@wxpinkc · Personal blog
Instapect Score
86/100 · grade A — a performance read, benchmarked against under 5K followers.
by followers · typical 4.00%
median 46
median 17
posts / week · 13.9 d apart
healthy band 1–3%
middle post in the sample
it's N!L, not "normal" 🎀 لحظههای واقعی + حرفای دلی تو سرم چی میگذره؟ بیا ببین.
t.me/etherealrsHeadline public metrics for @wxpinkc, from 2 sampled posts. Averages sit beside medians so one viral post cannot flatter the picture.
Engagement rate
9.38%
(avg likes + avg comments) ÷ followers · median 10.42% · under 5K followers
Average likes
46
Median 46 · 1 posts with a visible like count
Average comments
17
Median 17 · comment-to-like 37.0%
Posting cadence
0.5posts / week
About one post every 13.9 days
Latest posts
Newest first · engagement rate by followers per post
The verdict is at the top of the page; this is the reasoning underneath it. Every sub-score prints its own weight and formula — no black box.
Archetype
High-Engagement Community
Both the rate of response and the depth of it are strong — this audience reacts and talks back.
Nominal weights: Engagement 35% · Engagement Quality 25% · Consistency 15% · Content Performance 15% · Growth 10%. Audience Reach is context only and carries no weight — every account is graded against peers in its own follower tier · composite from 3 of 5 signals — unavailable sub-scores are excluded from both sums, not scored zero
Audience Reach
22 /100
Nano tier
672 followers (under 10K followers). An asset score: how many people this account can reach. It does not move with how well the posts perform.
What this means
Engagement is top-decile for this size
Engagement rate 9.38% is at or above the 8.00% top-decile mark for under 5K followers. Audience responsiveness is the strength of this account, not something it needs to fix.
Posting frequency is the most controllable lever
At 0.50 posts per week — one every 14 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 (46) are 100% of the average (46). 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.
Audience Reach
22 /100
672 followers puts this account in the Nano tier (under 10K 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 0% · 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(672) = 2.83, mapped as 25 + (L − 3) × 20 across the 1K–1M range (1K=25, 10K=45, 100K=65, 1M=85, 10M=100).
Engagement
88 /100
Engagement rate 9.38%, at or above the 8.00% top-decile rate for accounts with under 5K followers. Typical is 4.00%.
Weight 35% · piecewise-linear percentile curve for under 5K followers: 0%→5, p25 2.00%→30, p50 4.00%→55, p90 8.00%→85, 14.40%→100
Engagement rate 9.38% mapped onto the under 5K followers percentile curve (0%→5, p25 2.00%→30, p50 4.00%→55, p90 8.00%→85), measured across 1 of 2 sampled posts with visible like counts.
Engagement Quality
100 /100
36.96 comments per 100 likes, above the 1–3% healthy band, an unusually conversational audience. A comment costs far more effort than a like, so this ratio measures conversation rather than reach.
Weight 25% · comment-to-like ratio = avg comments ÷ avg likes × 100, mapped 0%→5, 0.5%→30, 1.5%→65, 3%→90, ≥5%→100
36.96 comments per 100 likes mapped as 0%→5, 0.5%→30, 1.5%→65, 3%→90, ≥5%→100.
Consistency
Not measurable
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)
The content window holds fewer than three posts, so gap variability cannot be distinguished from a single interval and neither regularity nor cadence is meaningful.
Content Performance
60 /100
Breakout upside could not be measured on this sample. 50% of sampled posts carry both a caption and at least one hashtag (a well-kept feed is usually above 80%), across 2 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 unavailable (fewer than 3 visible-like posts); its weight was redistributed. enrichment 0.50 (caption + ≥1 hashtag), format mix 1.0 (2 distinct product types).
Growth Signals
Not measurable
Weight 10% · clamp(50 + weekly follower growth % × 25, 0, 100), where weekly % = (followers now ÷ followers then − 1) × 100 ÷ weeks
This is the first recorded audit of this account, so there is no observation window yet. Instagram publishes no follower history — Instapect measures growth by comparing snapshots it takes itself, and the trend appears from the second audit that is at least 7 days later.
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
This is the first recorded audit of this account, so there is no observation window yet. Instagram publishes no follower history — Instapect measures growth by comparing snapshots it takes itself, and the trend appears from the second audit that is at least 7 days later.
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.
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
9.38%
Mean of (likes + comments) ÷ followers
Comment-only engagement rate
2.53%
Comments ÷ followers × 100 — the honest fallback when likes are hidden
Median engagement rate
10.42%
Middle post in the sample
Comment-to-like ratio
37.0%
Higher means more conversational audience
Like-based sample
1of 2 posts
1 post hide their like count and are excluded from like-based numbers only — they still count for cadence, format, captions and comments (2 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.
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.
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, the content plan, post ideas, hashtag strategy and best time to post for this account.
What this report measures, how, and what it deliberately does not claim.
What this account does not make measurable
KPI definitions
Sample, source & limits
A ready-to-post card with the Instapect Score, grade and the headline public metrics. Free to download — no account needed.
Cards show only lawfully-visible public metrics and carry the sample size and retrieval date, so anyone who sees one can check the full report.
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.
