Know how a post will do
before you publish it
Not a score out of 100. The specific things about this draft that are costing you, what each one costs, and what to do about it. It works on your first ever post, and it gets more personal as your results come in.
Performance prediction tells you how a post is likely to do before you publish it, and it does so by naming reasons rather than showing a score. Content Drifter reads the draft against researched per-network algorithm data, so it works on your very first post with no history at all, and it says exactly what is costing you: a link in the body costs roughly half your reach on LinkedIn, this is shorter than the length that performs, eight hashtags is above the band that network rewards. As it learns from your own published results it starts quoting those instead, and it always tells you which of the two it is speaking from.
There is no score, on purpose
Every tool in this category gives you a number. FeedHive gives you a number. A number is the one output you cannot check, cannot argue with, and cannot act on: if it says 62, what exactly do you change?
It is worse than useless before the tool has seen any of your results, because then it is two significant figures invented out of a handful of yes-or-no facts about your draft. That is not a prediction. It is a confident-looking shape.
Reasons, each with the fix attached
What you get instead is a short verdict and the specific reasons behind it. A link in the body costs roughly half your reach on LinkedIn, so move it to the first comment, which Content Drifter can do for you automatically. This runs shorter than the length that performs on that network. Eight hashtags is above the band it rewards. No image, where images reliably out-reach text.
You can read all of that and decide we are wrong about one of them. That is the point. A claim you can disagree with is worth more than a number you cannot.
Useful on your very first post
A tool that only scores against your own history has nothing to say until you have handed it months of posts. That is exactly backwards: the moment you most need help is before you have a track record.
So the first thing it reads your draft against is researched data for the network you are posting to: measured link penalties, the length range that performs, the hashtag count that network rewards, whether images out-reach text there, whether the time you picked is a peak window. All of that is available before you have published anything at all.
It gets personal, and says when it has
As your results come in, it starts quoting them instead: your posts with an image do 40% better than your posts without one, across a named number of measured posts. Each feature is compared against your own posts that do not have it, which is the only comparison that answers whether it helps you.
A feature needs at least five measured posts behind it before it will be quoted at all, and anything within a few points of zero is thrown away as noise rather than dressed up as a finding. Every reason is labelled with where it came from, and the panel tells you which it is speaking from. Blurring the two would be claiming a personalisation we do not have.
It costs nothing to run
There is no AI call involved. Every input is either a researched platform fact we already hold or a deterministic property of your draft, so checking a post never touches your generation allowance and never appears on a bill.
Where it sits
In the editor, directly above the first-comment control, because its single loudest finding is usually the link in your body and that control is the fix. Diagnosis next to the remedy, rather than a verdict on a separate screen you have to go and find.
When the prediction is about you, and when it is not
5
Measured posts before your own history is used
3
Confidence tiers
4
Signals it can learn about you
A prediction will not quote your own history until it has 5 measured posts carrying the signal it wants to talk about. Below that it blends you with the platform baseline, and with none at all it says plainly that the number is a baseline rather than a read of you. The signals it can learn are whether a post has media, has a link, runs long or asks a question. A tool that predicts confidently from one post is guessing, and the honest version of this feature is one that tells you which of the three it is doing.
Read from the code that enforces it, 25 August 2026.
Frequently asked questions
Do I get a score out of 100?
No, deliberately. A score is the one output you cannot check, argue with, or act on, and before we have any of your results it would be two significant figures invented from a handful of content features. You get a short verdict and the specific reasons behind it, each with what to do about it. You can look at those and decide we are wrong, which you cannot do with a number.
Does it work before I have published anything?
Yes, and that is the point. It reads your draft against researched data for the network you are posting to: measured link penalties, the length range that performs, the hashtag count that network rewards, whether images out-reach text there, and whether the time you picked is a peak window. Tools that only score against your own history have nothing to say until you have given them months of posts.
How does it use my own results once I have some?
Each content feature is compared against your own posts that do not have it, so it can say that your posts with an image do 40% better than your posts without one, across a named number of measured posts. A feature needs at least five measured posts behind it before it will be quoted at all, and anything within a few points of zero is discarded as noise rather than dressed up as a finding.
How do I know whether a reason is about my account or the platform in general?
Every reason is labelled. Ones learned from your own posts are marked as such, and the panel states which tier it is speaking from: how the network generally works, how it works plus your first few measured posts, or your own results. Blurring those two would be claiming a personalisation we do not have.
Does it cost extra or use my AI credits?
No. There is no AI call involved. Every input is either a researched platform fact already stored or a deterministic property of the draft itself, so checking a post costs nothing and never touches your generation allowance.
Keep reading
Related pages people usually open next.
Ready to try it?
Start for free and upgrade as you grow. No credit card required.