GUIDE · READING RESULTS
Not following back isn’t the same as unfollowed.
One describes a relationship in supplied data. The other describes a change over time. A single report cannot bridge that gap.
One report describes a present comparison
If an account is in your following list and absent from your supplied followers list, it belongs in “not following you back” for that source. It may never have followed you. That label does not say whether a change happened or when.
Two snapshots can reveal a difference
Suppose a fictional account called ada appears in an earlier complete followers snapshot and is absent from a later compatible snapshot. The careful description is: present in the earlier snapshot; absent in the later snapshot.
That observation is stronger than a single current report, but it still does not establish an exact unfollow time, a reason, or intent. Username changes, deactivation, source behavior, and collection-window differences can complicate interpretation.
Compatible inputs come first
- Both snapshots must describe the same account. Stable IDs help where the source provides them.
- Both need compatible sources and comparison scopes; known upload omissions remain qualifications. Automatic-source snapshots require source completeness.
- The source collection dates must be known and ordered. A file’s import or save date does not establish when its contents were collected.
- If identity is based only on usernames, rename and reactivation uncertainty remains.
Local snapshots are optional
MutualLens saves a snapshot only when you choose to do so. It stays on the checker’s browser origin. This is convenient for comparing your own records, but anyone using the same browser profile may be able to view those saved lists. Export a snapshot if you need your own backup, and delete local copies when appropriate.
Read the snapshot-history guide, review the storage details, or return tofollowers vs. following.