Back to @konstructivizm's profile

Black Hole engagement report

@konstructivizm - 877K followers on X

Measured over 120 original posts from a 30-day window, last computed on September 23, 2026.

Engagement

Middle of its size range
Per follower
0.011%
of 877K followers
Per impression
1.12%
8.6K views on a typical post
Reach
0.99%
of its followers see a post
Typical post
96
interactions (median)
Saved
0.093%
8 bookmarks on a typical post
Posting rate
4/day
active 17% of days
Peak time
15:00 UTC
Wednesday

A typical post picks up 96 interactions against 877K followers, an engagement rate of 0.011%. Measured over 120 original posts, its engagement rate beats 35% of 20,182 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 8.6K times each, and 1.12% of those impressions turn into an interaction. That is about 0.985% of the follower count, which is the gap between an audience on paper and an audience in a timeline. Posting runs at about 4 posts a day over the last 30 days, though only 17% of days saw any activity at all. Most posts go out around 15:00 UTC, and Wednesday is the busiest day of the week. Of the 120 posts sampled, 99% carry an image or video. The account's strongest tracked post pulled 958 interactions, about 10.0x its own typical post.

Measured over 120 original posts from a 30-day window, last computed on September 23, 2026.

Compared with accounts its own size

Black Hole's engagement rate beats 35% of the tracked X accounts closest to it in follower count (20,182 accounts, accounts of similar size (decile 10 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 50% 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 0.011%, Black Hole sits above the 10th percentile of the 204,424 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%
p750.677%
p902.55%
p9982.4%
Engagement rate as a share of followers, across the 204,424 accounts we have scanned enough to measure. The axis is logarithmic, because the top and bottom of this population are about 22,888 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 percentile0.677%
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 15:00 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: 15:00 UTC.
0003060912151821
Above the authors' own mediansBelowScale: plus or minus 111%Busiest hour: 15:00 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 video99% of posts+111%+108% to +115%34K
Outbound link0% of posts-41%-42% to -40%32K
Typical length-+15%+14% to +16%32K
  • 99% 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.
  • 0% of its posts carry a link off X. Across the catalog, posts with an outbound link run 41% below the same accounts' other posts.
  • Its average post runs 758 characters, which falls in the over 280 characters band. Across the catalog, posts over 280 characters run 15% above 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 7, 202610.0x their median

    Stars and Dust in the Carina Nebula Image captured by the Hubble Telescope https://t.co/SgwQXlu0AT

    83111411221K viewsView on X
  • Aug 29, 20266.4x their median

    The Whirlpool Galaxy (M51) captured with an amateur telescope https://t.co/p0MGXRZv7Y

    545645020K viewsView on X
  • Sep 7, 20265.7x their median

    An incredible video of Crew Dragon catching up to the ISS for docking 🛰 на https://t.co/OuUciYWzyQ

    476559422K viewsView on X
  • Sep 23, 20265.6x their median

    NASA has released these new photos from the surface of Mars... https://t.co/ibpSOL6Z3E

    4853614226K viewsView on X
  • Aug 29, 20265.4x their median

    A stunning visualization of a black hole and how its gravity distorts light passing nearby 🔭 https://t.co/y9b385KH3v

    448609522K viewsView on X
  • Aug 21, 20265.1x their median

    A cosmic giant and its tiny neighbor 🌋 Mars is home to Olympus Mons—the largest volcano in the Solar System—which reaches an impressive height of 26 kilometers and covers an area comparable to that of France. For scale, the tiny Martian moon Phobos—potato-shaped and diminutive—regularly drifts past this titanic slope.

    4165413222K viewsView on X
  • Aug 22, 20264.5x their median

    Earth isn’t a cosmic lottery ticket — new models show our world was practically inevitable For decades, planetary scientists treated Earth’s existence like a rare jackpot: the right size, the right distance from the Sun, the right conditions for life — all somehow lining up by pure chance. New simulations presented at the Origins 2026 conference in Paris are rewriting that story. Planetary scientist Nader Haghighipour of the University of Hawaii and his team ran more than 1,000 high-fidelity simulations of the late stages of terrestrial planet formation. Unlike earlier models that started with carefully chosen “solar-system-like” setups, these runs began from completely random distributions of planetesimals and planetary embryos. No assumptions. Just physics. The result? A planet the size of Earth forming at roughly 1 astronomical unit (Earth’s actual distance from the Sun) emerges as a natural, recurring outcome. Venus appears about 28% of the time and often stays in or near the habitable zone. Mars shows up repeatedly as a smaller body near its real orbit. In short, our familiar planetary lineup isn’t a fluke — it’s what the laws of physics tend to produce in a protoplanetary disk with a realistic, non-uniform distribution of solid material. Haghighipour puts it bluntly: “There is no reason to believe that our Earth is a fluke.” Tiny differences in the starting conditions can still send systems down wildly different paths, but the pathway that leads to an Earth-like world is surprisingly robust. The same simulations also hint that Earth-sized (and slightly larger) planets in the habitable zones of Sun-like stars should be common across the galaxy. Detecting life on those worlds remains far beyond our current technology. Yet understanding exactly how Earth became habitable — without any special pleading — gives us a much clearer target. Life may not be rare. The conditions that allow it to arise may simply be what nature does when you let the physics run free.

    3198124720K viewsView on X
  • Aug 28, 20264.4x their median

    Breathtaking footage of the ISS in flight, captured by the approaching Soyuz spacecraft https://t.co/GIg5xb0mnv

    365494424K viewsView on X
  • Aug 28, 20264.2x their median

    It is amazing how well Jupiter protects the inner part of the Solar System. https://t.co/tCP49qtGEH

    329656326K viewsView on X
  • Aug 22, 20264.2x their median

    The Elephant's Trunk in Cepheus Image Credit : Eddie Sgarbossa https://t.co/P8pD1yFYWv

    369294013K 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 96 interactions against 877K followers, an engagement rate of 0.011%. Measured over 120 original posts, its engagement rate beats 35% of 20,182 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 8.6K times each, and 1.12% of those impressions turn into an interaction. That is about 0.985% of the follower count, which is the gap between an audience on paper and an audience in a timeline. Posting runs at about 4 posts a day over the last 30 days, though only 17% of days saw any activity at all. Most posts go out around 15:00 UTC, and Wednesday is the busiest day of the week. Of the 120 posts sampled, 99% carry an image or video. The account's strongest tracked post pulled 958 interactions, about 10.0x its own typical post.

What is Black Hole's engagement rate on X?
Black Hole (@konstructivizm) has an engagement rate of 0.011%, based on the median interactions across 120 original posts from the last 30 days against 876,936 followers. Replies, reposts and quote-posts of other people are excluded from that sample.
Is that a good engagement rate?
At 0.011%, Black Hole sits above the 10th percentile of the 204,424 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 @konstructivizm have real engagement?
Its engagement rate beats 35% of the tracked X accounts closest to it in follower count (20,182 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 @konstructivizm post?
Most posts go out around 15:00 UTC, and Wednesday is its busiest day, at roughly 4 posts per day across the measured window.

Keep going