Back to @johntarnoff's profile

John Tarnoff engagement report

@johntarnoff - 72K followers on X

Measured over 40 original posts from a 30-day window, last computed on September 14, 2026.

Engagement

Bottom 10% for its size
Per follower
0%
of 72K followers
Per impression
0%
168 views on a typical post
Reach
0.23%
of its followers see a post
Typical post
0
interactions (median)
Saved
0%
0 bookmarks on a typical post
Posting rate
1.33/day
active 27% of days
Peak time
17:00 UTC
Wednesday

A typical post picks up 0 interactions against 72K followers, an engagement rate of 0%. Measured over 40 original posts, its engagement rate beats 0% 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 168 times each, and 0% of those impressions turn into an interaction. That is about 0.234% of the follower count, which is the gap between an audience on paper and an audience in a timeline. Posting runs at about 1.3 post a day over the last 30 days, though only 27% of days saw any activity at all. Most posts go out around 17:00 UTC, and Wednesday is the busiest day of the week. Of the 40 posts sampled, 100% link out. The account's strongest tracked post pulled 4 interactions.

Measured over 40 original posts from a 30-day window, last computed on September 14, 2026.

Compared with accounts its own size

John Tarnoff's engagement rate beats 0% of the tracked X accounts closest to it in follower count (20,444 accounts, accounts of similar size (decile 6 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 0% 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%, John Tarnoff sits below the 10th percentile of the 205,152 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%
p750.678%
p902.55%
p9982.4%
Engagement rate as a share of followers, across the 205,152 accounts we have scanned enough to measure. The axis is logarithmic, because the top and bottom of this population are about 22,894 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 percentile0.678%
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 17:00 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: 17:00 UTC.
0003060912151821
Above the authors' own mediansBelowScale: plus or minus 111%Busiest hour: 17:00 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 video3% of posts+111%+108% to +115%34K
Outbound link100% of posts-41%-42% to -40%32K
Typical length--3%-3% to -2%54K
  • 3% 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 80 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

  • Sep 10, 2026

    You can be the strongest candidate and still not get the offer. That part was never within your control. Fit is a subjective call. Budgets move, an internal candidate appears, someone has a bad morning.  You research the company, rehearse your answers, and tighten every line. Then a hiring manager decides in twenty minutes whether you fit the team. In mid-career, three things tend to work against you: - Competing on skills drops you into a bake-off you cannot win, because there’s always someone who checks more of the boxes, and for less money. - War stories date you faster than your graduation year. - Your experience reads as a cost to a manager who has no benchmark to price it. Here's the counterintuitive good news: that rejection is not a loss. You just sat with someone in your field who agreed to give you some of their time. That could be the beginning of a relationship you didn't have last week. Reframe the job interview: regardless of the outcome, it is always a networking opportunity. Stop performing and start building rapport. Find commonalities. Ask about them, the company, the role, their own job. That works with a recruiter as much as a hiring manager, because it’s about making a connection. Use your LinkedIn About section as your script. It should already include why you do this work, the values you stand for, and the market you want to serve. Be aspirational. Find agreement on the challenges facing the company, the industry, even the world. Then solve one of them together. If you're striking out midway through, if they're looking at you blankly and fumbling to stay on their superficial interview script, be the one to bring the conversation to a close. Don't prolong it. It's OK to be the wrong candidate, because the company is the wrong company (for you). Believe me: they'll remember you forever as the candidate who (politely but firmly) rejected them first. And if you make friends in that interview, you've seeded a potential referral relationship that may come back to connect you to an opportunity weeks, maybe even months later. Have you ever been rejected for a job, but then got a call back to apply to another position, or connect with another colleague? I tackle this and other mid-career job search challenges in my newsletter. https://t.co/jeCnhH41I2

    1030463 viewsView on X
  • Sep 8, 2026

    https://t.co/xaek9IlmCz

    1000175 viewsView on X
  • Sep 6, 2026

    https://t.co/LMxLCSO8Pt

    1000178 viewsView on X
  • Sep 13, 2026

    https://t.co/l1wpL16BNL

    0000144 viewsView on X
  • Sep 13, 2026

    https://t.co/QXGJG9uzFT

    0000128 viewsView on X
  • Sep 13, 2026

    https://t.co/vn2Lh66DUL

    0000217 viewsView on X
  • Sep 13, 2026

    https://t.co/hNDNG8lgi0

    0000240 viewsView on X
  • Sep 12, 2026

    https://t.co/7XdvSvu4B7

    0000271 viewsView on X
  • Sep 12, 2026

    https://t.co/QJq0jlw1qn

    0000144 viewsView on X
  • Sep 12, 2026

    https://t.co/YJXW0AcX9m

    0000109 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 0 interactions against 72K followers, an engagement rate of 0%. Measured over 40 original posts, its engagement rate beats 0% 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 168 times each, and 0% of those impressions turn into an interaction. That is about 0.234% of the follower count, which is the gap between an audience on paper and an audience in a timeline. Posting runs at about 1.3 post a day over the last 30 days, though only 27% of days saw any activity at all. Most posts go out around 17:00 UTC, and Wednesday is the busiest day of the week. Of the 40 posts sampled, 100% link out. The account's strongest tracked post pulled 4 interactions.

What is John Tarnoff's engagement rate on X?
John Tarnoff (@johntarnoff) has an engagement rate of 0%, based on the median interactions across 40 original posts from the last 30 days against 71,933 followers. Replies, reposts and quote-posts of other people are excluded from that sample.
Is that a good engagement rate?
At 0%, John Tarnoff sits below the 10th percentile of the 205,152 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 @johntarnoff have real engagement?
Its engagement rate beats 0% 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 @johntarnoff post?
Most posts go out around 17:00 UTC, and Wednesday is its busiest day, at roughly 1.33 posts per day across the measured window.

Keep going