🔥🔥🔥🔥 Bitcoin mining often gets criticized for its substantial annual CO₂ emissions. 🔥 @Bitcoin_Insights Powered by Bitunix 👍 Top non-KYC futures exchange Get 30% off trading fees—forever Etop Crypto #BitcoinMining #CO2Emissions #Cryptocurrency #SustainableCrypto #EtopCrypto

Channel
Etop Crypto
@Etop_Crypto
On this record: Growth · Engagement · What this channel posts · Reactions · Posts · Citations · Telegram's recommendations · Cite this entry
42,751subscribers
+0 since we began measuring on 2 October 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 31,623–100,000.
Register entry
| Telegram ID | -1001676830003 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @Etop_Crypto |
| Description | 🇺🇸 Etop Crypto US — daily updates on Bitcoin, Ethereum, altcoins, DeFi, and blockchain news. Join for real-time price alerts, market trends, token insights, and exclusive airdrop tips — all designed for the US crypto space. |
| Created | Between 1 December 2021 and 30 April 2023 — estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated. |
| First recorded | 2 October 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 2 October 2026 |
| Measurements held | 2 |
| On Telegram | t.me/Etop_Crypto |
Growth
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 2 Oct 2026, 08:22 | 42,751 | no change |
| 2 Oct 2026, 07:47 | 42,751 | first reading |
Engagement
33 posts held, back to 1 October 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 2 pages of Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
- ERR · 30 days
- 4.79%
- avg views ÷ 42,751 subscribers
- Avg views / post
- 2,050
- 33 posts measured
- Reaction rate
- 0.211%
- reactions ÷ views · ER floor
- Posts in window
- 33
- of 33 held
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 31 of 33 measured posts that carry a reaction reading, and over those same posts' views.
| Window | Rolling 30 days · latest post in window 2 October 2026 |
|---|---|
| Posts held | 33 (1 October 2026 – 2 October 2026) |
| Views total | 67,580 |
| Reactions total | 137 |
| Forwards / comments | not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated |
| Readings taken | 2 Oct 2026, 20:27 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.
What this channel posts
- Photos
- ≈4,440
- Videos
- ≈463
- Links
- ≈5,830
Lifetime counters from Telegram’s own channel header, read 2 October 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.
- Video runtime
- 1m 00s
- Average length
- 20s
Measured directly from 3 videos with a duration reading, out of the posts we hold for this channel — not this channel’s whole posting history, only the sample this register has actually read. An exact reading to the second, taken from the post itself rather than from Telegram’s own rounded chrome, so it carries no ≈ mark.
Reaction mix
137 reactions across 31 posts, in 37 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 6.57% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| 🥰 | 9 | 6.57% | |
| 👍 | 8 | 5.84% | |
| 😘 | 8 | 5.84% | |
| 🎄 | 7 | 5.11% | |
| 🔥 | 7 | 5.11% | |
| 🙈 | 7 | 5.11% | |
| 🤗 | 7 | 5.11% | |
| 👏 | 6 | 4.38% | |
| ⚡ | 5 | 3.65% | |
| 🐳 | 5 | 3.65% | |
| 😎 | 5 | 3.65% | |
| 😐 | 5 | 3.65% | |
| 🙏 | 5 | 3.65% | |
| 🤩 | 5 | 3.65% | |
| 🍾 | 4 | 2.92% | |
| 👌 | 4 | 2.92% | |
| 💩 | 4 | 2.92% | |
| 😇 | 4 | 2.92% | |
| 😨 | 4 | 2.92% | |
| 🤣 | 4 | 2.92% | |
| 17 further kinds | 24 | 17.5% |
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 31 of the 33 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 137 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 33 most recent posts we hold, published 1 October 2026 to 2 October 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.
Recent posts
🔥🔥🔥🔥 Michael Saylor’s strategy has propelled Bitcoin to surpass Nubank in market value—despite Nubank serving 135 million users. A clear signal: Bitcoin is rewriting the rules. 🔥 @Bitcoin_Insights Powered by Bitunix 👍 Best non-KYC futures exchange Save 30% on fees for life Etop Crypto #Bitcoin #Cryptocurrency #MichaelSaylor #Nubank #Bitunix
😐3
📢 $BNB Chain becomes the first blockchain to surpass $1B in tokenized stocks and ETFs. Etop Crypto #BNBChain #TokenizedStocks #CryptoETFs #BlockchainInnovation #Cryptocurrencies
😘4
The ETH exit queue has surged to 773,447—the highest it's been in 2026—as investors rush to unstake their Ethereum. ✅ Follow @cryp Etop Crypto #EthereumUnstake #ETHExitQueue #CryptoWithdrawals #StakingCrunch #EtopCrypto
🤗2💋1
⚡️ BREAKING: Ethereum Layer 2 network Blast is shutting down ✅ Follow @cryp Etop Crypto #Ethereum #Layer2 #BlastNetwork #Cryptocurrencies #CryptoNews
🐳3
😺 NEAR Intents Exploit: What Happened? NEAR co-founder Ilya Polosukhin has shared key details about the recent $3.8 million exploit affecting NEAR Intents. ➡️ The vulnerability stemmed from the Omni infrastructure tied to USDT on BSC, specifically during deposit and withdrawal operations via the NEAR Intents smart contract. ➡️ The anomaly was flagged by SHIELD, the project’s AI-powered monitoring system. As a prec…
👌2😐2🐳1🤣1😁1😘1🙏1
📢 US jobs data has just been released: Nonfarm Payrolls came in at 29K, significantly below the projected 89K. Meanwhile, the unemployment rate edged up to 4.2%, higher than the expected 4.1%. Etop Crypto #NonfarmPayrolls #UnemploymentRate #EconomicData #CryptoMarket #USJobs
🎄2🤝2😢2😴2
🔥🔥🔥🔥 Absa, South Africa’s $110 billion banking giant, has made history as the first bank in the country to launch crypto asset custody services. This milestone signals a major step forward in the region’s accelerating adoption of digital assets. 🔥 @Bitcoin_Insights Powered by Bitunix 👍 Best non-KYC futures exchange Save 30% on fees for life Etop Crypto #CryptoCustody #BitcoinInsights #DigitalAssets #AbsaBank #S…
😘3👏2
🚨Crypto security breaches surged to $1.26 billion in Q3—a 53.9% increase from last quarter—with the Bitget hack accounting for 31% of total losses at $387.5 million. Etop Crypto #CryptoSecurity #CryptocurrencyNews #BitgetHack #DigitalCurrency #BlockchainSecurity
⚡️ Bitcoin has dipped into the 'Fire Sale!' zone on the Rainbow Price Chart. Historically, this level has marked the start of powerful upward moves. 🔥 @Bitcoin_Insights Powered by Bitunix 👍 Best non-KYC futures exchange Save 30% on fees for life Etop Crypto #Bitcoin #Crypto #RainbowChart #FireSale #Bitunix
🎄3
One parent might introduce their kids to Bitcoin exploration. 🔥 @Bitcoin_Insights Powered by Bitunix 👍 Best non-KYC futures exchange Save 30% on fees for life Etop Crypto #BitcoinExploration #CryptoForParents #EtopCrypto #BitcoinInsights #CryptoEducation
👻1🖕1
⚡️ U.S. spot Bitcoin ETFs saw $6.34 billion in net inflows during Q3 2026, flipping the script after Q2’s ~$5 billion in net outflows. Over the same period, BTC surged 42.71% in value. This rebound strengthened the connection between ETF flows and Bitcoin’s price movement—whether correlation, causation, or both, issuers aren’t complaining. 🔥 @Bitcoin_Insights Powered by Bitunix 👍 Best non-KYC futures exchange Sa…
👍2
Showing the 12 most recent of 33 posts we hold for @Etop_Crypto. 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.
Mentions
Names
Channels on the register whose handles appear in this channel's posts.
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.
Channels Telegram recommends alongside this one
Telegram’s own answer, not this register’s. When this register asks Telegram’s API what is similar to this channel, this is the list it returns, in the exact order Telegram returns it — never re-sorted by subscribers or by anything else this register measures. The relationship, and the order, are Telegram’s; we record them and date them, and make no claim of our own about which of these channels actually resemble this one.
@blumcrypto · 14,188,780#1
@hamster_kombat · 20,830,171#2
@notcoin · 8,552,225#3
@keeper_en · 4,702,191#4
@et_birr · 164#5
@etairdrop24 · 216#6
@ethiocrypto18 · 2,951#7
@Amantherege · 2,293#8
@mediarussia · 1,684,965#9
@dagi_com1 · 85,040#10
@nexaranews · 2,318#11
@dogs · 6,948,804#12
@walt_news · 3,494,971#13
@gram · 6,641,039#14
@tikvahethiopia · 1,623,119#15
@banana_update · 1,385,656#16
@better_tip · 1,071#17
@habtishcarsell · 1,884#18
@ureportethiopia · 1,254#19
@Cats_housewtf · 7,850,625#20
@bfkror · 4,491#21
@catizenann · 3,550,802#22
@ICS_Ethiopia · 479,001#23
@money · 2,898,027#24
@realgoats_channel · 4,621,170#25
@invest_zonaa · 909,960#26
@avagoldcoin · 1,724,972#27
@watersolmeme · 1,130,160#28
@lilroba_music · 2,060#29
@hayzonn · 2,763,203#30
@Royalfixed100 · 1,038#31
@panaceabetltd · 664#32
@marakiagent · 2,035#33
@sinfoniac · 213#34
@marvelofficial01 · 1,710#35
@international_afrobeat_music · 10,000#36
@polunintrade7 · 519,867#37
Read from Telegram’s recommendation API, most recently 2 October 2026. Telegram holds a list like this for a small and growing share of the register — how this is measured, and why most channel pages show nothing here.
Appears in Telegram’s recommendations for other channels
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.
@recoveryteamchannel · 19,381
Telegram ranks this channel #49 of 50 here — alongside 49 others — read 2 October 2026
This channel appears in 1 seed channel's Telegram-generated recommendation list in total. Each is Telegram’s list for THAT channel, not this one — see how this is measured.
Cite this entry
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 2 October 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“Etop Crypto” (@Etop_Crypto), 42,751 subscribers as measured 2 October 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/Etop_Crypto.
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.