creator.inteljudgment on top of the feed
creator.intel
phase 1 · fraud.check live

200k followers,0.3% engagement— the math doesn't add up.

We score every creator you're considering against the niche-wide distribution for their follower band: nine thousand other accounts in the same hashtag, in the same tier. The score is a number out of one hundred. The reason is one line. That's the product.

scored against
9,142
peer creators / niche
audit run time
~14s
scrape + score
per audit
$0.05
or $49/mo for 2,000
median engagement · this band · this niche@subject · 0.4% eng41real-reach · /100engagement 0.41% — bottom 8% of micro-tier #skincare creators (9,142 scored)
how

a thin "we show you engagement rate" wrapper has no moat.

the row Creator Atlas returns already shows you engagement rate. what nobody else can show you is whether that number is normal for the niche. we keep the niche benchmark, scrape it once, reuse it across every customer.

  1. 01
    we scrape the niche, not the row

    for #skincare, micro-tier: we pull thousands of creators in that exact follower band and compute the band's engagement and like/comment distributions. once. then we cache it.

  2. 02
    your subject is one dot in that cloud

    we scrape the specific @handle you asked about with enrichment on. the four engagement numbers come back computed. we drop them onto the distribution.

  3. 03
    the score is the relationship

    engagement below the 25th percentile is a penalty. likes-heavy with no comments is a penalty. 200k followers and 18 posts is a penalty. the score is 100 minus the penalties.

  4. 04
    the reason is one line

    the brand manager has a campaign to ship. one number, one reason, the rest stays out of the way until they want to expand it.

the family

six products. one feed. one shared benchmark.

fraud.check leads because brands run it before every deal — the trust wedge. the rest of the family compounds on the same benchmark layer.

fraud.check
live
real-reach / fake-follower audit

scored against the niche-band distribution, not against a brochure — one number, one reason

$0.05 / audit · $49 / mo for 2,000
run it →
creator.brief
soon
auto-generated outreach dossiers

500-row CSV becomes 500 ready-to-send pitches: fair-rate, fraud score, opening DM that references real posts

$0.50 / dossier
roster.watch
soon
creator-roster monitoring

weekly re-scrape, weekly diff: who's growing, whose engagement is sliding before renewal, who went quiet

$29 / mo up to 100 · $99 / mo up to 500
rate.estimate
soon
fair-price intelligence

follower-band × engagement × niche against the benchmark — what they should cost, not what they ask

$0.05 / creator · free inside creator.brief
niche.map
soon
market-saturation report

every creator on a hashtag, segmented by band and engagement — macro players, underpriced micro-tier, the long tail

$99 – $299 one-time
lookalike.find
soon
audience-fit expansion

feed it your best-performing creators; competitor follower-mining + hashtag clustering surfaces the rest

$0.10 / creator surfaced
how we talk

we said the math doesn't add up. that's what we mean.

  • we scored this account against the 9,142 other skincare creators in that follower band; its engagement is in the bottom 8%
    AI-powered influencer fraud detection suite
  • 200k followers, 0.3% engagement — the math doesn't add up, here's why
    unlock creator insights
  • fair rate $640 — micro-tier skincare, p50 of band; you were quoted $2,400
    leverage data-driven creator economics

the followers were always public.
knowing which ones were real was the hard part.