Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason & Science engagement report

Where this sits in the catalog

At 0.018%, Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason & Science sits above the 10th percentile of the 205,676 accounts in this comparison. That places it in the bottom 25% band, which runs below 0.024%.

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 16:00 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.

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.

• 0% 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 436 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.

Reading these numbers

A typical post picks up 17 interactions against 93K followers, an engagement rate of 0.018%. Posts are seen about 1.9K times each, and 0.907% of those impressions turn into an interaction. That is about 2.02% 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 7% of days saw any activity at all. Most posts go out around 16:00 UTC, and Monday is the busiest day of the week. Of the 2 posts sampled, 100% link out. The account's strongest tracked post pulled 1.6K interactions, about 92x its own typical post. Only 2 original posts 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 Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason & Science's engagement rate on X?

Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason & Science (@rdfrs) has an engagement rate of 0.018%, based on the median interactions across 2 original posts from the last 30 days against 92,737 followers. Replies, reposts and quote-posts of other people are excluded from that sample.

Is that a good engagement rate?

At 0.018%, Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason & Science sits above the 10th percentile of the 205,676 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 @rdfrs have real engagement?

There is not yet enough sample to rank this account against others of its size.

When does @rdfrs post?

Most posts go out around 16:00 UTC, and Monday is its busiest day, at roughly 0.07 posts per day across the measured window.