X (formerly Twitter) vs. Threads: What brands need to know [data]

We’re past the hype cycle and deep into the experimentation phase of social media’s most recent rivalry: X vs. Threads. X, formerly known as Twitter, has dramatically changed over the past few years — from leadership shakeups to shifting content policies. Yet, it remains the go-to platform for real-time commentary, breaking news, and cultural chaos.

Threads is carving out a quieter space: A more curated, community-driven alternative where brands can engage in authentic dialogue without the pressure to go viral.

As someone who uses both platforms as a content strategist, I’ve noticed a clear split — not just in tone, but in how marketers are using them. X still feels like the front row of the Internet, while Threads is more like a dinner party where people are finally starting to open up.

I spoke with founders, marketers, and strategists across industries to get a clearer picture of how each platform is actually performing — and where brands are seeing traction, engagement, and ROI in 2025.

Table of Contents

• X vs. Threads: What’s the difference?
• What is X?
• What is Threads?
• Which Should You Use — X or Threads?

X vs. Threads: What’s the difference?

At a glance, X and Threads might seem nearly identical: Both are text-based social media platforms, both encourage public conversation, and both have roots in tech giants (X from Twitter, Threads from Meta via Instagram).

But after spending real time on both, I can confidently say they feel very different in practice. X is loud, fast, and built for viral moments. Threads feels slower, softer, and more intentional.

And that difference in vibe reflects deeper platform design choices that affect how marketers should approach each one. Here’s how they stack up side by side: