How Often Do Competitors Actually Post on Each Platform?

The spread across the three platforms is narrow, and the whole range sits between one and two posts a week. The busiest platform in the tracked field still did not reach two posts a week, and the quietest was close to one.

Posting cadence

The rate at which an account publishes, expressed as posts per week over a stated period rather than as a total, so accounts observed for different lengths of time stay comparable.

Averaging per-account values rather than pooling every post matters more than it sounds. Pool the posts and a single high-volume publisher sets the number for the whole set. Average the accounts and each one counts once, which is what makes 1.98 posts a week a description of a typical account instead of a description of the busiest one.

Months where an account has no data are excluded from the denominator rather than counted as zero. An account we saw for three weeks contributes a three-week rate, not a month with a hole in it.

Publication has a floor. A figure computed from fewer than 20 accounts is labelled an observation rather than a benchmark, and every value on this page is above that line with its count printed next to it.

The gap has a practical consequence. A team that sets a five-a-week target from a listicle is competing against a field that publishes between one and two times a week, and it will burn its capacity on volume nobody is matching. The target was never benchmarked against anything; it was inherited.

A cadence you can hold indefinitely beats a cadence you abandon in week six. The measured field gives that decision an anchor: publish at 1.98 posts a week on Instagram, the figure measured across 71 tracked accounts, and you are already keeping pace with the accounts you are compared against.

A video share under half is the opposite of the all-in-on-Reels advice in circulation, and it is a more comfortable number to plan against. Video is the most expensive format a small team produces, and a mix means the expensive format has to carry only part of the schedule.

The useful reading is about allocation rather than preference. Give video the slots where motion is the argument, such as a product in use or a before-and-after, and let static and carousel formats carry the explanatory work. That distribution is roughly what the tracked field already does.

A LinkedIn post carries an argument, a point of view or a piece of news, and each one costs someone an hour of thinking. An Instagram post can be a product photograph with a caption. The measured cadence difference is mostly a production-cost difference, not a difference in how much the platform rewards frequency.

That reframes the planning question. On LinkedIn, one strong post a week already matches the field, which means the budget goes into what the post says. On Instagram, the field publishes roughly twice as often, so the constraint is a repeatable format rather than a fresh idea every time.

Facebook sits between the two at 1.68 posts a week across 77 accounts, which is consistent with a channel most teams feed from work produced for somewhere else.

Then measure yourself against yourself. Your own cadence over the previous quarter is a more actionable comparison than any cross-account average, because it holds your audience, your category and your production constraints fixed.

Excluding the open month is what keeps the figure honest. A month measured on day nine looks like a collapse in cadence on every account, because most of its posts have not happened yet. The last complete month is the earliest period that can be compared with the one before it.

Figures move between recomputations as new data arrives, so a published number is tied to a dated snapshot rather than to a live query. When you quote 1.98 posts a week, quote it with the 71 accounts and the June 2026 date attached, and the number stays checkable a year from now.