Foreign Affairs engagement report
@ForeignAffairs - 947K followers on X
Measured over 97 original posts from a 30-day window, last computed on August 27, 2026.
Engagement
A typical post picks up 11 interactions against 947K followers, an engagement rate of 0.001%. Measured over 97 original posts, its engagement rate beats 13% of 3,882 tracked accounts of a similar size. That is a reason to look at how the audience behaves - reply depth, saves, whether the followers are recent - rather than a conclusion about it on its own. Posts are seen about 6.0K times each, and 0.185% of those impressions turn into an interaction. That is about 0.629% 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 17% of days saw any activity at all. Most posts go out around 13:00 UTC, and Wednesday is the busiest day of the week. Of the 97 posts sampled, 100% link out. The account's strongest tracked post pulled 359 interactions, about 33x its own typical post.
Measured over 97 original posts from a 30-day window, last computed on August 27, 2026.
Compared with accounts its own size
Foreign Affairs's engagement rate beats 13% of the tracked X accounts closest to it in follower count (3,882 accounts, accounts of similar size (decile 9 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 15% 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 0.001%, Foreign Affairs sits below the 10th percentile of the 37,701 accounts in this comparison. That places it in the bottom 25% band, which runs below 0.012%.
Show the percentile table
| Percentile | Engagement rate |
|---|---|
| 10th percentile | 0.002% |
| 25th percentile | 0.012% |
| 50th percentile | 0.081% |
| 75th percentile | 0.439% |
| 90th percentile | 2.10% |
| 99th percentile | 156.3% |
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 13:00 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.
Show engagement by hour posted, utc as a table
| Hour (UTC) | Vs author median | Posts |
|---|---|---|
| 00:00 UTC | -1% | 53K |
| 01:00 UTC | -2% | 53K |
| 02:00 UTC | -3% | 52K |
| 03:00 UTC | -4% | 55K |
| 04:00 UTC | -6% | 44K |
| 05:00 UTC | -4% | 43K |
| 06:00 UTC | -4% | 50K |
| 07:00 UTC | -5% | 54K |
| 08:00 UTC | -4% | 63K |
| 09:00 UTC | -3% | 72K |
| 10:00 UTC | -2% | 75K |
| 11:00 UTC | -3% | 81K |
| 12:00 UTC | -2% | 90K |
| 13:00 UTC | -2% | 98K |
| 14:00 UTC | -3% | 101K |
| 15:00 UTC | -2% | 105K |
| 16:00 UTC | -4% | 102K |
| 17:00 UTC | -3% | 95K |
| 18:00 UTC | -1% | 88K |
| 19:00 UTC | -2% | 83K |
| 20:00 UTC | -1% | 77K |
| 21:00 UTC | -1% | 69K |
| 22:00 UTC | -2% | 60K |
| 23:00 UTC | -2% | 53K |
Show engagement by day of week as a table
| Day | Vs author median | Posts |
|---|---|---|
| Sunday | +5% | 238K |
| Monday | 0% | 302K |
| Tuesday | -3% | 302K |
| Wednesday | -1% | 257K |
| Thursday | -2% | 250K |
| Friday | -3% | 259K |
| Saturday | +3% | 233K |
Best tweets
- Aug 26, 202633x their median
In “The Steppe and Its Empires,” Michael Khodarkovsky considers how the history of the Eurasian steppe influences Russia’s behavior in the present day. Read Ayşe Zarakol’s review: https://t.co/uTtJminipM https://t.co/XXeKcVg54V
- Aug 26, 202610x their median
“Ultimately, what Washington wants most is for Iran to interact productively with its neighbors, abandon an illicit nuclear program, and promote the well-being of its people,” writes Nate Swanson. “But like it or not, the Islamic Republic gets a say in what happens next in Iran.” https://t.co/OpnzstD8FR
- Aug 20, 20269.2x their median
“The American Middle East is finished,” writes Marc Lynch. “The regional order that has prevailed since 1991 has been one of the many casualties of the U.S.-Israeli war with Iran.” https://t.co/cLGfJhZNNA
- Aug 18, 20267.5x their median
Our September/October 2026 issue is now available online. Start reading here: https://t.co/FvQpkBupd6
- Aug 19, 20266.7x their median
“Leaders who fail to confront their new reality are failing their countries,” writes @markhleonard. “It is time to acknowledge that the old order really has disappeared—and to plot a new approach to geopolitics.” https://t.co/GMwKX4GI2s
- Aug 19, 20266.5x their median
“If the United States wants to keep itself out of costly conflicts around the world, it may have no choice but to forge closer ties with the new stabilizing powers,” a category that includes countries such as Pakistan and Turkey, writes @asfandyarmir. https://t.co/ENs2JNV4gt
- Aug 19, 20266.5x their median
“Thirteen years after Xi Jinping ascended to the top of China’s leadership hierarchy, observers in Washington remain deeply confused about how to assess his rule.” Read @jonczin on how U.S. officials are misreading Xi: https://t.co/z3HrtH9TXi
- Aug 19, 20265.4x their median
“With the United Nations and other multilateral bodies proving unable to mitigate modern conflicts, nontraditional powers are beginning to fill the gaps by engaging in order-stabilizing statecraft,” writes @asfandyarmir. https://t.co/ENs2JNV4gt
- Aug 19, 20265.0x their median
“Conflict management should not be conflated with conflict resolution,” write @NeilQuilliam1 and @SanamVakil. “History suggests that problems arise when leaders replace strategy with a series of narrow bargains.” https://t.co/SAS9s9kF2o
- Aug 27, 20264.3x their median
China is turning its “inability to produce the food it needs” into geopolitical leverage, write @welshce and @BrianTHart. “By exploiting its importance to food-producing countries, Beijing has found growing opportunities to pressure its rivals.” https://t.co/ORI5YE4FMQ
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 11 interactions against 947K followers, an engagement rate of 0.001%. Measured over 97 original posts, its engagement rate beats 13% of 3,882 tracked accounts of a similar size. That is a reason to look at how the audience behaves - reply depth, saves, whether the followers are recent - rather than a conclusion about it on its own. Posts are seen about 6.0K times each, and 0.185% of those impressions turn into an interaction. That is about 0.629% 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 17% of days saw any activity at all. Most posts go out around 13:00 UTC, and Wednesday is the busiest day of the week. Of the 97 posts sampled, 100% link out. The account's strongest tracked post pulled 359 interactions, about 33x its own typical post.
- What is Foreign Affairs's engagement rate on X?
- Foreign Affairs (@ForeignAffairs) has an engagement rate of 0.001%, based on the median interactions across 97 original posts from the last 30 days against 946,714 followers. Replies, reposts and quote-posts of other people are excluded from that sample.
- Is that a good engagement rate?
- At 0.001%, Foreign Affairs sits below the 10th percentile of the 37,701 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 @ForeignAffairs have real engagement?
- Its engagement rate beats 13% of the tracked X accounts closest to it in follower count (3,882 accounts), which puts it in the bottom 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 @ForeignAffairs post?
- Most posts go out around 13:00 UTC, and Wednesday is its busiest day, at roughly 3.37 posts per day across the measured window.