Ryan Grim engagement report
@ryangrim - 536K followers on X
Measured over 17 original posts from a 30-day window, last computed on October 16, 2026.
Engagement
A typical post picks up 1.2K interactions against 536K followers, an engagement rate of 0.234%. Measured over 17 original posts, its engagement rate beats 83% of 20,444 tracked accounts of a similar size. Comparing inside a size band matters here: engagement rate falls as accounts grow, so a raw rate would mostly just re-measure the follower count. Posts are seen about 120K times each, and 1.04% of those impressions turn into an interaction. That is about 22.4% of the follower count, which is the gap between an audience on paper and an audience in a timeline. Posting runs at about 3.4 posts a day over the last 30 days, though only 20% of days saw any activity at all. Most posts go out around 15:00 UTC, and Thursday is the busiest day of the week. Of the 17 posts sampled, 82% carry an image or video and 29% link out. The account's strongest tracked post pulled 20K interactions, about 16x its own typical post. Recurring topics include #akgov, #aksen, #بلدية_غزة.
Measured over 17 original posts from a 30-day window, last computed on October 16, 2026. Recurring tags: #akgov, #aksen, #بلدية_غزة.
Compared with accounts its own size
Ryan Grim's engagement rate beats 83% of the tracked X accounts closest to it in follower count (20,444 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 48% 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 0.234%, Ryan Grim sits above the 50th percentile of the 205,782 accounts in this comparison. That places it in the above the median band, which runs 0.143% to 0.679%.
Show the percentile table
| Percentile | Engagement rate |
|---|---|
| 10th percentile | 0.004% |
| 25th percentile | 0.024% |
| 50th percentile | 0.143% |
| 75th percentile | 0.679% |
| 90th percentile | 2.56% |
| 99th percentile | 82.4% |
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 Thursday 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 | 82% of posts | +111% | +108% to +115% | 34K |
| Outbound link | 29% of posts | -41% | -42% to -40% | 32K |
| Typical length | - | +15% | +14% to +16% | 32K |
- 82% 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.
- 29% 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 452 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 4, 202616x their median
The universe has served up more justice to Apartheid Israel than all international legal institutions combined. 5 out of 6 desalination plants in Israel have been shut down due to a sudden, massive algal bloom in the Mediterranean Sea. It was brought on by the large amounts of raw sewage being discharged into the Mediterranean from Gaza, the result of Apartheid Israel's military's destruction of sewage treatment plants and sewage pipes in the Strip during the war. https://t.co/Q8NwjYWkvp
- Aug 27, 202616x their median
TAFS 301 ft @CurtisSliwa out in the next hour https://t.co/e73II19Z1R
- Oct 21, 202315x their median
so many 9/11 first responders who worked on the rock pile got cancer, just imagine what forcing 2 million people––half of them children––to wallow in this kind of debris and aerosolized building materials for weeks is going to inflict longterm https://t.co/RzuG9jcyJc
- Oct 14, 202610x their median
A sixth person was just removed during Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth's remarks at the Association of the United States Army 2026 conference in Washington, DC. "You're a f---ing war criminal. You're a f---ing Nazi," the man says as he's removed. https://t.co/2rV8WleQO7
- Aug 26, 20267.6x their median
James Carville: “What AIPAC doesn’t understand is a lot of people and a lot of Democrats can’t stand the current government of Israel and you can spend all the fucking money you want telling me they’re good and I’m not gonna ever believe it. The people that say that people that disagree with the policies of the government of Israel are antisemites are frankly full of shit and they need to be told that. You can’t have the kind of policies the government of Israel is engaged in and not expect that there’s gonna be pushback and backlash”
- Oct 15, 20264.7x their median
This is one of the biggest geopolitical mysteries of the year: why did China just save the world economy? Because, make no mistake, it absolutely did. Analysts are pretty much unanimous on this: had China not dramatically - and I mean dramatically - reduced its oil imports this year, the price of crude oil would have gone through the roof and dragged the global economy down with it. For proof, read how Javier Blas from Bloomberg - widely recognized as one of the world’s top energy analysts - explains what China did to Jake Sullivan and Jon Finer on their podcast “The Long Game” (https://t.co/bBD8yFFUdC). As Blas puts it, China went “from 11, 12 million barrels a day to less than 6 million barrels a day” of seaborne crude imports, and that “freed a lot of oil for other countries, particularly in Asia.” India, Japan, Korea and Southeast Asia “could buy the barrels that China was not buying.” To be clear, China wasn’t the only factor - surging US exports and the IEA’s emergency release helped too - but it was by far the biggest: JPMorgan reckons China accounted for about 74% of the fall in global crude trade (https://t.co/JCmFXYJcfh). So it's no exaggeration to say that it is China, first and foremost, that saved the world economy this year. If you remember the early days of the Iran war, none of this is what was predicted. In fact some US think tankers, such as the (always horrendous) Zineb Riboua from the Hudson Institute, were even cheering the war as being “all about China… the opening act in the larger contest against China,” the moment the US would crack “the central pillar of a regional order that Beijing has assembled” (https://t.co/RaCE05TcMp). Seven months on, what actually happened is that not only did China come out of the war unscathed economically, and strengthened strategically, it also ended up shielding the world economy, America’s included, from the fallout of the very war that was supposed to be its undoing. Breaking news: if you do something that’s supposed to be a “blow” to someone else - some sort of 3D chess move to gain the upper hand - and they end up having to rescue you from the fallout, maybe it wasn’t such a brilliant strategic move after all. So how did China pull it off? And, more intriguingly, why did it choose to rescue countries, including the US, from a war that Washington’s own hawks were openly selling as a strike against China itself? And why do this when it effectively dampened Iran's leverage considerably, even though they're supposed to be China's "ally" (which, as we'll see, is false)? This is the topic of my latest article. I went very deep researching all the Chinese sources I could find on this, looking at the exact legal mechanisms, and at what officials, oil refiners and state media actually said. The answer turns out to be far stranger than I expected: no-one in Beijing actually ever ordered an import cut. China, effectively, seems to have saved the world economy incidentally, as a by-product of its own domestic policy to protect Chinese consumers. Which is the real story here: China has become so large and so important it can just rescue the world economy as a mere side effect. In fact what I discovered, hilariously, is that the Chinese were just as surprised as anyone else: it’s only weeks after Western media started crediting China with saving the world economy that Chinese media picked up the story. And even then, CCTV’s first take in July (https://t.co/xLPyaJeZnT) presented it as something 外媒称 (wàiméi chēng, “foreign media claim”) 🤣 Almost like a giant suddenly waking up to its own powers. Because, that's the thing: intentions fade, consequences stay. Intentional or not, as Igor Sechin, the head of Rosneft, Russia’s largest oil company, put it (https://t.co/ckinOaHzJ7), the consequence is that it's now China, not OPEC, who calls the shots on global energy markets. The valve of global oil pricing is now in Shandong, not in Zhongdong anymore (Zhongdong, 中东, is the Middle East in Chinese). Full article here, with how China’s 20-year strategic nightmare, the “Malacca dilemma”, has now effectively become its leverage over the rest of the world: https://t.co/HsxPLJp45X
- Oct 14, 20264.4x their median
Trump says that he was driving through Iowa early in his term and saw that gas was $1.85/gallon at one station and $1.95 at another. He says the next day he called a meeting of his team and said we need to go to war on Iran. I do not know why he would say this. https://t.co/G2acTLRrib
- Aug 24, 20263.4x their median
LA Times on Maryam Dawas, 2025: "Doctors confirmed that her condition is solely the result of hunger and malnutrition." Official fundraising website of Maryam Dawas, 2026: "Maryam has a serious immune disorder that attacks her body every day, leaving her weak and vulnerable." Reminder that many of the most viral images of skeletal Palestinian children—presented by news outlets as victims of famine last August—were like Maryam, in that they were suffering from complicated medical issues, including autoimmune disorders and cystic fibrosis. Last August, The Free Press contacted the LA Times to alert them of our reporting. They did not respond to our request for comment. Their story remains uncorrected on their website.
- Aug 26, 20263.1x their median
One of my favorite Dolly Parton lyrics gets at the way that in America, there is immense shame connected with being poor, and also immense pride in having been poor. https://t.co/vyZWth9G45
- Sep 17, 20262.7x their median
This is a rather infuriating read... https://t.co/ctKy4diATz
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 1.2K interactions against 536K followers, an engagement rate of 0.234%. Measured over 17 original posts, its engagement rate beats 83% of 20,444 tracked accounts of a similar size. Comparing inside a size band matters here: engagement rate falls as accounts grow, so a raw rate would mostly just re-measure the follower count. Posts are seen about 120K times each, and 1.04% of those impressions turn into an interaction. That is about 22.4% of the follower count, which is the gap between an audience on paper and an audience in a timeline. Posting runs at about 3.4 posts a day over the last 30 days, though only 20% of days saw any activity at all. Most posts go out around 15:00 UTC, and Thursday is the busiest day of the week. Of the 17 posts sampled, 82% carry an image or video and 29% link out. The account's strongest tracked post pulled 20K interactions, about 16x its own typical post. Recurring topics include #akgov, #aksen, #بلدية_غزة.
- What is Ryan Grim's engagement rate on X?
- Ryan Grim (@ryangrim) has an engagement rate of 0.234%, based on the median interactions across 17 original posts from the last 30 days against 536,278 followers. Replies, reposts and quote-posts of other people are excluded from that sample.
- Is that a good engagement rate?
- At 0.234%, Ryan Grim sits above the 50th percentile of the 205,782 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 @ryangrim have real engagement?
- Its engagement rate beats 83% of the tracked X accounts closest to it in follower count (20,444 accounts), which puts it in the top quarter 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 @ryangrim post?
- Most posts go out around 15:00 UTC, and Thursday is its busiest day, at roughly 3.37 posts per day across the measured window.