Channel
@qqbtceth1688
On this record: Topic · Observations · Also posting the same content · Growth · Engagement · What this channel posts · Reactions · Stars · Posts · Posts edited after publishing · Posts recorded as deleted · Citations · Telegram's recommendations · Cite this entry
18,269subscribers
-2,385 since we began measuring on 7 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 10,000–31,623.
| Telegram ID | -1002003444005 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @qqbtceth1688 |
| Description | ❤️顶级策略频道，聚焦山寨龙头热点，实时分享潜力币种。 👉入群私信 @bdaiydaige 👉双向点击 @Daiydaige_bot。 |
| Created | Between 1 November 2023 and 30 April 2024 — estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated. |
| First recorded | 7 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 6 November 2026 |
| Measurements held | 61 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 6 November 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/qqbtceth1688 |
Crypto & trading — a classification, not a measurement. An on-box language model (Qwen3.6-35B-A3B-UD-Q6_K_XL, prompt version 1) read this channel’s own recent posts on 10 August 2026 and assigned it the closest of 31 fixed categories, at 100% confidence. This is a model’s judgement about what the channel is likely to be about, not a fact this register measured the way a subscriber count or a view count is measured — it can be revised on a later pass, and it carries no weight anywhere else on this page. How this classification works, and the other topics.
These are measurements, not verdicts. Each one below states something we counted, alongside the evidence it was counted from, so you can check it rather than take it. None of them is graded: every observation this register holds is recorded at severity 0, because the precision of the detectors behind them has not been measured yet, and a rating we cannot support is worse than none. Read each as a fact about the data, not as a judgement about the channel. How we measure.
Posts published here appear word for word on 2 other registered channels. The matching is on the text itself, not on Telegram’s forward marker, so it finds a copy whether or not it was labelled as one.
| Posted first | Then | Overlap | Gap |
|---|---|---|---|
| @eth77896bnb/68001 Aug 2026, 02:55 UTC | @qqbtceth1688/5325 · this entry1 Aug 2026, 02:56 UTC | 1.00 | under a minute |
| @eth77896bnb/68103 Aug 2026, 02:33 UTC | @qqbtceth1688/5335 · this entry3 Aug 2026, 02:33 UTC | 1.00 | under a minute |
| @eth77896bnb/68143 Aug 2026, 14:53 UTC | @qqbtceth1688/5339 · this entry3 Aug 2026, 14:53 UTC | 1.00 | under a minute |
| @eth77896bnb/68204 Aug 2026, 02:46 UTC | @qqbtceth1688/5342 · this entry4 Aug 2026, 02:46 UTC | 1.00 | under a minute |
| @eth77896bnb/68225 Aug 2026, 07:51 UTC | @qqbtceth1688/5344 · this entry5 Aug 2026, 07:51 UTC | 1.00 | under a minute |
| @eth77896bnb/68237 Aug 2026, 07:27 UTC | @qqbtceth1688/5345 · this entry7 Aug 2026, 07:28 UTC | 1.00 | under a minute |
| Channel | Matching posts | Text overlap | Typical gap | Published first |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| @eth77896bnb | 8 (7/8 hand-verifiable sample passed) | 1.00 | under a minute | @eth77896bnb (8–0) |
| @btc18688 | 8 (7/8 hand-verifiable sample passed) | 1.00 | under a minute | @btc18688 (8–0) |
Text overlap is the Jaccard coefficient over the set of distinct three-word phrases in the two bodies: 1.00 is identical wording, and the threshold for counting a pair at all is 0.70. Candidates are generated by simhash LSH (4 x 16-bit bands, exact Hamming <= 3) verified against the bodies with Jaccard over the SET of distinct 3-word shingles. Published first counts which side of each matching pair carries the earlier timestamp — in this corpus, which is the limitation directly below.
What this cannot establish
MEASURED, DOMINANT ERROR SOURCE: a post ingested before 2026-08-06 may have carried a forward header that was not recorded. A 45-pair hand-check against live t.me pages found 14 (31%) where the live page shows a forward header naming the other channel and the database has none, plus 4 more (9%) naming a third party. The text match itself was wrong 0 times out of 45. Read attribution_capture.items_in_trusted_window before treating the unattributed count as a claim.
Telegram lets a channel forward a post with a header naming the source, and we only began reliably recording that header on 2026-08-06. None of the 4 matches recorded here fall after that date, so for this entry we cannot say whether any of them carried a credit. The duplication is measured; the absence of attribution is not.
“Published first” means first in this corpus. We hold 8 comparable posts for this entry, running 1 August 2026 to 7 August 2026. A channel we have read one page deep will look younger than a neighbour we have read in full, and the order would flip with no change in the underlying facts.
The detector’s own notes on this observation, as it recorded them. Names in this_style are fields of the underlying evidence record, which the plain-English paragraphs above read out for this entry.
Across the whole group of 3, the earliest publisher we hold is @eth77896bnb. That is a statement about our reading window, not a claim of authorship.
38,100 average views per post against 18,330 subscribers — an engagement rate of 207.6%. Across the 2,085 registered channels in the same cohort — 10,003–31,622 subscribers, posting mainly in Chinese — the middle half sit between 1.76% and 11.0%, with a median of 4.89%.
| Window | 30 days (6 October 2026 – 5 November 2026) |
|---|---|
| Posts measured | 19 of 19 published in the window (0 exact, 19 rounded by Telegram) |
| Views totalled | 723,120 |
| Mature posts only | 237.7% over 16 posts read at least 24h after publication |
| Subscribers | 18,330 measured 5 November 2026 |
| Cohort | b10000:zho · 2,085 channels · p10 0.495% · p25 1.76% · p50 4.89% · p75 11.0% · p90 24.0% |
| Position in cohort | 99.856th percentile · 42.4× the cohort median |
| Uncertainty | ±0.158% of the figure, from Telegram’s rounding |
| Post language | Chinese · 100.0% of the window’s posts |
When this is recorded. A channel is listed here only when its engagement rate sits at or above the 99th percentile of its cohort and is at least 3× away from that cohort’s median — above it — on both the all-readings figure and the mature-only figure. The percentile alone would be circular: a percentile cut puts the same share of every cohort in the tail whatever the data looks like. The distance from the median is what makes it a statement about this channel.
This is not a verdict, and the direction is not a quality signal. A low rate has many innocent causes — audiences that read in the Telegram app without opening the channel, a subscriber base built long before the current output, an audience in a different timezone from our reading. A high rate has innocent causes too: a post that travelled far beyond the channel’s own subscribers will do it. We publish the measurement and the distribution it sits in. The full cohort baselines are downloadable, so this comparison can be reproduced rather than trusted.
Recorded under the keys clone_copy · err_high, last confirmed 5 November 2026. An observation that a later pass no longer finds is cleared, and a cleared observation is removed from this page rather than being shown struck through — we do not keep publishing a claim we have withdrawn. Dispute an observation.
This channel’s posts match, word for word or near enough, posts on 2 other registered channels, found by comparing text fingerprints across every channel on the register. That matching has been checked by hand against the live Telegram pages and found reliable — 0 wrong of 45 pairs re-read.
Which channel, if either, published first is deliberately not shown. The same hand-check found that reading wrong 18 of 45 times — 60%, no better than a coin flip — because it depends on how deep our own crawl happened to reach into each channel’s history, not on when the content was actually first posted. This list is ordered by subscriber count, the same as every other listing on this site, never by which channel we think came first. Word-for-word matching has several ordinary explanations besides copying — a channel mirroring itself, an unattributed repost, or two channels independently repeating the same wire story — and this measurement cannot tell those apart. How this is measured.
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 6 Nov 2026, 07:46 | 18,269 | -61 |
| 5 Nov 2026, 04:47 | 18,330 | -69 |
| 4 Nov 2026, 02:27 | 18,399 | -30 |
| 3 Nov 2026, 00:39 | 18,429 | -26 |
| 1 Nov 2026, 21:56 | 18,455 | -24 |
| 31 Oct 2026, 22:46 | 18,479 | -44 |
| 30 Oct 2026, 21:29 | 18,523 | -46 |
| 29 Oct 2026, 21:30 | 18,569 | -16 |
| 29 Oct 2026, 01:00 | 18,585 | -34 |
| 28 Oct 2026, 03:08 | 18,619 | -11 |
| 27 Oct 2026, 03:15 | 18,630 | -8 |
| 26 Oct 2026, 03:06 | 18,638 | -11 |
| 25 Oct 2026, 02:36 | 18,649 | -13 |
| 24 Oct 2026, 04:21 | 18,662 | +13 |
| 23 Oct 2026, 01:21 | 18,649 | -15 |
| 22 Oct 2026, 01:58 | 18,664 | +17 |
| 20 Oct 2026, 18:10 | 18,647 | -8 |
| 19 Oct 2026, 20:37 | 18,655 | -19 |
| 18 Oct 2026, 23:31 | 18,674 | -25 |
| 18 Oct 2026, 02:40 | 18,699 | first reading |
61 posts held, back to 1 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 65 pages of 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 20 of 21 measured posts that carry a reaction reading, and over those same posts' views.
| Window | Rolling 30 days · latest post in window 6 November 2026 |
|---|---|
| Posts held | 61 (1 August 2026 – 6 November 2026) |
| Views total | 872,930 |
| Reactions total | 836 |
| Forwards / comments | not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated |
| Readings taken | 6 Nov 2026, 15:48 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 6 November 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.
2,997 reactions across 59 posts, in 6 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 34.1% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| 👍 | 1,023 | 34.1% | |
| 😁 | 994 | 33.2% | |
| ❤ | 977 | 32.6% | |
| 🍌 | 1 | 0.033% | |
| 👌 | 1 | 0.033% | |
| 💯 | 1 | 0.033% |
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 59 of the 61 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 2,997 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 61 most recent posts we hold, published 1 August 2026 to 6 November 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 @qqbtceth1688. 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 61 most recent posts we hold for this entry, published 1 August 2026 to 6 November 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.
Telegram’s own ‘edited’ marker: 0 of 21 posts held from the last 30 days (0%) carried it when this register last read them. The marker says a post was changed after publishing, not what it said before — this register holds the earlier wording only where an edit fell between two of its own reads (see the edit ledger and how it is measured).
今晚21:30的非农数据是当前市场最大的变量。市场预期新增6.5万人，但近期12月加息概率已从约80%回落至68.7%，2年期美债收益率也下行了12个基点，宏观预期正悄然生变。📉 数据推演很明确：若非农明显弱于预期，加息预期降温，被压制的风险偏好将迎来修复窗口 📈；若数据不弱甚至偏强，宏观的“第一刀”将继续压制市场 📉。 在数据正式落地前，大资金大概率按兵不动。
😁18👍15❤14
11月05日 比特币以太坊行情分析 BTC/ETH的突破：是“相对企稳”，不是“绝对转强”，当前市场的“不确定性”已全面落地，且川普的失势反而让预期更加乐观。原油价格跌破两个月新低，这极大地缓解了加密市场的流动性压力。🛢💧从盘面看，短期难以出现深度回踩，中小级别支撑正在同步上移。下方极限回踩位最多在79,000-78,000美元附近。整体上攻动能强劲，至少要到82,000美元上方，才会迎来一次像样的调整。操作上顺势而为，回踩即是上车机会！🚀🐂 ETH与BTC高度相关，整体仍受宏观与加密市场情绪主导。相对BTC的强度若持续，可能吸引更多资金轮动，但需警惕ETF资金流与链上活跃度变化。 重点关注：11月6日的非农就业和12月加息概率 操作建议： 日內支撐位：78,300—78,800 做多 日內阻力位：81,300—81,800 做空 今日策略已出，欢迎加入会员群，实时跟上策略布局。💀 财富列车跟单咨询👁 …
❤15😁12👍9
🎯回顾11月初，我们在市场恐慌中明确提示75,000-76,500美元的黄金抄底区间。如今BTC强势突破8万关口，思路已获完美验证！📈 虽然中间经历洗盘波折，但大方向始终未出错。无论是此前从81,800美元带大家一路做空，还是这次底部的精准狙击，节奏皆在掌控。 拒绝马后炮，实力无需多言，行情就是最好的证明！💪🚀 更多实时点位与高利润暴富单，请进VIP会员群 👉想进会员群私信戴哥 https://t.me/BDaiydaige
👍18😁13❤11
戴哥唯一TG：✈️ https://t.me/BDaiydaige
❤18😁18👍14
民主党同时拿下两院，宏观预期落地引发BTC早间一波加速下探。但盘面极其强悍，刚好插针跌破76,000后迅速收针反弹，这说明链上资金承接力度非常强，目前价格重新回到78,000附近震荡。🧲 短线洗盘极其激烈，这两天上下翻飞搞了好几次，但大方向我认为绝对不会变，因为周线级别已经形成了非常清晰的底部转换结构。🧱 整体操作思路依旧明确：持有76,500多单的朋友，可以在78,500减仓50%锁定利润，余仓设保本损. 短线先看79,000美元突破！后续只要把这阵子的利空消化完毕，大概率会再次挑战短期新高。坚定看好11月月线必收阳！☀️💪🚀
❤16👍14😁11
昨晚BTC跟随纳指回调，原油回落也未能提振风险资产，市场正提前计价选举变局。当前盘面出现严重的资金分歧：ETF卖的是“宏观避险的短期仓位”，巨鲸买的是“中长期的核心价值”。这两股力量在76,000-78,000区间激烈拉锯，导致价格陷入僵持抵消。⚖️ 操作建议： 回调至75,000-76,500 分批接多， 已入场的朋友可继续持有76,500多单🧘♂️💡🚀
❤19😁16👍10
中期选举临近，这需要关注立法节奏变化 🗳📊 中期选举明日开始投票。回顾历史，比特币过去三轮周期底部多出现在选后13至71天，同期美股表现也普遍不错，因此选举窗口值得留意。📈 据Kalshi预测，民主党拿下众议院概率94%、参议院71%。这一结果可能影响加密立法推进速度，尤其《CLARITY法案》涉及SEC与CFTC对数字资产的监管权限划分，是关键变量。⚖️ 短期看，若民主党影响力上升，法案推进难度可能增加，对币圈情绪未必友好，但并非必然结果。 这需要关注选举落地后立法进展与市场反应。🧘♂️💡
👍15😁15❤9
🎉🔥双十一福利来袭！戴哥会员社区开放50个特大优惠名额 🎉🔥 戴哥会员社区技术过硬、胜率较高，长期稳定输出。 本月VIP会员群63笔订单胜率高达82.1%，公开频道拿下9连胜。 这样的战绩无需多言，我们只认真做好每一笔交易：顺境不浪，逆境不躁，保持平常心。💪📊 戴哥唯一TG：✈️ https://t.me/BDaiydaige
❤14👍12😁12
11月01日 比特币以太坊行情分析 这几天大饼接连遭遇交易所安全事件、科技股财报暴雷、现货ETF单日巨额净流出。换成以前，这种组合至少要砸出10%的跌幅；而这次仅从81,000回调至76,000附近，说明筹码结构稳定了许多。📊 前期窄幅震荡让杠杆持续降低，也把踩踏风险压到最低。短期看，市场已承受住这轮压力，76,000作为底部可能还要震荡一段时间，主要消化事件余波。因此，这一区域都是分批抄底的好位置。🛡💰 以太坊眼下处于现货ETF创纪录失血，资金面承压；空头开始拥挤，超卖信号真实，但均线全在头顶形成压制；巨鲸动作也不统一，这种结构下，追空盈亏比在下降，抄底又缺资金面配合。 操作建议： 回调至75,000-76,500 分批接多 今日策略已出，欢迎加入会员群，实时跟上策略布局。💀 财富列车跟单咨询👁 Daiy戴哥 财富列车备用联系👁 Daiy戴哥 财富列车试单体验😐 免费试单群
👍14❤13😁9
方向对了，就要拿得住！ 📉🔥 这波下跌确实够猛，但看准方向后坚定执行才是关键。78,000美元下方全部止盈离场，整段波段堪称完美，5,000点以上利润轻松拿下。💰✅ 交易不怕波动大，就怕方向乱、拿不住。该止盈时果断落袋，该持有的时候稳住心态。节奏踩对，利润自然来。恭喜跟上的兄弟，这一波吃得漂亮！🚀🐂
😁18❤14👍6
戴哥唯一TG：✈️ https://t.me/BDaiydaige
😁19👍10❤9
美联储没加息符合预期， 明天有110亿美元的期权到期，最大痛点78,000像一块磁铁在下面；贝莱德还在买，但只有它一家在买。
👍22😁16❤7
Showing the 12 most recent of 61 posts we hold for @qqbtceth1688. 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.
@qqbtceth1688 edited 1 post after it first published — the same permalink now carries different wording than the one this register originally read, caught because our own crawl held a copy of the earlier text.
An edit is not deception. Typo fixes, price updates and corrections look exactly like this too — this register can tell you the wording changed and when, not why. How this is measured.
We recorded 1 post on @qqbtceth1688 as deleted — posts this register held that were missing from the channel’s public page on two separate reads, taken from different network addresses at least an hour apart.
A deletion is not wrongdoing. This register can see that a post it held is no longer on the channel’s public page, and when — not why. Expired ad placements, reposts, rotating links and corrections all look the same. This is a count of recorded detections, not an exact total: it misses deletions we could not see, because only a post we held and later re-read inside the page can be seen to go, and it may include a small number of wrong records. How this is measured.
Republishes
Channels on the register whose posts this channel has forwarded.
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.
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.
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.
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 3 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 6 November 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“比特币以太坊行情分析（每日发布免费策略）” (@qqbtceth1688), 18,269 subscribers as measured 6 November 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/qqbtceth1688.
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.