Your LinkedIn posts
are being ignored.

Five factors, each weighted differently. Hook strength carries the most — 28% — because the first line determines whether anyone reads the rest. Engagement triggers (closing questions, CTAs, story) is 26%. Structure and format is 18%. Value and specificity — real numbers, concrete outcomes — is 16%. Algorithm signals — external links, hashtag count — is 12%. Every factor is scored 0–100 and combined into a final grade A through D. Same post always returns the same score. The number doesn’t change based on who’s asking.

No. It means your post is missing signals that LinkedIn specifically rewards — and those are different from what makes writing good anywhere else. A thoughtful essay scores low here if it starts with “In today’s fast-paced world” and ends with a full stop. A punchy first-person story with a closing question scores high. The tool is measuring platform performance, not the quality of your thinking or your craft. I’ve seen beautifully written posts score C and structurally sound posts score A. The score tells you how the algorithm will treat your post — not how smart you are.

This is the right thing to worry about. Most AI rewrites flatten everything into the same smooth, soulless voice. This one doesn’t work that way. Before rewriting, the engine reads your sentence length, your rhythm, your punctuation habits, and your post type. The rewrite rebuilds the structure — it doesn’t replace your words with nicer ones. Your voice stays yours. The architecture improves. That said, you’re always the final editor. Read it, adjust what feels off, and post the version that sounds like you.

The scoring engine measures things that are true regardless of niche — whether your hook earns the second line, whether your post has specific numbers or stays vague, whether you end with a question or a full stop. A financial adviser, a fitness coach, and a software founder all benefit from a stronger hook and a closing question. The AI tips are context-aware and read your actual post rather than applying generic advice. It works best for people who write thought leadership, personal stories, client results, or contrarian takes — which covers most professional LinkedIn content.

No. Your post is processed to generate your score and rewrite, then discarded. Nothing is saved, logged, or shared. The only thing stored is your email address if you sign up for the trial — and that’s only so you can access rewrites on return visits. Your content stays yours.

Scoring is always free — no account needed, no limit, no expiry. Rewrites require a 14-day free trial, no card needed. After that it’s A$19/month or A$149/year. If the trial ends and you haven’t subscribed, scoring stays free and rewrites lock until you do. If you upgrade, access restores instantly. Cancel any time — no lock-in, no awkward cancellation flow.

Yes — and it’s worth doing before you spend anything. LinkedIn’s algorithm rewards the same signals whether a post is organic or sponsored: a hook that earns the second line, specificity over vague claims, an engagement trigger at the close. A D-grade post doesn’t become a B-grade post because you put budget behind it. It becomes an expensive D. Score the copy first. Get it to a B or above. Then run it. One other thing worth knowing: LinkedIn lets you build retargeting audiences from people who engaged with your organic posts, via Matched Audiences in Campaign Manager. If a post is already pulling strong organic engagement, you can retarget those people without a separate lead gen campaign. The Calculator won’t set that up for you — but getting the post score up is step one regardless.