Channel
@CoinDeskGlobal
On this record: Growth · Engagement · What this channel posts · Reactions · Stars · Posts · Citations · Telegram's recommendations · Cite this entry
14,471subscribers
+150 since we began measuring on 6 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 10,000–31,623.
| Telegram ID | -1001303836973 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @CoinDeskGlobal |
| Description | Real-time feed for the most trusted name in crypto news. Official channel for CoinDesk content. Read more: https://www.coindesk.com/ |
| Created | Between 1 March 2018 and 31 July 2021— estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated. |
| First recorded | 6 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 30 August 2026 |
| Measurements held | 22 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 30 August 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/CoinDeskGlobal |
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 30 Aug 2026, 15:06 | 14,471 | +3 |
| 29 Aug 2026, 14:08 | 14,468 | +16 |
| 28 Aug 2026, 11:56 | 14,452 | +6 |
| 27 Aug 2026, 08:53 | 14,446 | +11 |
| 26 Aug 2026, 07:53 | 14,435 | +10 |
| 25 Aug 2026, 05:24 | 14,425 | -9 |
| 24 Aug 2026, 07:12 | 14,434 | +13 |
| 22 Aug 2026, 12:56 | 14,421 | +24 |
| 20 Aug 2026, 23:48 | 14,397 | +28 |
| 19 Aug 2026, 21:26 | 14,369 | +10 |
| 18 Aug 2026, 18:56 | 14,359 | -3 |
| 17 Aug 2026, 18:04 | 14,362 | +2 |
| 15 Aug 2026, 00:13 | 14,360 | +6 |
| 13 Aug 2026, 14:36 | 14,354 | +11 |
| 12 Aug 2026, 17:28 | 14,343 | +6 |
| 11 Aug 2026, 17:42 | 14,337 | -3 |
| 10 Aug 2026, 17:36 | 14,340 | +4 |
| 8 Aug 2026, 21:12 | 14,336 | +3 |
| 7 Aug 2026, 21:49 | 14,333 | +8 |
| 6 Aug 2026, 19:20 | 14,325 | first reading |
374 posts held, back to 5 August 2026 — the reader has not yet reached the start of this channel’s public history, so older posts may sit further back, unread. Read across 46 pagesof Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
ERR is average views per post over the last 30 days divided by subscribers, the definition TGStat uses, so this figure is comparable with the one you will see elsewhere. It falls structurally as a channel grows: a high ERR on a small channel and a low one on a large channel describe reach mathematics, not quality. We publish the figure and the sample it came from and pass no verdict on it.
ER is defined industry-wide as (forwards + reactions + comments) ÷ views— note the denominator is views, not subscribers. Telegram’s public web preview carries views and reactions but not forward or comment counts, so the reaction rate above is the reactions term only and is therefore a floor: the true ER for this channel is higher by an amount we have not measured and will not estimate. It is computed over the 141 of 374 measured posts that carry a reaction reading, and over those same posts' views.
| Window | Rolling 30 days · latest post in window 30 August 2026 |
|---|---|
| Posts held | 374 (5 August 2026 – 30 August 2026) |
| Views total | 273,718 |
| Reactions total | 225 |
| Forwards / comments | not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated |
| Readings taken | 30 Aug 2026, 17:51 UTC |
Views are a single reading per post, taken at the time above. A post published in the last day or two is still accumulating views, which pulls the 30-day average down slightly. That is a property of the standard definition rather than a fault in it, so we keep the definition rather than “correcting” the number into something nobody can reproduce.
Precision. Telegram publishes view counts on its public widget in short form — 8.12K, 3.7M — so any reading at or above 1,000 reaches us rounded to three significant figures, and only counts below 1,000 are exact. Averages and rates derived from them are shown to the same precision rather than to the unit: a figure like 3,701,250 would assert digits nobody measured.
Reaction counts are published per emoji and rounded the same way, so a total below 1,000 is exact and a larger one is a sum that may carry a rounded component from each emoji above 1,000. Because it is a sum, it does not look rounded — read a large reaction total as three significant figures per contributing emoji rather than as the figure it prints.
Lifetime counters from Telegram’s own channel header, read 30 August 2026 — not the date at the top of this page, which is when the subscriber count was last read. A count marked ≈ was rounded by Telegram before we ever saw it — t.me prints these counters in full below 1,000 and to three significant figures above, so ≈142,000 means somewhere between 141,500 and 142,499.
220 reactions across 121 posts, in 17 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 31.4% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| ❤ | 69 | 31.4% | |
| 🤡 | 50 | 22.7% | |
| 🤣 | 31 | 14.1% | |
| 🔥 | 22 | 10.0% | |
| 👍 | 10 | 4.55% | |
| ✍ | 6 | 2.73% | |
| 👎 | 5 | 2.27% | |
| 👀 | 4 | 1.82% | |
| 👏 | 4 | 1.82% | |
| 🤮 | 4 | 1.82% | |
| ⚡ | 3 | 1.36% | |
| 💯 | 3 | 1.36% | |
| 😁 | 3 | 1.36% | |
| 🆒 | 2 | 0.909% | |
| 🤯 | 2 | 0.909% | |
| ☃ | 1 | 0.455% | |
| 🤔 | 1 | 0.455% |
No sentiment is inferred, and none should be read in. This table is ordered by count and by nothing else. Emoji do not carry stable meaning across languages or communities — 🙏 is thanks in one channel and mourning in another — so we publish which ones were pressed and how often, and pass no judgement on what an audience meant by them.
Precision. Telegram publishes reaction counts per emoji and short-forms each one — 4.34K, 1.2M — so any single kind at or above 1,000 reaches us at three significant figures, and only counts below 1,000 are exact. The shares above are ratios of those figures and carry the same error. This is also why the total here can differ slightly from a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page: both are sums of the same rounded parts, taken over samples with different edges.
Coverage. Reactions were read on 141 of the 374 sampled posts in this sample. Summed by Telegram’s own count on each post — not by adding up the per-emoji breakdown above — those same posts carry 225reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 374 most recent posts we hold, published 5 August 2026 to 30 August 2026, using the newest reading held for each. Telegram Stars are excluded: they are a payment, not a reaction, and they have their own section.
A paid reaction is a reader spending Telegram Stars — bought with money — on a post by @CoinDeskGlobal. Telegram publishes the count on the public post preview alongside ordinary reactions, and this register reads it there. It is the only figure on this site that measures money moving rather than attention.
Stars are not reactions, and the two are never added. They are rendered in the same strip on Telegram and counted in the same shape, but one is a tap and the other is a purchase. The reaction totals and the engagement rate elsewhere on this page exclude every figure in this section, and no rate here is computed against a reaction count.
This is not revenue, and we publish no currency figure. What a Star costs a reader and what it pays a channel are different numbers, Telegram takes a share we cannot observe, and the terms have changed. Converting a Star count into money would be an estimate dressed as a measurement, so the count is where we stop.
Counted over the 374 most recent posts we hold for this entry, published 5 August 2026 to 30 August 2026. Star counts above 1,000 reach us in Telegram’s short form and carry the same three-significant-figure rounding as everything else on this page.
Michael Saylor hints at first bitcoin purchase in two months as Bitcoin nears $79,000 Bitcoin rebounds from Friday’s low as Strategy’s valuation expands and bitcoin dominance climbs above 60%.
🤡1
From Hawala to Swift: Inside the 1,000-year battle to move money safely Finance has spent centuries decoupling wealth from physical transport, but constantly erasing friction creates vectors for increasingly high-tech exploits.
Crypto market makers are cashing in on bitcoin's rally - without betting on direction As bitcoin surges back above $80,000, sophisticated trading firms are quietly collecting yield rather than making directional bet.
A $1.1 million crypto card hack crashed a neobank's token 49% The exploit caused the neobank's AVICI token to drop 49% from a 24-hour high, hitting a record low before paring some of the losses.
Ditching 'digital gold': BPI study suggests everyday Americans prefer control and micro-investing A new survey suggests some of bitcoin's most familiar sales pitches of changing the world may be poorly suited to a majority of prospective buyers.
The next trillion-dollar currency may not be a stablecoin — it might not even have a name yet AI agents are coming. They will need to pay each other. Crypto executives agree on the problem but disagree sharply on the solution, and one thinks the answer has not been invented yet.
Swift’s $1.5 quadrillion network faces a blockchain test Crypto executives say new blockchain payment infrastructure could make Swift obsolete. Bankers say its 11,500-institution network gives it the power to absorb the technology instead.
Bitcoin wallets untouched for 10 years moved $40 million. Most avoided exchanges Six decade-old wallets moved $40 million this month, but Galaxy's data shows dormant coin activity at its lowest since 2022 and 2026 on pace for under half of last year's total.
🔥3
Ripple is preparing XRP Ledger for quantum computers before ‘Q-Day’ arrives An Anthropic model cut the work needed to break a leading post-quantum signature candidate by a factor of 67 million last month, while Bitcoin and Ethereum published their own migration plans this week.
🤡1
Kalshi takes legal blow in court ruling confirming state powers over prediction markets This latest U.S. appeals court ruling sets up a rift between federal courts on event contracts, suggesting the U.S. Supreme Court may need to settle the matter.
❤2
Solana vote to double disinflation passes by a hair in dramatic finish Solana's first network-wide vote went down to the wire, with a Kraken-linked validator switching sides before the disinflation proposal narrowly passed.
BitGo to buy NYDIG trading arm for $42.5M in cash and stock plus $15M earnout The deal to buy NYDIG IF Holdings comprises $7 million in cash and around $35.5 million, as well as the $15 earnout.
Showing the 12 most recent of 374 posts we hold for @CoinDeskGlobal. View and reaction counts are the latest single reading for each post, not a live figure, and a recent post is still accumulating both. A view count marked ≈ was rounded by Telegram before we ever saw it — t.me prints views in full below 1,000 and to three significant figures above, so ≈1,200,000 means somewhere between 1,150,000 and 1,249,999. Unmarked counts are exact. Text is reproduced from the public post preview and truncated for length.
Citation-graph rank — 336,616 of 1,627,445entries in the measured graph. A weighted position computed from the forward and mention edges below — republished posts weigh more than named mentions — and recomputed periodically, over the whole graph. Published only as this ordinal position, never as a score: a position is a fact, and a score printed beside one channel’s name would read as a verdict this register does not make. The two counts beneath stay separate for the same reason mentions are never summed with forwards anywhere else on this page — a named-by count costs nothing to manufacture. The top 100 by this measure, or how it is computed.
Republished by
Channels on the register that have forwarded this channel's posts into their own feed.
Built only from forwarded posts we have actually read, on both sides. Coverage is early and deliberately incomplete: a missing link means we have not read the post that would prove it, never that the relationship does not exist. Counts are distinct forwarded posts observed, so they only ever go up as we read more.
Named by 5 registered channels — every channel on the register whose own posts have named this one, by its current username or any other username it currently holds, merged from two separately captured readings of the same fact so a namer caught by only one of them is not missed and a namer both caught is not counted twice. A username this channel has since dropped is not matched — that handle may belong to someone else now, and crediting today’s namer to yesterday’s owner would misattribute it.
Named by
Channels on the register whose posts name this channel's handle.
A mention is a weaker signal than a forward and is counted separately for that reason — naming a channel is not republishing it, and a handle in a post body is easy to place deliberately. The post counts beside each row below are distinct posts in which the handle appeared, from posts we have read on both sides — the “Named by N registered channels” figure above is a different count, of distinct NAMING CHANNELS rather than posts, and is not the sum of the rows under it.
The reverse of the list above, and a different kind of signal. This does not require this channel to have ever been asked about directly — each row below is a channel we DID ask Telegram about, whose Telegram-generated list happened to include this one. A channel can appear here with an empty list above it, because being named by someone else’s query is independent of having been queried itself.
This channel appears in 14 seed channels' Telegram-generated recommendation lists in total. Each is Telegram’s list for THAT channel, not this one — see how this is measured.
A live page changes as we take new readings, so a citation should name the measurement it is based on, not just the URL. The line below cites the subscriber count as measured 30 August 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“CoinDesk News” (@CoinDeskGlobal), 14,471 subscribers as measured 30 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/CoinDeskGlobal.
Full measurement history, CC BY 4.0. Every reading this register holds for this entry, not just the latest one, as a dated, downloadable record: CSV · JSON. Free to use with attribution to tgregister.com. Each file carries its own generation timestamp, which is the figure to cite for exactly when the data was retrieved.