Scored entertainment-first on WhatSphere's content-balance model 3
Its director stated on the record that "throughout my entire career, my intent was always to create something that people would be able to engage with, not just a very specific market, I wanted to sh…" 1. Its narrative-universality assessment registers 8 of 10 2. Taken together, the content-balance model places it entertainment-first at 9 of 100 3. Relative to the expected cast make-up for its production origin, on-screen representation registers above the baseline for Asian 4.
- 1Creator statementdirector: "Throughout my entire career, my intent was always to create something that people would be able to engage with, not just a very specific market. I wanted to shift the focus to the relationship betwee…"Anime News Network interview, December 2016 source ↗
- 2Narrative universalityNarrative universality 8 of 10; identity centrality incidental.WhatSphere content assessment. Narrative universality 8/10 -> advocacy signal 22
- 3Content balanceAdvocacy 9 of 100, tier entertainment-first.WhatSphere content-balance model, score_version 1. Swaps: 0 race, 0 gender, 0 critical -> 0
- 4RepresentationRepresentation vs production-origin baseline: Asian 77.WhatSphere representation model, score_version 1
WhatSphere presents the sourced record; it does not cast the judgement. Every statement above is drawn from a stored, sourced row — shown beside it — and nothing is asserted beyond what those receipts support.
Age: 29 — strongly youth-oriented
Quadrant Scores
Audience Representation
Faithfulness
Faithfulness not applicable
Faithfulness is scored only for adaptations.
Why this is blank
An original has no source text to compare. The score is left blank rather than shown as zero.
Advocacy
Where to Watch (US)
Synopsis
High schoolers Mitsuha and Taki are complete strangers living separate lives. But one night, they suddenly switch places. This bizarre occurrence continues to happen randomly, and the two must adjust their lives around each other.
What did the audience think? Rate Your Name — every voice counts equally, no account needed. Clean reviews appear instantly.
Lineage and popularity
No lineage or popularity yet
This title has no Wikidata match, source work, or Steam player snapshot. A missing snapshot is not zero.
Put its audience profile side by side with any other title.
Advocacy Over Time in Romance
The average advocacy score of Romance titles by release year, with this title marked. Higher is more advocacy-driven.
| Year | Average advocacy | Titles |
|---|---|---|
| 1925 | 0 | 2 |
| 1931 | 1 | 3 |
| 1932 | 0 | 2 |
| 1935 | 0 | 4 |
| 1936 | 0 | 2 |
| 1939 | 9 | 2 |
| 1940 | 2 | 3 |
| 1942 | 0 | 5 |
| 1944 | 2 | 2 |
| 1945 | 1 | 3 |
| 1946 | 1 | 3 |
| 1952 | 0 | 3 |
| 1953 | 0 | 3 |
| 1955 | 3 | 3 |
| 1956 | 4 | 4 |
| 1957 | 2 | 4 |
| 1958 | 1 | 3 |
| 1959 | 5 | 2 |
| 1960 | 0 | 2 |
| 1961 | 5 | 3 |
| 1962 | 2 | 2 |
| 1963 | 0 | 2 |
| 1964 | 4 | 4 |
| 1965 | 3 | 3 |
| 1968 | 2 | 3 |
| 1970 | 0 | 2 |
| 1972 | 0 | 2 |
| 1974 | 3 | 3 |
| 1976 | 0 | 3 |
| 1978 | 4 | 2 |
| 1980 | 2 | 3 |
| 1981 | 0 | 2 |
| 1982 | 0 | 5 |
| 1983 | 2 | 4 |
| 1984 | 0 | 2 |
| 1985 | 4 | 4 |
| 1986 | 3 | 5 |
| 1987 | 4 | 5 |
| 1988 | 2 | 9 |
| 1990 | 2 | 8 |
| 1991 | 5 | 4 |
| 1992 | 1 | 5 |
| 1993 | 2 | 7 |
| 1994 | 8 | 9 |
| 1995 | 1 | 5 |
| 1996 | 4 | 9 |
| 1997 | 5 | 8 |
| 1998 | 5 | 6 |
| 1999 | 2 | 14 |
| 2000 | 3 | 18 |
| 2001 | 3 | 17 |
| 2002 | 3 | 15 |
| 2003 | 3 | 10 |
| 2004 | 3 | 16 |
| 2005 | 6 | 18 |
| 2006 | 3 | 14 |
| 2007 | 1 | 13 |
| 2008 | 3 | 7 |
| 2009 | 2 | 5 |
| 2010 | 5 | 4 |
| 2011 | 4 | 4 |
| 2012 | 0 | 4 |
| 2013 | 9 | 2 |
| 2014 | 2 | 3 |
| 2015 | 2 | 3 |
| 2016 | 7 | 6 |
| 2017 | 16 | 3 |
| 2018 | 9 | 3 |
| 2019 | 15 | 6 |
| 2020 | 15 | 2 |
| 2021 | 2 | 4 |
| 2022 | 22 | 3 |
| 2023 | 23 | 5 |
| 2024 | 2 | 4 |
| 2025 | 7 | 7 |
| 2026 | 4 | 13 |
| This title (2016) | 9 | 1 |
● This title (2016): advocacy 9 · explore Romance →
Cast & Crew
Yoshitoshi Shinomiya (director) · Kenji Imura (director)