Everyone scrolls a leaderboard of big videos and calls it research. It teaches you nothing, because the biggest number almost always belongs to the biggest account. The only honest question is whether a video beat what that account normally does — and the answer needs its whole back catalogue, not one link. Paste any public video below and watch it get measured against its own history, live.
Anything the platform refuses to publish is dropped from the score rather than guessed at, and the coverage figure tells you how much was really measurable.
The video's views divided by the median of that same account's recent uploads. This is the lever that separates a genuine breakout from a large channel having an ordinary Tuesday, and it is why a small account's forty thousand views can outrank a giant's million.
Views per day since publication, compared against that account's normal pace. A total is a lifetime figure and flatters anything old; velocity is what tells you a thing is happening right now, while there is still time to be part of it.
The share of viewers who actually reacted. Reach can be bought, borrowed or algorithmically gifted; the proportion of people moved enough to press something is the closest public proxy for whether the content earned its distribution.
There is a whole cottage industry selling directories of scraping endpoints. A directory is not an answer. Even after you wire one up, you are holding raw numbers with no idea which of them mean anything.
The public demo is one video at a time. Behind it, the same engine runs as a standing watch on the accounts you compete with.
"This one has 1.2 million views, let's do something like that." The account posts to nine million subscribers and averages four million a video. You have just copied a below-average video from a channel whose distribution you do not have, and you will conclude the format does not work.
"This one did 1.2 million against a median of four million — that is a miss. But this other account's 38,000 against a median of 2,600 is a 14x breakout, still climbing, in our category." You copy the shape that beat its own ceiling, which is the only thing that ever transfers.
Because it measures the size of the account, not the quality of the video. The only honest definition of a hit is a video that beat what that same account normally does — so the first number you need is their median, not the video's total.
None of the three. Everything read here is public information the platform already serves to anyone who opens the link, including the account's own upload feed. Platforms that hide their counts behind a login wall are the exception and run through a licensed route in the full engine rather than this public demo.
How much of the score was actually measurable. If a platform publishes views but not reactions, the engagement lever is dropped and the remaining weights are rebalanced rather than a number being invented. Coverage tells you how much confidence the score has earned.
Copying their content is a bad idea. Copying the structure is what every good studio has always done. The brief hands you the archetype, the pacing and the opening tension for your own offer — and everything we publish passes a pre-publish check before it goes out.
Yes, and that is how it is meant to be used. We watch the accounts you compete with, X-ray every upload, and bring you only what beat its own baseline — turned into a brief the same day.
Text Rudy the words VIDEO X-RAY with a competitor's name, and we will send back their breakout videos, scored against their own baseline, with the briefs to beat them.
TEXT RUDY: VIDEO X-RAY