped yet, we'd love feedback on this on our GitHub issue. https://t.co/0F3kBO3kjl
- Sep 11, 2026
Every day, I get a lot of of emails and messages like this one. I try to respond to as many as I can. Sharing my response below, for anyone else in a similar situation. What do you think? https://t.co/z1GtgK14RM
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 3.3K interactions against 628K followers, an engagement rate of 0.546%. Posts are seen about 298K times each, and 1.10% of those impressions turn into an interaction. That is about 47.4% of the follower count, which is the gap between an audience on paper and an audience in a timeline. Posting runs at about 1.8 posts a day over the last 30 days, with activity on roughly 63% of days. Most posts go out around 17:00 UTC, and Monday is the busiest day of the week. Of the 5 posts sampled, 60% carry an image or video, 20% are part of a thread and 80% link out. The account's strongest tracked post pulled 24K interactions, about 7.8x its own typical post. Only 5 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 Boris Cherny's engagement rate on X?
- Boris Cherny (@bcherny) has an engagement rate of 0.546%, based on the median interactions across 5 original posts from the last 30 days against 628,402 followers. Replies, reposts and quote-posts of other people are excluded from that sample.
- Is that a good engagement rate?
- At 0.546%, Boris Cherny sits above the 50th 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 @bcherny have real engagement?
- There is not yet enough sample to rank this account against others of its size.
- When does @bcherny post?
- Most posts go out around 17:00 UTC, and Monday is its busiest day, at roughly 1.83 posts per day across the measured window.