How long do your threads accounts last?

[lissaaa]

Hey,

im currently sorting out in my Farm. So for me personally organic accounts last a LOT longer then spam accounts. For me it seems like new accounts have a boost at the beginning and then it decides if they will go good or bad. If the go good they last a little longer until views eventuall or under 100 for every post. (At the beginning its 500-20k for every post). After that we sort them out. Whats yall process? Are yall seeing the same stuff?

 

[vambrose]

Hey,

im currently sorting out in my Farm. So for me personally organic accounts last a LOT longer then spam accounts. For me it seems like new accounts have a boost at the beginning and then it decides if they will go good or bad. If the go good they last a little longer until views eventuall or under 100 for every post. (At the beginning its 500-20k for every post). After that we sort them out. Whats yall process? Are yall seeing the same stuff?

Interesting insight. When you say organic accounts last longer, are you mainly talking about delaying links and promotions, or are there other behaviours that seem to matter most early on?

 

[medialounge]

Hey,

im currently sorting out in my Farm. So for me personally organic accounts last a LOT longer then spam accounts. For me it seems like new accounts have a boost at the beginning and then it decides if they will go good or bad. If the go good they last a little longer until views eventuall or under 100 for every post. (At the beginning its 500-20k for every post). After that we sort them out. Whats yall process? Are yall seeing the same stuff?

By organic.. manually created account
Or account without content automation
?

 

[NotableMoney]

Yes, the "boost" is a calibration period. My successful farms see accounts last 6-12 months if they pass initial engagement checks. The key is gradually increasing post frequency and using diverse, non-viral content after the boost to avoid triggering the "spam decline" algorithm. Prune accounts as soon as views consistently drop below 200.

 

[Invictus]

No problem for weeks doing OFM but we warmp them up properly with automation

 

[washingtondc]

I see the same thing, natural accounts survive longer and spam accounts burn out very quickly.

 

[ToyBox Marketing]

For API created, you might need to appeal them after 7-10 days. That is what some other agencies have noticed when using API threads profiles.

 

[imccafey]

The pattern's pretty familiar. New accounts tend to get an initial boost of sorts before the algo decides if they're worth keeping in that wider circulation.. If engagements and retention are lacking, reach is gonna fall off by quite a lot.
The process isn't too far. Let the accounts ride the initial boost and keep the ones that stabilise and retire the ones that hemorrhage reach.

 

[Facebook_Ads_Agency]

We usually create many accounts, and they all tend to get an initial boost. Then, after 7-10 days, we review them and keep the best accounts. There's no point in wasting time on the others.

 

[Eastuncr]

I see the same thing, natural accounts survive longer and spam accounts burn out very quickly.

This is quite logical, but Thread also functions quite differently so spam is more frowned upon from my experience

 

[lissaaa]

By organic.. manually created account
Or account without content automation
?

I mean an organic posting style. Nothing spam related.

 

[omi3oh1]

Makes sense Threads works differently, and spam is less tolerated.

 

[lissaaa]

Yes, the "boost" is a calibration period. My successful farms see accounts last 6-12 months if they pass initial engagement checks. The key is gradually increasing post frequency and using diverse, non-viral content after the boost to avoid triggering the "spam decline" algorithm. Prune accounts as soon as views consistently drop below 200.

How would you say you trigger the ‘spam decline’ algorithm? And how to avoid it? Cause thats what im seeing. Posts can go mid or bad. Meaning from 50-200 views. Ive linked some example statistics below

EDIT: Also for those accounts who get less views it seems like it just wont give the 2nd testing after posting. For example if you get a viral post and have like 200 views in under 15 minutes the post usually stops for a while before pushing the post even more. After that it seems to go though similar phases again and again. The problem is that it doesnt matter for those accounts. We had posts doing 150 views in under 3 minutes and they stopped completely after like 200 views.

 

[NotableMoney]

How would you say you trigger the ‘spam decline’ algorithm? And how to avoid it? Cause thats what im seeing. Posts can go mid or bad. Meaning from 50-200 views. Ive linked some example statistics below

EDIT: Also for those accounts who get less views it seems like it just wont give the 2nd testing after posting. For example if you get a viral post and have like 200 views in under 15 minutes the post usually stops for a while before pushing the post even more. After that it seems to go though similar phases again and again. The problem is that it doesnt matter for those accounts. We had posts doing 150 views in under 3 minutes and they stopped completely after like 200 views.

View attachment 498787

You trigger it by inconsistency and low engagement velocity after the initial push. Avoid it by maintaining a steady post cadence and ensuring each post's initial engagement rate stays above your account's historical average. The algorithm abandons posts it predicts will not retain viewers.

 

[King Agency]

Yes, that initial “boost” is usually part of the platform’s calibration or testing phase. From what I’ve seen, accounts that pass early engagement checks tend to remain stable for a long period afterward.
A more sustainable approach is to increase posting frequency gradually and keep content varied and natural, rather than chasing viral spikes. Monitoring performance over time is important, and if engagement drops consistently, it’s often a signal to reassess the content strategy rather than push harder.

 

[lissaaa]

Yes, that initial “boost” is usually part of the platform’s calibration or testing phase. From what I’ve seen, accounts that pass early engagement checks tend to remain stable for a long period afterward.
A more sustainable approach is to increase posting frequency gradually and keep content varied and natural, rather than chasing viral spikes. Monitoring performance over time is important, and if engagement drops consistently, it’s often a signal to reassess the content strategy rather than push harder.

You trigger it by inconsistency and low engagement velocity after the initial push. Avoid it by maintaining a steady post cadence and ensuring each post's initial engagement rate stays above your account's historical average. The algorithm abandons posts it predicts will not retain viewers.

Okay so to get the higher average you can A: post better content or B: post more? Do the "daily views" count and not the views per post? Since posting more would only make sense if it tracks this way. Also with the "The algorithm abandons posts it predicts will not retain viewers." Doesnt that mean if i post the same 30 assets over and over this will give me more growth? And then just adjust the frequency higher and higher?

 

[Cloud Agency]

I see the same thing: Threads gives new accounts an initial boost, then decides whether they are organic or spam in 2–4 weeks.
Accounts with organic behavior tend to survive longer, while accounts with spam behavior tend to throttle or drop quickly.

 

[repix]

If you want to keep Threads accounts at good engagement rate after the initial boost, I've noticed that Threads will favor the accounts that naturally contribute to Threads community
That is if you're an active user, spend time on the app, actively scroll, like & comment under other people's posts in a human way, the algo will reward.
If all you do is post & only spend 5-10 minutes on the app, the engagement rate will eventually decline

 

[trueplayer]

What I’ve seen is Threads seems to score the account, not just the post. Once it tags you as “publisher only” vs “user”, reach slowly dies no matter how good single posts are

Posting more doesn’t fix that if the baseline engagement per session is weak, it just gives the algo more data to downrank you. Reposting the same assets works short term, but long term you need mixed intent sessions - scroll, react, comment, disappear, then post later so the account looks alive, not scheduled

 

[Red ruby]

Organic accounts last longer for me too, spam accounts get shut down faster. I usually sort after views drop under 100.