H

Harbor Lane

Trend & Social Hub

Feed
Accounts
Posts
Watchlist
Trends
Calendar
Queue6
Mentions8
Report
Sources

Data as of 09:53

  • Instagram: read 41 min ago
  • TikTok: read 58 min ago
  • YouTube: read 2 h ago
  • Facebook: read 2 h ago
  • LinkedIn: read 10 h ago

Watched accounts are read once a day, not on this clock.

Sample data
Omni*module 02 · demoCustomer Voice demoContent Studio demo
H

Harbor Lane · Social

Data as of 09:53 · sample data

Omni*

Report

Week of 7 Sep – 13 Sep · month to 13 Sep · vs previous period

Previous periodLast year

The two documents the department sends: one on Friday, one on the first of the month. Both carry their own dates, so the period control at the top does not move them — it only decides what they are set against.

Download PDF at the top of the page opens the browser's own print dialogue; the document below is laid out for it.

Weekly scorecard

7 Sep – 13 Sep · against 31 Aug – 6 Sep

The short read

  • Instagram carried 6 of the 8 posts. Engagement per reach there is 7.2%, 0.1 pt on the window before.
  • 4 posts beat their own account's median by three or more. What they have in common is counted on the Feed; why they worked is not something this data answers.
  • 7 of 8 planned slots went out. The rest are named on the Calendar with what stopped them.
  • 1 publish failed and was put back in the queue rather than lost. Every publish is read back from the platform afterwards, which is how a failure is noticed at all.
  • 1 row in this report has no figure. The reason is written beside each one rather than filled with a zero.
  • Engagement per reach

  • Instagram

    7.2%▼ 0.1 ptPlatform insights

  • TikTok

    10.9%▼ 0.3 ptPlatform insights

  • YouTube

    6.0%—Platform insights
  • Reach

  • Instagram

    137,190▲ 118.6%Platform insights

  • TikTok

    30,243▲ 28.6%Platform insights

  • YouTube

    12,349—Platform insights
  • Counted across platforms

  • Engagement, all platforms

    13,849▲ 92.4%Platform insights

  • Saves

    2,040▲ 92.8%Platform insights

  • Follows from posts

    497▲ 107.1%Platform insights

  • Posts published

    8+60.0%Publish log
  • How the posts did against themselves

  • Posts above their own median

    100.0%▲ 20.0 ptComputed

  • Breakouts

    4▲ 300.0%Computed
  • What the month and the queue did

  • Planned slots that went out

    87.5%▼ 12.5 ptCampaign calendar

  • Publishes that failed

    1▲ newPublish log

  • Items the queue is holding this morning

    2—Computed
  • Not measured

  • Revenue from organic posts

    Not measured. Without its own code or link, a post's effect on orders cannot be separated from everything else that happened that week. The one collaboration carrying a code is on the Mentions page.

    not measured—Computed

Reach is listed platform by platform and never added into one figure: on Instagram it counts accounts that saw a post, on YouTube it counts something else, and one total would be a number with no meaning. Counts of things that happened — posts, saves, follows — do add up and are shown once.

Against the watched set

Only on figures both sides genuinely have. Where a comparison has to leave an account out, the row says which and why.

Watch crawlers

  • Median engagement per post

    Harbor Lane806
    Watched competitors320

    The median post on each side. Engagement is the one figure every watched account gives; a reach comparison would have to drop an account and would still print a number, so it is not made here.

  • Posts a week

    Harbor Lane6.46
    Watched competitors4.85

    Counting posts needs nothing the accounts hide. Theirs is the median of 5 competitor accounts over the same days, so one account posting constantly does not stand in for the set.

  • Share of posts above their own median

    Harbor Lane90.0%
    Watched competitors63.2%

    Every post on both sides, pooled, each judged against its own account's history. Rookery Roasters is left out of the 4 accounts counted here: with view counts hidden there is no reach to rank.

Each account is measured against its own history before the two are set side by side, so a competitor with four times the followers does not win this by size alone.

FeedCalendarQueueMentions