Instapect
Sign inCreate account

@asif2bd

Broad Reach, Low Interaction

Mid tier250.5K followersAudience Reach73/100Benchmarked against 100K–1M followers

With 250,531 followers, an engagement rate of 0.29% sits below the 0.35% bottom quartile for 100K–1M followers, and only 0.18 comments arrive per 100 likes against a healthy 1–3. The follower count is large but the audience currently reaching the posts is not reacting to them. This is the most consequential thing in the report: the lever is what the content asks the audience to do, not how many people follow.

41Instapect ScoreD

Reachweight 20% · asset

73 /100

250,531 followers puts this account in the Mid tier (100K–500K followers). This is an asset score — how many people the account can reach — and it never moves based on how well the posts perform.

log-scaled followers: L = log10(followers); L≤3 → 5–25, 3<L≤6 → 25 + (L − 3) × 20, L>6 → 85 + (L − 6) × 15, capped 100

Engagementweight 30%

26 /100

Engagement rate 0.29%, below the 0.35% bottom quartile for accounts with 100K–1M followers. Typical is 0.70%.

piecewise-linear percentile curve for 100K–1M followers: 0%→5, p25 0.35%→30, p50 0.70%→55, p90 1.60%→85, 2.88%→100

Engagement Qualityweight 20%

Not measurable

The typical post carries 0 comments, below the 5-comment base at which a comment-to-like ratio is statistically meaningful. One or two reactions expressed as a percentage is not a measurement, so the weight is redistributed rather than scored.

comment-to-like ratio = avg comments ÷ avg likes × 100, mapped 0%→5, 0.5%→30, 1.5%→65, 3%→90, ≥5%→100

Consistencyweight 15%

9 /100

Posting cadence 0.68 posts per week, below the 1-per-week floor most active accounts clear. Gaps between posts vary by 1.05× the mean gap of 10.3 days — under 0.5× reads as a dependable rhythm.

60 × (1 − clamp(stdev(gaps) ÷ mean(gaps), 0, 1)) + 40 × cadence factor (0/wk → 0, 3/wk → 1.0, 3–7/wk → 1.0, 14/wk → 0.6, ≥21/wk → 0.3)

Content Performanceweight 15%

60 /100

The best post in the window drew 1.3× the median post's likes — 1× means no post ever breaks out, 3× or more means the account reliably produces outliers worth repeating. 89% of sampled posts carry both a caption and at least one hashtag (a well-kept feed is usually above 80%), across 3 distinct formats.

60 × upside score (top-post likes ÷ median likes: 1×→30, 2×→60, 3×→80, ≥5×→100) + 25 × caption-and-hashtag share + 15 × format mix (1.0 if ≥2 product types, else 0.5)

Growth Signalsweight 15%

43 /100

Followers moved -0.29% per week across the observed window. Flat (0%) sits at the 50 midpoint; +1%/week is a fast-growing account, and anything negative means the audience is shrinking.

clamp(50 + weekly follower growth % × 25, 0, 100), where weekly % = (followers now ÷ followers then − 1) × 100 ÷ weeks

Public-profile audit · 9 posts sampled (3 pinned excluded) · retrieved 28 Aug 2026· served from 24h cache

What this account does not make measurable

  • 3 pinned posts were detected at the head of the response and excluded from the content window, leaving 9 of the 12 returned items. Pinned posts hold permanent placement and keep accumulating engagement, and the oldest one manufactures a gap that never happened — so they are excluded from cadence, gaps, regularity, format mix and every average. They still appear in the content leaderboard, badged "Pinned".
  • The content sample is the 9-item recent-posts window. The reels endpoint reaches further back and covers Reels only, so it is used to enrich matched items with their play count (1 matched) — never to extend the sample, which would inflate the Reel share and corrupt cadence.
  • 11 older Reels outside the content window are shown separately in "Top Reels by plays" with their own window, and are excluded from every average, the format mix and all cadence maths.
  • Play counts are published public counts shown only where the provider returns them. They are not reach, views or watch time, and none of those are available for a public-profile audit.
@asif2bd profile picture

M Asif Rahman

Verified
Entrepreneur

@asif2bd

#50Under40 🌏 63 Countries & Counting 🔥 Focused on #AI #SaaS #WordPress #Shopify 🚀 🌐 Founder @WPDeveloper @ARCom ✈️🎶🏔👨‍💻🚙🏏🏌️| Balancing Life

asif.im/
250.5K
Followers
310
Following
990
Posts

Engagement rate by followers

0.29%

(avg likes + avg comments) ÷ followers × 100 · below the 0.35% bottom quartile for 100K–1M followers · typical 0.70%

Average likes

730per post

Median 722 likes per post

Average comments

1per post

Median 0 comments per post

Posting cadence

0.7posts / week

Average 10.3 days between posts

Comment-to-like ratio

0.18%

avg comments ÷ avg likes × 100 · healthy band 1–3% · below band — the audience is scrolling past rather than replying

Instapect Score

Two headline numbers, kept apart on purpose: the Instapect Score reads performance, Audience Reach reads the size of the asset. Every formula is printed below — no black box.

41out of 100D

Broad Reach, Low Interaction

A large audience that is not currently reacting. The follower base is a real asset; what the posts ask that audience to do is the lever.

Nominal weights: Reach 20% · Engagement 30% · Engagement Quality 20% · Consistency 15% · Content Performance 15% · Growth 15% · composite from 5 of 6 signals — unavailable sub-scores are excluded from both sums, not scored zero

Audience Reach

73 /100

Mid tier

250,531 followers (100K–500K followers). An asset score: how many people this account can reach. It does not move with how well the posts perform.

What this means

Audience–engagement mismatch

With 250,531 followers, an engagement rate of 0.29% sits below the 0.35% bottom quartile for 100K–1M followers, and only 0.18 comments arrive per 100 likes against a healthy 1–3. The follower count is large but the audience currently reaching the posts is not reacting to them. This is the most consequential thing in the report: the lever is what the content asks the audience to do, not how many people follow.

Posting frequency is the most controllable lever

At 0.68 posts per week — one every 10 days — the account publishes less than once a week. Unlike engagement rate, cadence is entirely within the owner's control, which makes it the cheapest thing on this page to change.

Performance is genuinely consistent

Median likes (722) are 99% of the average (730). No viral outlier is propping up the average, so every number in this report describes what a typical post actually does — a dependable baseline is a real asset when planning.

Reach

73 /100

250,531 followers puts this account in the Mid tier (100K–500K followers). This is an asset score — how many people the account can reach — and it never moves based on how well the posts perform.

Weight 20% · log-scaled followers: L = log10(followers); L≤3 → 5–25, 3<L≤6 → 25 + (L − 3) × 20, L>6 → 85 + (L − 6) × 15, capped 100

log10(250,531) = 5.40, mapped as 25 + (L − 3) × 20 across the 1K–1M range (1K=25, 10K=45, 100K=65, 1M=85, 10M=100).

Engagement

26 /100

Engagement rate 0.29%, below the 0.35% bottom quartile for accounts with 100K–1M followers. Typical is 0.70%.

Weight 30% · piecewise-linear percentile curve for 100K–1M followers: 0%→5, p25 0.35%→30, p50 0.70%→55, p90 1.60%→85, 2.88%→100

Engagement rate 0.29% mapped onto the 100K–1M followers percentile curve (0%→5, p25 0.35%→30, p50 0.70%→55, p90 1.60%→85), measured across 9 of 9 sampled posts with visible like counts.

Engagement Quality

Not measurable

Weight 20% · comment-to-like ratio = avg comments ÷ avg likes × 100, mapped 0%→5, 0.5%→30, 1.5%→65, 3%→90, ≥5%→100

The typical post carries 0 comments, below the 5-comment base at which a comment-to-like ratio is statistically meaningful. One or two reactions expressed as a percentage is not a measurement, so the weight is redistributed rather than scored.

Consistency

9 /100

Posting cadence 0.68 posts per week, below the 1-per-week floor most active accounts clear. Gaps between posts vary by 1.05× the mean gap of 10.3 days — under 0.5× reads as a dependable rhythm.

Weight 15% · 60 × (1 − clamp(stdev(gaps) ÷ mean(gaps), 0, 1)) + 40 × cadence factor (0/wk → 0, 3/wk → 1.0, 3–7/wk → 1.0, 14/wk → 0.6, ≥21/wk → 0.3)

regularity 0.00 (1 − stdev 10.8d ÷ mean gap 10.3d) and cadence factor 0.23 from 0.7 posts/week (0→0, ramping to 1.0 at 3/wk, flat 1.0 through 7/wk, tapering to 0.6 at 14/wk and 0.3 at 21+/wk).

Content Performance

60 /100

The best post in the window drew 1.3× the median post's likes — 1× means no post ever breaks out, 3× or more means the account reliably produces outliers worth repeating. 89% of sampled posts carry both a caption and at least one hashtag (a well-kept feed is usually above 80%), across 3 distinct formats.

Weight 15% · 60 × upside score (top-post likes ÷ median likes: 1×→30, 2×→60, 3×→80, ≥5×→100) + 25 × caption-and-hashtag share + 15 × format mix (1.0 if ≥2 product types, else 0.5)

upside 1.28× (top post 924 likes ÷ median 722) scoring 38, enrichment 0.89 (caption + ≥1 hashtag), format mix 1.0 (3 distinct product types).

Growth Signals

43 /100

Followers moved -0.29% per week across the observed window. Flat (0%) sits at the 50 midpoint; +1%/week is a fast-growing account, and anything negative means the audience is shrinking.

Weight 15% · clamp(50 + weekly follower growth % × 25, 0, 100), where weekly % = (followers now ÷ followers then − 1) × 100 ÷ weeks

-0.29% followers per week over 0.0 weeks of Instapect snapshots, mapped as 50 + weekly% × 25.

Growth & cadence

Instagram publishes no follower history, so Instapect builds its own: every audit records a snapshot, and the trend below is measured across those snapshots. Everything else here comes from the visible posting record.

Follower growth

Measured across 1 days of Instapect snapshots · -4 followers.

Engagement rate per post (%)

Oldest to newest across the sampled posts. Unit: % of followers.

Likes and comments per post

Unit: absolute interactions per post.

Free account required

Create a free account to see when this account posts and when its audience actually responds — weekday mix and hour-of-day heatmap.

Create a free accountSign in

Engagement diagnostics

Averages are easily distorted by one viral post. The median tells you what a typical post actually does — read them side by side.

Average engagement rate

0.29%

Mean of (likes + comments) ÷ followers

Comment-only engagement rate

0.00%

Comments ÷ followers × 100 — the honest fallback when likes are hidden

Median engagement rate

0.29%

Middle post in the sample

Comment-to-like ratio

0.2%

Higher means more conversational audience

Like-based sample

9of 9 posts

Every sampled post shows its like count. Comment metrics use all 9 posts.

Free account required

Create a free account to see the full engagement distribution — how far the best and worst posts sit from the median.

Create a free accountSign in

Content leaderboard

Posts ranked by engagement rate by followers. Pinned posts are shown because a reader will recognise them, but they sit outside the measured window and feed no average, rate or rhythm.

Free account required

Create a free account to see the full content breakdown — every top post with its thumbnail and per-post engagement rate.

Create a free accountSign in

Hashtags & mentions

Frequency from captions in the sample, with the average engagement rate of the posts each tag appears on. Association, not causation.

Free account required

Create a free account to see the full hashtag and mention detail, with the engagement associated with each tag.

Create a free accountSign in

Action plan

Prioritised by expected impact, written from the measured data above. The advisor sees only the metrics this report could actually compute — never an estimate, never a metric Instagram keeps private.

Free account required

Create a free account to read the full AI action plan, post ideas, hashtag strategy and best time to post for this account.

Create a free accountSign in

Methodology & caveats

What this report measures, how, and what it deliberately does not claim.

KPI definitions

  • Engagement rate by followers = (average likes + average comments) ÷ followers × 100.
  • Median engagement rate = the middle post's engagement rate in the sample; robust to viral outliers.
  • Posting cadence = (sampled posts − 1) ÷ days spanned × 7. Intervals, not posts: n posts span n−1 gaps. Unavailable below 2 posts or a zero-day window.
  • Instapect Score = 0.20 × Reach + 0.30 × Engagement + 0.20 × Engagement Quality + 0.15 × Consistency + 0.15 × Content Performance + 0.15 × Growth Signals, renormalised over the sub-scores that could be measured.
  • Comment-to-like ratio = average comments ÷ average likes × 100. A healthy conversational account sits between 1% and 3%.

Sample, source & limits

  • 9 public posts sampled (9 usable for like-based metrics) · retrieved 28 Aug 2026 · served from the 24-hour cache.
  • Only lawfully-visible public signals are used: published posts, visible counts, captions, hashtags, mentions and timestamps.
  • Instapect never reports reach, impressions, audience demographics, Story insights or Reels watch-time. Those are private to the account owner and any tool claiming them for a third party is guessing.
  • Benchmarks are published industry medians by follower tier and are indicative, not guarantees. Any forward-looking figure is labelled an estimate with its method stated.

This report is built only from lawfully-visible public Instagram signals — published posts and visible counts. It contains no reach, impressions, demographics, Story insights or watch-time, because nobody outside the account can see those. Request removal and the report is delisted from the directory, the category hubs and the sitemap.