Companion analysis · for Sydney

What the LinkedIn Data Shows

Forty-six posts, thirteen months, broken down by what actually moved. Written to answer one question: where should the next thirty posts go?

Headline

Across the reliable data window the page produced 9,404 impressions and 287 link clicks — an overall click-through rate of 3.05%, which is a strong number for organic B2B. Engagement averaged around 6%, roughly double the typical company-page benchmark.

The pattern in the data is clear and useful: the content that performs best is the content there is least of. Event promotion makes up 28% of posts and returns the lowest engagement and the fewest clicks. Expert-led posts, event recaps and team content all substantially outperform it — and together account for fewer posts than event promotion alone.

Nothing here needs fixing. It needs rebalancing — and more of it.

01

What performs

Every post from June 2025 onward, sorted into eight content types. Earlier posts are excluded because LinkedIn's API stops reporting reliable impression data beyond about thirteen months.

Average engagement rate by content type
Event recap 49.4%
Named expert 28.6%
Team & culture 48.5%
Giveaway 46.9%
Customer win 36.9%
Trade press 96.7%
Ingredient science 76.4%
Event promotion 135.2%
Average link clicks per post — the intent signal
Named expert16.0
Event recap10.5
Team & culture9.0
Trade press5.8
Ingredient science5.7
Giveaway5.5
Customer win4.7
Event promotion3.8
Full breakdown
Content typePostsAvg impressionsAvg reachAvg clicksAvg engagement
Named expert233218416.08.6%
Event recap425613510.59.4%
Team & culture4176789.08.5%
Ingredient science72201105.76.4%
Trade press share91991105.86.7%
Customer win31791054.76.9%
Giveaway4168825.56.9%
Event promotion13190903.85.2%
The standout post

"R&D today requires more than just great science" — the announcement that Dr. Crabtree would speak at SupplySide, posted 23 September 2025. 569 impressions, 311 people reached, 25 link clicks, 21 reactions.

That is the highest-reach and highest-click post in the entire dataset, by a wide margin. Twenty-five clicks is more than double the next best. It is worth understanding why: it put a named technical expert in front of a technical question, and gave people a reason to act. Not a booth number — a session worth attending.

02

When to post

Weaker signal than content type — the sample per day is small — but consistent enough to act on.

Performance by day of week
DayPostsAvg impressionsAvg clicksAvg engagement
Monday71884.75.9%
Tuesday112316.96.1%
Wednesday122106.06.4%
Thursday112146.97.6%
Friday51346.08.3%

Thursday is the best all-round day — high impressions, highest clicks, strong engagement. Tuesday matches it on clicks with slightly higher reach. Monday is consistently the weakest on every measure.

Friday shows the highest engagement rate but the lowest impressions, which usually means a smaller, more committed audience is seeing it. Useful for content where depth of response matters more than breadth — a technical piece or an expert quote — but not where reach is the point.

Posting times already cluster sensibly between 10am and 3pm. No change needed there.

03

Cadence

Volume averages 3.3 posts a month, but the distribution is uneven — and the gaps line up with the quiet periods between trade shows.

Posts per month, June 2025 – July 2026
Jun 20253
Jul 20254
Aug 20252
Sep 20253
Oct 20259
Nov 20252
Dec 20252
Jan 20263
Feb 20264
Mar 20262
Apr 20264
May 20263
Jun 20263
Jul 20262

October 2025 shows what the page can do at volume — nine posts around SupplySide Global, and follower growth for that month ran above trend. The months at two posts are all non-show months.

The dependency is understandable: trade shows generate obvious things to say. The opportunity is having something to say when there isn't a show, which is most of the year. Section 05 has a starting list.

04

Recommendations

Five changes, ordered by how much difference they make relative to effort.

01Cut event promotion roughly in half

Thirteen of forty-six posts were event countdowns, and they returned the lowest engagement and fewest clicks of any format. Several shows got three or four separate promotional posts — one month out, two weeks, one week, days out.

Two per show is enough: one announcement with a genuine reason to attend, and one final reminder. That frees roughly six slots a year for content that performs two to four times better.

If those six posts performed like expert content: +73 link clicks a year
02Make expert-led posts a regular format

Two posts in thirteen months put a named BLS expert in front of a technical question. They averaged 332 impressions and 16 clicks — the best numbers on the page by a distance.

This does not require a speaking engagement. It requires an expert and a question:

  • Michael Crabtree on why bioavailability matters more than dose
  • A technical answer to a question that came up at the last show
  • A short technical answer to a question a formulator actually asked

One a month would be transformative. The trade press already quotes these people — the same material works on LinkedIn.

Highest click rate of any format · currently 4% of output
03Keep doing recaps — they are the best-kept secret

Event recaps returned 9.4% engagement and 10.5 clicks, the strongest engagement of any format, from only four posts. The promotional posts before a show underperform; the recap after it outperforms.

Worth extending: a recap does not have to be a thank-you. "Three things formulators kept asking us at IFT" is a recap that carries technical substance and gives the people who did not attend a reason to read.

9.4% engagement · best of any format
04Write more for the formulator, less about the company

The BLS brand statement documents contain two distinct voices — one written for a technical R&D specialist, one for a marketer. Both are specific and genuinely differentiated. Very little published content uses either.

The single highest-engagement post of the last year was "Most NAD+ ingredients were designed to raise one number. RiaGev was designed to raise three" at 11.6%. That is the technical brand statement, compressed. There is more where it came from.

The RiaGev messaging also positions directly against NR — "even those taking NR will be sold on RiaGev" — but no published post makes that comparison. That is an argument the market is ready for and nobody at BLS has made publicly.

Best individual post of the year came straight from the messaging docs
05Build to three posts a week

Current volume is 3.3 a month, ranging from two to nine. The swings matter as much as the average — LinkedIn distribution rewards consistency, and a page that goes quiet for six weeks between shows has to rebuild reach every time.

Three a week is the level at which a B2B page holds its distribution. That is twelve a month, roughly four times current volume, so it needs a build path rather than a switch:

  • Now: eight a month, no month below six
  • By month six: twelve a month, three a week

Thursday and Tuesday are the strongest days in the data. A rhythm of Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday — one technical, one category or team, one strongest asset — gets there without anyone writing on a Friday afternoon.

Half the volume comes free from the rebalance in recommendation 01 and from recirculating trade coverage that already exists. The rest is the expert-led format in recommendation 02.

Current: 3.3/month, ranging 2 to 9 · Target: 12/month
05

Twelve posts for the quiet months

Drawn from the BLS messaging documents and from questions the data suggests the audience is already asking. None depend on a trade show.

Expert

Crabtree on why simultaneous NAD, ATP and glutathione support matters more than raising one marker

Comparison

RiaGev against NR and NMN — the argument the messaging already makes internally

Technical

Why format flexibility is a formulation constraint: what actually survives in an RTD

Expert

Crabtree on what buyers in muscle and strength are asking for that they weren’t two years ago

Technical

Stable to 375°F — what that unlocks in baked and extruded applications

Category

Sugar reduction without the aftertaste problem: where SweetR fits

Proof

What "only patented and GRAS-certified D-Ribose" actually means for a formulator's risk

Recap

Three questions formulators kept asking at the last show — and the answers

Technical

Why coating-free co-crystal technology changes what's possible in stick packs

Category

The healthy aging category is outpacing the supplement market — what that means for formulation briefs

Customer

A finished product built on a BLS ingredient, told from the formulation challenge forward

Proof

Two US patents for AMPK activation — the science in plain terms

06

Two things worth checking

The custom button

The LinkedIn page's custom button has recorded essentially no clicks since May 2024 — one in the last thirteen months. The manual reporting workbook shows it working normally before that, running 5 to 15 clicks a month through early 2024.

Most likely it was removed during a page edit, or its destination broke. Either way it is a call-to-action sitting on the page doing nothing, and it takes minutes to check in page settings. Once the new formulation brief page is live, that button is where it should point.

Who is actually visiting

The new demographic reporting shows something the old workbook never could: the largest single industry among page visitors is Staffing & Recruiting, and 69% of visitors work in sales or business development.

That is worth knowing rather than worrying about. It means a meaningful share of page traffic is people selling to BLS or recruiting from it, not formulators evaluating ingredients. It also means the follower and visitor numbers understate how well the content reaches the real target — and that more technical content should shift the mix, since technical content attracts technical people.