Original data · H2 2026 edition
Twitter Cold DM Benchmarks
Aggregated, anonymized benchmarks from 43.7 million real X/Twitter cold DMs sent through Xreacher over six months: what reply rates typical campaigns actually get, how hard mass multi-account blasting underperforms targeted solo outreach, when to send, which lead profiles reply, and how much daily volume accounts sustain. Recomputed each edition from the full campaign dataset with the methodology published below.
Data window: the 180 days ending July 3, 2026 · Published 2026-07-03 · Free to cite with attribution and a link
The dataset
Every figure on this page is computed across all campaigns sent through Xreacher in the stated window, aggregated and anonymized. No individual customer data is shown.
85.3M
Xreacher has recorded 85.3M initial cold DMs on X/Twitter since launch (85,311,813 as of July 3, 2026).
43.7M
This edition of the Xreacher benchmarks covers 43.7M cold DMs (43,672,794 initial messages; follow-up messages are counted and analyzed separately) sent on X/Twitter in the 180 days ending July 3, 2026.
15,045
The data spans 15,045 distinct sending accounts across 1,124 campaigns in the window.
Follow-ups
How often follow-ups are used at all. Low usage is partly rational economics rather than a verdict on follow-ups: a follow-up consumes the same scarce daily DM allowance as a fresh prospect, so senders tend to spend the quota on new leads instead of second touches. We also deliberately do not publish a follow-up 'lift' figure: reply attribution in this dataset is last-touch, so differences between threads with and without follow-ups reflect selection (follow-ups only go to leads who have not replied yet), not causal lift. The naive full-pool comparison (0.94% vs 0.43%) reverses inside cohorts (0.92% vs 1.35%) — a Simpson's paradox we would rather disclose than publish.
99.3%
99.3% of all cold DM threads consist of a single message — and even among smaller, non-bulk senders, 96.5% of threads never receive a follow-up.
Methodology note: Follow-ups count against the same daily DM limit as new outreach, so preferring fresh prospects over second touches can be the economically rational choice — this is a usage stat, not evidence that follow-ups underperform.
Send timing
How send time relates to reply rate, computed excluding bulk adult-industry operations so the pattern is not dominated by one audience type. Hours are UTC.
19:00-02:00 UTC
DMs sent between 19:00-02:00 UTC — US afternoon and evening — replied at roughly 1.4%, about 60% above the 09:00-12:00 UTC trough (0.86%).
Methodology note: Correlation across a global sender base, not a causal test; sender and audience timezones vary. Computed on the non-bulk cohort (5.4M threads).
Reply rate by send hour — full table
| UTC | New York (ET) | Berlin (CET) | DMs sent | Reply rate |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 00:00 | 20:00 | 02:00 | 226,646 | 1.44% |
| 01:00 | 21:00 | 03:00 | 221,327 | 1.45% |
| 02:00 | 22:00 | 04:00 | 200,056 | 1.55% |
| 03:00 | 23:00 | 05:00 | 110,792 | 1.45% |
| 04:00 | 00:00 | 06:00 | 85,173 | 1.62% |
| 05:00 | 01:00 | 07:00 | 79,018 | 1.66% |
| 06:00 | 02:00 | 08:00 | 64,596 | 1.52% |
| 07:00 | 03:00 | 09:00 | 44,163 | 1.50% |
| 08:00 | 04:00 | 10:00 | 70,326 | 1.69%best |
| 09:00 | 05:00 | 11:00 | 77,362 | 0.91% |
| 10:00 | 06:00 | 12:00 | 97,094 | 0.86% |
| 11:00 | 07:00 | 13:00 | 135,499 | 0.80%lowest |
| 12:00 | 08:00 | 14:00 | 165,956 | 0.88% |
| 13:00 | 09:00 | 15:00 | 321,587 | 1.30% |
| 14:00 | 10:00 | 16:00 | 327,876 | 1.13% |
| 15:00 | 11:00 | 17:00 | 349,539 | 1.31% |
| 16:00 | 12:00 | 18:00 | 369,705 | 1.28% |
| 17:00 | 13:00 | 19:00 | 381,083 | 1.41% |
| 18:00 | 14:00 | 20:00 | 370,446 | 1.42% |
| 19:00 | 15:00 | 21:00 | 401,471 | 1.52% |
| 20:00 | 16:00 | 22:00 | 376,953 | 1.28% |
| 21:00 | 17:00 | 23:00 | 354,557 | 1.32% |
| 22:00 | 18:00 | 00:00 | 310,189 | 1.42% |
| 23:00 | 19:00 | 01:00 | 246,577 | 1.37% |
Non-bulk cohort (5.4M threads), 180 days ending July 3, 2026. Early-UTC-morning hours (04:00-08:00) also show high rates but on much smaller volume. Local-time columns use current offsets (New York UTC-4, Berlin UTC+2); the window spans daylight-saving changes, which blurs local hours by about one hour.
Who replies
Reply rate by the contacted lead's profile, from a large random sample of threads joined against scraped lead attributes (non-bulk cohort).
1.8x
Leads with X Premium (verified) replied at about 2.3% versus 1.25% for non-Premium leads — a 1.8x difference that held across every follower band.
Methodology note: Weighted across follower bands in the non-bulk cohort sample (~200,000 joined threads). 'Verified' = active X Premium subscription.
Daily volume, then and now
How much daily volume accounts actually sent during the window analyzed. Important: X has since tightened DM limits substantially (roughly 35 DMs/day for X Premium accounts as of mid-2026), so treat these historical volumes as context about the era the data comes from — not as pacing guidance for today.
50-99
During the window analyzed, the median active sending account sent 50-99 DMs per day; smaller non-bulk senders were closer to 25-49.
Methodology note: Median of ~290,000 account-days, January-July 2026. X's DM caps have since been reduced (~35/day for Premium accounts as of mid-2026); volumes in this dataset predate those limits and should not be read as recommended pacing.
Methodology
Figures are computed with read-only database aggregations across all X/Twitter cold DM campaigns sent through Xreacher during the 180 days ending July 3, 2026. Stats that join lead attributes (follower bands, verified status) use large random samples. Everything is aggregated and anonymized; no individual customer, account, or campaign is identifiable.
Known limits we disclose rather than hide: reply attribution is last-touch per thread, reply detection is polled (hour-level timing precision), and lead-attribute joins have coverage gaps for leads pruned from the scraping pool. Each stat carries its own methodology note where one applies.
FAQs
Where does this data come from?
From aggregated, anonymized campaign data across all X/Twitter outreach sent through Xreacher in the stated window — 43.7 million DMs from 15,045 sending accounts. Figures are computed with database-level aggregations over the full dataset (large random samples for stats that join lead attributes), and no individual customer, account, or campaign is identifiable.
Why report a median campaign rate instead of one overall average?
Because a pooled average is dominated by a handful of industrial-scale senders: operations running 11+ accounts produced 97.5% of raw volume at a 0.39% reply rate, while typical small senders earned 2.2-2.5%. A single pooled number (0.43%) describes the volume extremes, not a typical campaign, so we publish the campaign-level median and the cohort split instead — and show all three numbers.
Can I cite these benchmarks?
Yes. Every stat has an anchor link you can reference directly, and you may quote any figure with attribution to 'Xreacher Cold DM Benchmarks' and a link to this page. The edition label states the data window so citations stay accurate as the page is refreshed.
What counts as a reply?
A thread counts as replied when the contacted lead sends any response after the initial DM. Attribution is last-touch: if follow-ups were sent, the reply is credited to the thread's final stage. Automated or AI-agent conversations after the first reply are not counted as additional replies.
How often is this updated?
Each edition is recomputed from the full dataset and the edition label and publication date are updated accordingly. Previous editions' figures are not silently changed; a refresh replaces the edition label so any external citation remains traceable to its window.
Last updated 2026-07-03