Back to @ionet's profile

io.net engagement report

@ionet - 434K followers on X

Measured over 32 original posts from a 30-day window, last computed on August 30, 2026.

Engagement

Middle of its size range
Per follower
0.038%
of 434K followers
Per impression
1.17%
14K views on a typical post
Reach
3.26%
of its followers see a post
Typical post
165
interactions (median)
Saved
0.021%
3 bookmarks on a typical post
Posting rate
1.67/day
active 87% of days
Peak time
09:00 UTC
Monday

A typical post picks up 165 interactions against 434K followers, an engagement rate of 0.038%. Measured over 32 original posts, its engagement rate beats 52% of 3,774 tracked accounts of a similar size, which puts it in the middle of its size range rather than at either end. Posts are seen about 14K times each, and 1.17% of those impressions turn into an interaction. That is about 3.26% of the follower count, which is the gap between an audience on paper and an audience in a timeline. Posting runs at about 1.7 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 Monday is the busiest day of the week. Of the 32 posts sampled, 66% carry an image or video, 38% are part of a thread and 78% link out. The account's strongest tracked post pulled 914 interactions, about 5.5x its own typical post.

Measured over 32 original posts from a 30-day window, last computed on August 30, 2026.

Compared with accounts its own size

io.net's engagement rate beats 52% of the tracked X accounts closest to it in follower count (3,774 accounts, accounts of similar size (decile 7 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 55% 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 0.038%, io.net sits above the 25th percentile of the 36,654 accounts in this comparison. That places it in the below the median band, which runs 0.012% to 0.08%.

p100.002%
p250.012%
p50 (median)0.08%
p750.433%
p902.10%
p99160.5%
Engagement rate as a share of followers, across the 36,654 accounts we have scanned enough to measure. The axis is logarithmic, because the top and bottom of this population are about 106,977 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 percentile0.002%
25th percentile0.012%
50th percentile0.08%
75th percentile0.433%
90th percentile2.10%
99th percentile160.5%

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 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.

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 6%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%51K
01:00 UTC-2%52K
02:00 UTC-3%50K
03:00 UTC-4%53K
04:00 UTC-6%43K
05:00 UTC-4%42K
06:00 UTC-4%48K
07:00 UTC-5%52K
08:00 UTC-4%61K
09:00 UTC-3%70K
10:00 UTC-2%72K
11:00 UTC-3%78K
12:00 UTC-2%86K
13:00 UTC-2%94K
14:00 UTC-4%97K
15:00 UTC-2%101K
16:00 UTC-3%98K
17:00 UTC-2%91K
18:00 UTC-1%85K
19:00 UTC-1%80K
20:00 UTC-1%74K
21:00 UTC-1%66K
22:00 UTC-1%57K
23:00 UTC-2%52K
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: Monday.
SunMonTueWedThuFriSat
Above the authors' own mediansBelowScale: plus or minus 5%Busiest day: Monday
Show engagement by day of week as a table
Engagement by day of week
DayVs author medianPosts
Sunday+4%231K
Monday0%288K
Tuesday-2%278K
Wednesday-1%251K
Thursday-1%245K
Friday-3%253K
Saturday+3%227K
See what moves engagement across the whole catalogWhat counts as a good engagement rate at this size

Best tweets

  • Jun 11, 20265.5x their median

    The future of AI compute doesn't run on hype. It runs on real utility, real burns, and a network that gets stronger every time it's used. The Incentive Dynamic Engine (IDE) is now live! https://t.co/ggOg5dBdZw https://t.co/Ylmj9jH0d0

    67214371289.8M viewsView on X
  • Aug 24, 20261.6x their median

    27 million dollars paid out. Not raised or projected. Paid. That's real money flowing to real GPU providers, for real compute delivered on https://t.co/WLXlHkv6f1. This is what the future of AI compute looks like. https://t.co/tcCnNRP29P

    2062917816K viewsView on X
  • Aug 6, 2026

    Google Cloud Platform H100: $11.06/hr. https://t.co/ZuybGWvjv9 H100: $1.49–2.20/hr. 87% extra for a logo, not performance. Same NVIDIA silicon. Same CUDA stack. Same PyTorch. The difference is a quota form, a 3-7 day wait, and a hyperscaler margin. We skipped all three. Deploy in <2 minutes. No queue.

    1662821615K viewsView on X
  • Aug 19, 2026

    Your GPU bill says $10,000. Your actual cost: $25,000–$65,000. Here's the math most teams aren't doing. A 72-hour H100 wait shows up as $0 on the invoice. No GPU-hours, nothing billed. Looks free. But your ML team just burned $5,400+ in salary sitting idle. Your fine-tune slipped 3 days. Your investor demo got pushed. Your competitor ran 30% more experiments this quarter because their compute didn't queue. None of this is on the invoice. But all of it hits the business. It's time to stop asking "what's the per-GPU rate" and start focusing on "what unavailability costs." https://t.co/vHGRjPGELl

    1552618614K viewsView on X
  • Jul 24, 2026

    Training a 7B model on 1 trillion tokens takes ~300,000 H100 GPU-hours. AWS: $3.4M https://t.co/ZuybGWvjv9: $447K The same compute. The same model. But a $3M difference. Fine-tuning tells the same story: AWS (8-GPU minimum): $2,753 https://t.co/ZuybGWvjv9 (pay for what you use): $42 This isn't a discount. This is what AI compute looks like when you put builders and not corporate profits at the center.

    14730161016K viewsView on X
  • Aug 11, 2026

    Fine-tuning GPT-4o via API: ~$640 for a 50K-example run. Fine-tuning Llama 3.1 70B on https://t.co/ZuybGWvjv9: ~$26. Same task, but with full weight ownership, no API dependency, and 25x cheaper. Most teams don't need a frontier API. They need the right open-source model on the right GPU. https://t.co/YTFW7ReUbH

    1492323515K viewsView on X
  • Aug 18, 2026

    We were just named one of the Top 5 Decentralized AI Compute Networks to Watch in 2026 by @cryptodailyuk. Here's the scale behind that. Thousands of GPUs across 130+ countries, 32M compute hours delivered, and nearly $27M in total network earnings. The future of AI compute is being built on @ionet. https://t.co/WrOgocIUMQ

    1521919514K viewsView on X
  • Jul 31, 2026

    AWS pioneered the cloud. Then it built the tax. H100s at $6.88/hr. 3-6 month waitlists, if you can even get quota approval. And egress fees that punish you for moving your own data. @ionet changes the equation. H100s from $2.10/hr. No waitlist. And the first 1TB egress free. Same workload. Different economics. https://t.co/hEy47xdOfQ

    1591910616K viewsView on X
  • Aug 29, 2026

    Some things do exactly what they say. Render Network is great at what it was built for: rendering. But AI workloads ask for something else. Persistent inference. Multi-node training. Clusters that scale in seconds. That’s orchestration, not just GPU access. And that's what https://t.co/ZuybGWvjv9 was built for that from day one. https://t.co/YQC5wpjIu3

    1452218513K viewsView on X
  • Aug 22, 2026

    AI needs more than models. It needs compute, storage, connectivity, and data. And all of that is being coordinated on @solana. Helium → connectivity Hivemapper → data Shadow Drive → storage https://t.co/ZuybGWvjv9 → GPU compute This is what a full DePIN stack looks like. Not another cloud. An open infrastructure layer for AI, globally distributed. https://t.co/PotB1S3x3C

    1551812516K 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 X accounts - escrow-protected

PlayerSells is an escrow marketplace for X accounts. Every deal is protected, with no middleman risk.

Reading these numbers

A typical post picks up 165 interactions against 434K followers, an engagement rate of 0.038%. Measured over 32 original posts, its engagement rate beats 52% of 3,774 tracked accounts of a similar size, which puts it in the middle of its size range rather than at either end. Posts are seen about 14K times each, and 1.17% of those impressions turn into an interaction. That is about 3.26% of the follower count, which is the gap between an audience on paper and an audience in a timeline. Posting runs at about 1.7 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 Monday is the busiest day of the week. Of the 32 posts sampled, 66% carry an image or video, 38% are part of a thread and 78% link out. The account's strongest tracked post pulled 914 interactions, about 5.5x its own typical post.

What is io.net's engagement rate on X?
io.net (@ionet) has an engagement rate of 0.038%, based on the median interactions across 32 original posts from the last 30 days against 433,662 followers. Replies, reposts and quote-posts of other people are excluded from that sample.
Is that a good engagement rate?
At 0.038%, io.net sits above the 25th percentile of the 36,654 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 @ionet have real engagement?
Its engagement rate beats 52% of the tracked X accounts closest to it in follower count (3,774 accounts), which puts it in the middle of its size range 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 @ionet post?
Most posts go out around 09:00 UTC, and Monday is its busiest day, at roughly 1.67 posts per day across the measured window.

Keep going