Neil Patel engagement report
@neilpatel - 478K followers on X
Measured over 88 original posts from a 30-day window, last computed on September 21, 2026.
Engagement
A typical post picks up 61 interactions against 478K followers, an engagement rate of 0.013%. Measured over 88 original posts, its engagement rate beats 38% of 16,408 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 6.9K times each, and 0.881% of those impressions turn into an interaction. That is about 1.45% of the follower count, which is the gap between an audience on paper and an audience in a timeline. Posting runs at about 3 posts a day over the last 30 days, with activity on almost every day in the window. Most posts go out around 12:00 UTC, and Sunday is the busiest day of the week. Of the 88 posts sampled, 98% carry an image or video and 7% link out. The account's strongest tracked post pulled 2.2K interactions, about 35x its own typical post. Recurring topics include #contentmarketing, #digitalmarketing, #seo.
Measured over 88 original posts from a 30-day window, last computed on September 21, 2026. Recurring tags: #contentmarketing, #digitalmarketing, #seo.
Compared with accounts its own size
Neil Patel's engagement rate beats 38% of the tracked X accounts closest to it in follower count (16,408 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 46% 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 0.013%, Neil Patel sits above the 10th percentile of the 166,880 accounts in this comparison. That places it in the bottom 25% band, which runs below 0.022%.
Show the percentile table
| Percentile | Engagement rate |
|---|---|
| 10th percentile | 0.003% |
| 25th percentile | 0.022% |
| 50th percentile | 0.13% |
| 75th percentile | 0.612% |
| 90th percentile | 2.35% |
| 99th percentile | 82.5% |
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 12:00 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.
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 | 98% of posts | +111% | +108% to +115% | 34K |
| Outbound link | 7% of posts | -41% | -42% to -40% | 32K |
| Typical length | - | +15% | +14% to +16% | 32K |
- 98% 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.
- 7% 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 614 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
- Aug 17, 202635x their median
This is the difference between posting 5, 10, 15, and 25 times per week on social media. If you post 5 times a week on average, you have 5,194 followers across all your social platforms and roughly generate 302 visitors a month from people typing in your brand name on search engines. If you post 10 times a week, you have roughly 8,042 followers and 634 visitors from brand queries. If you post 15 times a week, you have roughly 11,587 followers and 591 visitors from brand queries. If you post 25 times a week, you have roughly 19,531 followers and 2833 visitors from brand queries. If you post 26 times a week or more, you have roughly 53,002 followers and 6,037 visitors from brand queries. Generally, the more you post, the better off you are (assuming your content is good).
- Aug 18, 202610x their median
Your social posts used to die in 48 hours. But Google… just changed everything. Now you can connect your social media profiles with your Google Search Console, just like you do with your website, you can see which posts show up in Google, which keywords they rank for, and how many clicks they drive. And that flips the entire ROI of social content. Because a post in your social feeds peaked in a day or two. Then it's gone. But then that same post ranking in Google can keep working for months. And the thing is Instagram content has been indexed in search for about a year now. But you just couldn't measure any of it. Now you can. So I’m telling all clients to create content around questions people are actually typing into Google. I use AnswerThePublic for this. Type in your topic, and it shows every question your audience is asking. Then answer one question in every piece of content you create. Because now, every post has the potential to become more than a social post. It can become a measurable search asset that keeps bringing you attention, traffic, and customers long after you publish it.
- Aug 25, 20266.6x their median
If you use any AI platform to create content, Google will know, and you won't rank well or be mentioned often in AI Overviews. Just look at the technology other platforms are using to watermark their content. Notice a pattern: it's Google's technology. You may see short-term wins with AI content, but I bet in the long run you would have just wasted time and money.
- Sep 10, 20265.9x their median
Everyone argues about whether AI content works. We tested it at scale instead. We published 744 articles across 68 real websites. Half went live exactly as the AI wrote them. The other half got one 20 minute step first, and it produced 444% more traffic. In this video I show you that step, why Google can tell your content is AI even when your readers can't, and the rule we now run at NP Digital: AI writes the draft, humans make it worth ranking.
- Aug 25, 20265.6x their median
SEO, AEO, GEO. Same goal, three different games. SEO gets your book on the front shelf where people can find it, winning on Google and Bing. AEO is the kid the teacher calls on, showing up in "People Also Ask" boxes and voice assistants like Siri. GEO is the teacher writing your name next to the answer, appearing in ChatGPT, Perplexity, and AI Overviews. Master all three and you're everywhere your audience is searching. Want the one tool I use to manage all three? Comment "MARKETING" and I'll send it your way.
- Aug 24, 20265.1x their median
Move over YouTube, because TikTok is the new king of video. Just look at video watch time per day by platform. If you are ignoring TikTok because you think it is just for Gen Z, you are making a big mistake. First off, Gen Z eventually grows up, just as Snap was once for high schoolers... but now those high schoolers all have corporate jobs. Second, it drives significant revenue, especially if you are an ecom brand.
- Aug 22, 20265.1x their median
If you want ChatGPT to recommend your business, you need to be on the websites it trusts. My team ranked all of them and #1 is a site most marketers ignore. #5 G2. AI treats verified reviews as proof you're actually good. No reviews, no recommendation. #4 LinkedIn. Your posts there carry more weight with AI than your own website does. #3 Wikipedia. Neutral and boring which is exactly why AI believes it. Now the top two and neither one is a publication. #2 YouTube. AI reads every transcript. Every video you post is a document telling it what you're an expert in. And #1... Reddit. An anonymous forum beats every brand website on earth. Because AI doesn't trust what companies say about themselves, it trusts what strangers say when nobody's selling. Comment "CITED" for my AI visibility playbook.
- Aug 23, 20265.1x their median
AI has just created a big problem for marketers. Because AI is so popular, roughly 85.48% of the new content that marketers produce is either fully AI-generated or AI-generated and modified by humans. And to make matters worse, 91% of companies have reduced their content budgets because AI has made their work more efficient. But now AI-generated content must be watermarked under EU law. This makes it easier for platforms to detect. And as Anthropic stated, rewriting a few sentences or paragraphs won't really remove the watermark. You're going to have to rewrite the whole thing. So now you have all these companies reliant on using AI to create content, and it just won't perform. Plus, it won't be easy for them to revert back to humans for content creation, as most budgets have been cut. Ouch!
- Aug 26, 20263.2x their median
AI-generated content is 2.15X less likely to be liked on social media. Check out the stats. It doesn't matter whether you use AI fully or have a human modify AI-generated content... people just don't like it. Because of the watermark, platforms are more likely to detect it, so their algorithms could reduce reach. The bigger issue here isn't AI, it is that people are lazy and just use basic prompts to help them out versus taking the time to create something amazing, whether they use humans, AI, or a combo.
- Sep 17, 20263.1x their median
Here's what nobody tells you about AI search. Before it recommends your business, it checks Google Reviews, Yelp, Trustpilot, Reddit threads, podcast transcripts, and 30-plus other places you don't control. Your site is one vote. The other 36 are the reviews, mentions, and listings you've been ignoring. That's the whole game now. #AIMarketing #SEO #FutureOfSearch #OnlineReputation #NeilPatel
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.
Recurring topics
The most frequent hashtags in the sampled posts. They describe what this account writes about; they are not a performance signal, and the catalog-wide breakdown on the hub shows how little hashtag count moves.
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 61 interactions against 478K followers, an engagement rate of 0.013%. Measured over 88 original posts, its engagement rate beats 38% of 16,408 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 6.9K times each, and 0.881% of those impressions turn into an interaction. That is about 1.45% of the follower count, which is the gap between an audience on paper and an audience in a timeline. Posting runs at about 3 posts a day over the last 30 days, with activity on almost every day in the window. Most posts go out around 12:00 UTC, and Sunday is the busiest day of the week. Of the 88 posts sampled, 98% carry an image or video and 7% link out. The account's strongest tracked post pulled 2.2K interactions, about 35x its own typical post. Recurring topics include #contentmarketing, #digitalmarketing, #seo.
- What is Neil Patel's engagement rate on X?
- Neil Patel (@neilpatel) has an engagement rate of 0.013%, based on the median interactions across 88 original posts from the last 30 days against 477,733 followers. Replies, reposts and quote-posts of other people are excluded from that sample.
- Is that a good engagement rate?
- At 0.013%, Neil Patel sits above the 10th percentile of the 166,880 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 @neilpatel have real engagement?
- Its engagement rate beats 38% of the tracked X accounts closest to it in follower count (16,408 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 @neilpatel post?
- Most posts go out around 12:00 UTC, and Sunday is its busiest day, at roughly 2.97 posts per day across the measured window.