Back to @karpathy's profile

Andrej Karpathy engagement report

@karpathy - 4.1M followers on X

Measured over 1 original post from a 30-day window, last computed on August 31, 2026.

Engagement

Per follower
0.812%
of 4.1M followers
Per impression
0.657%
5.0M views on a typical post
Reach
123.7%
of its followers see a post
Typical post
33K
interactions (median)
Saved
0.232%
12K bookmarks on a typical post
Posting rate
0.07/day
active 3% of days
Peak time
03:00 UTC
Sunday

Early reading. We have captured 1 original post 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 33K interactions against 4.1M followers, an engagement rate of 0.812%. Posts are seen about 5.0M times each, and 0.657% of those impressions turn into an interaction. That is about 123.0% of the follower count, which is the gap between an audience on paper and an audience in a timeline. Posting runs at about 0.07 posts a day over the last 30 days, though only 3% of days saw any activity at all. Most posts go out around 03:00 UTC, and Sunday is the busiest day of the week. Of the 1 posts sampled, 100% carry an image or video and 100% are part of a thread. The account's strongest tracked post pulled 176K interactions, about 5.4x its own typical post. Only 1 original post 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 1 original post from a 30-day window, last computed on August 31, 2026.

Where this sits in the catalog

At 0.812%, Andrej Karpathy sits above the 75th percentile of the 36,521 accounts in this comparison. That places it in the top 25% band, which runs 0.434% to 2.10%.

p100.002%
p250.012%
p50 (median)0.08%
p750.434%
p902.10%
p99160.7%
Engagement rate as a share of followers, across the 36,521 accounts we have scanned enough to measure. The axis is logarithmic, because the top and bottom of this population are about 107,166 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 percentile0.434%
90th percentile2.10%
99th percentile160.7%

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 03:00 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.

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: 03:00 UTC.
0003060912151821
Above the authors' own mediansBelowScale: plus or minus 6%Busiest hour: 03:00 UTC
Show engagement by hour posted, utc as a table
Engagement by hour posted, UTC
Hour (UTC)Vs author medianPosts
00:00 UTC-1%50K
01:00 UTC-2%51K
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%60K
09:00 UTC-3%69K
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%100K
16:00 UTC-3%97K
17:00 UTC-2%90K
18:00 UTC-1%84K
19:00 UTC-2%79K
20:00 UTC-1%74K
21:00 UTC-1%66K
22:00 UTC-2%57K
23:00 UTC-2%51K
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: Sunday.
SunMonTueWedThuFriSat
Above the authors' own mediansBelowScale: plus or minus 5%Busiest day: Sunday
Show engagement by day of week as a table
Engagement by day of week
DayVs author medianPosts
Sunday+4%230K
Monday0%286K
Tuesday-2%276K
Wednesday-1%251K
Thursday-1%244K
Friday-3%252K
Saturday+3%227K
See what moves engagement across the whole catalogWhat counts as a good engagement rate at this size

Best tweets

  • May 19, 20265.4x their median

    Personal update: I've joined Anthropic. I think the next few years at the frontier of LLMs will be especially formative. I am very excited to join the team here and get back to R&D. I remain deeply passionate about education and plan to resume my work on it in time.

    150K11K7.9K7.5K28M viewsView on X
  • Apr 2, 20262.2x their median

    LLM Knowledge Bases Something I'm finding very useful recently: using LLMs to build personal knowledge bases for various topics of research interest. In this way, a large fraction of my recent token throughput is going less into manipulating code, and more into manipulating knowledge (stored as markdown and images). The latest LLMs are quite good at it. So: Data ingest: I index source documents (articles, papers, repos, datasets, images, etc.) into a raw/ directory, then I use an LLM to incrementally "compile" a wiki, which is just a collection of .md files in a directory structure. The wiki includes summaries of all the data in raw/, backlinks, and then it categorizes data into concepts, writes articles for them, and links them all. To convert web articles into .md files I like to use the Obsidian Web Clipper extension, and then I also use a hotkey to download all the related images to local so that my LLM can easily reference them. IDE: I use Obsidian as the IDE "frontend" where I can view the raw data, the the compiled wiki, and the derived visualizations. Important to note that the LLM writes and maintains all of the data of the wiki, I rarely touch it directly. I've played with a few Obsidian plugins to render and view data in other ways (e.g. Marp for slides). Q&A: Where things get interesting is that once your wiki is big enough (e.g. mine on some recent research is ~100 articles and ~400K words), you can ask your LLM agent all kinds of complex questions against the wiki, and it will go off, research the answers, etc. I thought I had to reach for fancy RAG, but the LLM has been pretty good about auto-maintaining index files and brief summaries of all the documents and it reads all the important related data fairly easily at this ~small scale. Output: Instead of getting answers in text/terminal, I like to have it render markdown files for me, or slide shows (Marp format), or matplotlib images, all of which I then view again in Obsidian. You can imagine many other visual output formats depending on the query. Often, I end up "filing" the outputs back into the wiki to enhance it for further queries. So my own explorations and queries always "add up" in the knowledge base. Linting: I've run some LLM "health checks" over the wiki to e.g. find inconsistent data, impute missing data (with web searchers), find interesting connections for new article candidates, etc., to incrementally clean up the wiki and enhance its overall data integrity. The LLMs are quite good at suggesting further questions to ask and look into. Extra tools: I find myself developing additional tools to process the data, e.g. I vibe coded a small and naive search engine over the wiki, which I both use directly (in a web ui), but more often I want to hand it off to an LLM via CLI as a tool for larger queries. Further explorations: As the repo grows, the natural desire is to also think about synthetic data generation + finetuning to have your LLM "know" the data in its weights instead of just context windows. TLDR: raw data from a given number of sources is collected, then compiled by an LLM into a .md wiki, then operated on by various CLIs by the LLM to do Q&A and to incrementally enhance the wiki, and all of it viewable in Obsidian. You rarely ever write or edit the wiki manually, it's the domain of the LLM. I think there is room here for an incredible new product instead of a hacky collection of scripts.

    61K7.4K2.9K2.2K22M viewsView on X
  • Jul 21, 20261.8x their median

    One pattern I find useful for working with LLMs is a nice long ramble session. Sometimes the LLM needs more bits to understand what you're trying to achieve, but you're too lazy to type them. In these cases I like to lean back, switch to /voice and just ramble for like 10 minutes, total mess, anything goes, full stream of consciousness. Sometimes I declare it up top, something like "switching to speech recognition sorry for any typos...". Sometimes I turn it into a small interview of a few turns. But I find that the LLMs are somehow very good at reconstructing long incoherent rambles and often their echo of your own tangle of thoughts comes out quite a bit cleaner than what you started with. The result is that you improve the mind meld and have to correct things less from that point on.

    50K4.1K2.4K1.5K4.2M viewsView on X
  • Feb 25, 2026

    It is hard to communicate how much programming has changed due to AI in the last 2 months: not gradually and over time in the "progress as usual" way, but specifically this last December. There are a number of asterisks but imo coding agents basically didn’t work before December and basically work since - the models have significantly higher quality, long-term coherence and tenacity and they can power through large and long tasks, well past enough that it is extremely disruptive to the default programming workflow. Just to give an example, over the weekend I was building a local video analysis dashboard for the cameras of my home so I wrote: “Here is the local IP and username/password of my DGX Spark. Log in, set up ssh keys, set up vLLM, download and bench Qwen3-VL, set up a server endpoint to inference videos, a basic web ui dashboard, test everything, set it up with systemd, record memory notes for yourself and write up a markdown report for me”. The agent went off for ~30 minutes, ran into multiple issues, researched solutions online, resolved them one by one, wrote the code, tested it, debugged it, set up the services, and came back with the report and it was just done. I didn’t touch anything. All of this could easily have been a weekend project just 3 months ago but today it’s something you kick off and forget about for 30 minutes. As a result, programming is becoming unrecognizable. You’re not typing computer code into an editor like the way things were since computers were invented, that era is over. You're spinning up AI agents, giving them tasks *in English* and managing and reviewing their work in parallel. The biggest prize is in figuring out how you can keep ascending the layers of abstraction to set up long-running orchestrator Claws with all of the right tools, memory and instructions that productively manage multiple parallel Code instances for you. The leverage achievable via top tier "agentic engineering" feels very high right now. It’s not perfect, it needs high-level direction, judgement, taste, oversight, iteration and hints and ideas. It works a lot better in some scenarios than others (e.g. especially for tasks that are well-specified and where you can verify/test functionality). The key is to build intuition to decompose the task just right to hand off the parts that work and help out around the edges. But imo, this is nowhere near "business as usual" time in software.

    37K4.7K1.6K1.1K5.2M viewsView on X
  • Mar 28, 2026

    - Drafted a blog post - Used an LLM to meticulously improve the argument over 4 hours. - Wow, feeling great, it’s so convincing! - Fun idea let’s ask it to argue the opposite. - LLM demolishes the entire argument and convinces me that the opposite is in fact true. - lol The LLMs may elicit an opinion when asked but are extremely competent in arguing almost any direction. This is actually super useful as a tool for forming your own opinions, just make sure to ask different directions and be careful with the sycophancy.

    31K2.4K1.7K6823.5M viewsView on X
  • Apr 22, 2026

    Imagine every pixel on your screen, streamed live directly from a model. No HTML, no layout engine, no code. Just exactly what you want to see. @eddiejiao_obj, @drewocarr and I built a prototype to see how this could actually work, and set out to make it real. We're calling it Flipbook. (1/5)

    29K3.7K1.1K1.2K6.0M viewsView on X
  • Jun 23, 2026

    Introducing Claude Tag, a new way for teams to work with Claude. In Slack, Claude joins as a team member with access to the channels and tools you choose. Tag Claude in and delegate tasks to it while you focus on other work. https://t.co/R2C6A5Kcye

    28K2.2K1.6K2.0K21M viewsView on X
  • Mar 7, 2026

    I packaged up the "autoresearch" project into a new self-contained minimal repo if people would like to play over the weekend. It's basically nanochat LLM training core stripped down to a single-GPU, one file version of ~630 lines of code, then: - the human iterates on the prompt (.md) - the AI agent iterates on the training code (.py) The goal is to engineer your agents to make the fastest research progress indefinitely and without any of your own involvement. In the image, every dot is a complete LLM training run that lasts exactly 5 minutes. The agent works in an autonomous loop on a git feature branch and accumulates git commits to the training script as it finds better settings (of lower validation loss by the end) of the neural network architecture, the optimizer, all the hyperparameters, etc. You can imagine comparing the research progress of different prompts, different agents, etc. https://t.co/YCvOwwjOzF Part code, part sci-fi, and a pinch of psychosis :)

    28K3.6K1.0K1.1K11M viewsView on X
  • Aug 2, 2026

    We're starting to leave the territory where you'd test an LLM by e.g. "create an svg of pelican on a bicycle". As one idea to generalize it, I was interested what Opus 5 would do if I gave it the first paragraph of the Lord of the Rings, a 1M token budget (~$10) and asked for three js render of it. Opus went off for ~2 hours and wrote 5500 lines of code that (procedurally) rendered the story. It's kind of janky but fun. But it's a bit mindboggling that the LLM has to place and orchestrate various polygon assets in (x,y,z) coordinates and write code that animates it all, and that it even does anything at all. I also like this kind of examples because no one in their right mind would ever spend the time to write something this custom but LLMs have all the stamina and patience in the world, so it's an example where we go from "no one would ever do this" to "sure, why not, it's ~free". There might be a lot more. But I'm excited about creating hyper custom worlds that you can imagine dropping players into, e.g. here to participate in the LoTR story as a spectator NPC, or one of the characters, or etc. Something like an ephemeral GTA of X on demand. Last thought is that the domain of worlds/games exposes a weakness in LLMs: they can't easily audit their work because they aren't able to efficiently and natively perceive videos or play games within them. Here, Opus 5 had to very slowly and painstakingly take screenshots at different points, and it messed up a few times and created a bunch of jank. An example of raw capability (multimodal, gameplay) that I think is still quite lacking.

    28K2.2K1.6K7085.0M viewsView on X
  • Mar 25, 2026

    One common issue with personalization in all LLMs is how distracting memory seems to be for the models. A single question from 2 months ago about some topic can keep coming up as some kind of a deep interest of mine with undue mentions in perpetuity. Some kind of trying too hard.

    21K1.1K1.7K4662.8M 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 33K interactions against 4.1M followers, an engagement rate of 0.812%. Posts are seen about 5.0M times each, and 0.657% of those impressions turn into an interaction. That is about 123.0% of the follower count, which is the gap between an audience on paper and an audience in a timeline. Posting runs at about 0.07 posts a day over the last 30 days, though only 3% of days saw any activity at all. Most posts go out around 03:00 UTC, and Sunday is the busiest day of the week. Of the 1 posts sampled, 100% carry an image or video and 100% are part of a thread. The account's strongest tracked post pulled 176K interactions, about 5.4x its own typical post. Only 1 original post 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 Andrej Karpathy's engagement rate on X?
Andrej Karpathy (@karpathy) has an engagement rate of 0.812%, based on the median interactions across 1 original posts from the last 30 days against 4,065,433 followers. Replies, reposts and quote-posts of other people are excluded from that sample.
Is that a good engagement rate?
At 0.812%, Andrej Karpathy sits above the 75th percentile of the 36,521 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 @karpathy have real engagement?
There is not yet enough sample to rank this account against others of its size.
When does @karpathy post?
Most posts go out around 03:00 UTC, and Sunday is its busiest day, at roughly 0.07 posts per day across the measured window.

Keep going