Channel
@AW_Time
On this record: Growth · Engagement · What this channel posts · Reactions · Stars · Posts · Citations · Cite this entry
12,405subscribers
-27 since we began measuring on 7 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 10,000–31,623.
| Telegram ID | -1001820822370 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @AW_Time |
| Description | - Curated Alpha for Telegram Members - Exclusive Crypto Insights Owner: @alex_wacy X: https://x.com/wacy_time1 |
| Created | Between 1 October 2022 and 30 September 2023— estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated. |
| First recorded | 7 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 12 August 2026 |
| Measurements held | 6 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 12 August 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/AW_Time |
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 12 Aug 2026, 22:07 | 12,405 | -7 |
| 11 Aug 2026, 19:29 | 12,412 | -7 |
| 9 Aug 2026, 21:17 | 12,419 | -5 |
| 8 Aug 2026, 18:04 | 12,424 | -5 |
| 7 Aug 2026, 18:05 | 12,429 | -3 |
| 7 Aug 2026, 09:45 | 12,432 | first reading |
20 posts held, back to 12 April 2025 — the reader has not yet reached the start of this channel’s public history, so older posts may sit further back, unread. Read across 16 pagesof Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
Nothing published in the last 30 days. ERR and ER are rolling 30-day measures, so there is nothing to compute — we hold 20 posts for this entry, the most recent from 23 December 2025. An engagement rate over an empty window would be a number about nothing.
Lifetime counters from Telegram’s own channel header, read 13 August 2026 — not the date at the top of this page, which is when the subscriber count was last read. Below Telegram’s rounding threshold, so these counts are exact.
756 reactions across 20 posts, in 1 kind.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| ❤ | 756 | 100.0% |
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 20 of the 20 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 756reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 20 most recent posts we hold, published 12 April 2025 to 23 December 2025, 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 @AW_Time. 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 20 most recent posts we hold for this entry, published 12 April 2025 to 23 December 2025. 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.
2025 wasn’t an easy year. Volatility, uncertainty, long waiting periods, tough decisions. For many, it tested patience more than skill. But we’re still here. We stayed in the game, learned, adapted, and moved forward. What gives me confidence is that crypto keeps evolving. The industry is maturing, new ideas keep emerging, and the space is becoming deeper and more interesting with every cycle. I genuinely believe…
❤69
Hello friends! I warned you about this drop a week ago. Hopefully you made the right decision for yourself and are feeling good right now. Still think we get a bounce - how strong it will be is the real question. At the very least, I expect a move toward ~$100k. As for what happens next… it’s harder to predict now. I’ll just watch the market and react to what it does next. As a friend once told me: “In the end, e…
❤95
The weekly close for BTC is looking weak. My main scenario hasn’t changed, I still expect a retest ~$110k. But with this kind of close, the market will most likely drop into the 76–84k range🤨. Whether it goes there straight away or through a bounce doesn’t really matter, that’s the zone I’m watching. We could still see a move back toward 110k-117k, but even if that happens, I’d treat it as nothing more than a corre…
❤57
$100,500 - $106,000 ✅ $96-97k ✅ We got both entry points — the scenario played out. I think the market should show solid upside soon, but as I mentioned earlier, a quick liquidity sweep down to $94K is still on the table. Regarding ETH — if BTC really dips to ~$94K, ETH could slide to around $2,800. I’m still leaving my bids there. Right now though, ETH looks stronger than BTC, so let’s see how it plays out.
❤73
I’ve started noticing large buy orders for BTC around $94,000. That level might not get filled anytime soon — so it makes sense to shift the entry higher, somewhere near $96–97K. Even if price briefly dips to $94K, it’s not critical — buying around $96K still looks solid. Right now there are two main scenarios: – We first go up to $106–112K, then pull back to $95K – Or we dip to $95K first and then start the next l…
❤62
Hey friends! It’s been a while since my last update - four months, to be exact. And truth be told, not much has changed on a macro level. Bitcoin slightly refreshed its ATH Ethereum showed a strong rally Altcoins are still asleep As I’ve said before, I open large positions only during deep pullbacks and scale out gradually as the market moves up. That’s exactly what I did after my April call, closing positions s…
❤52
Hello friends! This is the important post with some thoughts that have been building up lately. Over the past few months, there’s been a lot of noise in crypto and very little real value. So from now on, I’ll only post my actual thoughts about the market here. Sometimes, reading 5–10 honest opinions is enough to build your own point of view. Now, about the market. Honestly, you could’ve done nothing in the past 5 …
❤67
Trading the News in Crypto: Lessons From a Still-Young Market How do you know crypto is still early? ➜ Look at how a single tweet can shake the entire market. Even in 2025, with billions at stake in institutional crypto portfolios, the market remains vulnerable to narratives and social buzz. ➜ Contrast this with traditional markets—steady, anchored, and resistant to headline hype. Crypto, however, is still jumpy…
❤26
$BTC has veered off course with no turning back. Today's market is a far cry from the Bitcoin glory days of two halvings past... 📌 📑 Post https://x.com/wacy_time1/status/1928115982054424683
❤20
Without altcoin evolution, $BTC liquidity remains stagnant and a true altseason stays a distant dream. Let me explain ⬇️ 📌 📑 Post https://x.com/wacy_time1/status/1927436550192656786
❤16
The latest pump brought euphoria back to the timeline, but it also split the room. Some are calling it the last bounce before we bleed. Others say we’re just getting started. Honestly? It feels like both sides have a point. ETH/BTC reversal was the first sign — $ETH showed strength before the ETF narrative even picked up steam. Add in a cooler CPI print, and suddenly macro and crypto were aligned for once. But he…
❤25
Cheatsheet: Top Projects and Products Across Various Categories Bookmark this post for later! 📌 📑 Post https://x.com/wacy_time1/status/1916886568721342879
❤20
Showing the 12 most recent of 20 posts we hold for @AW_Time. 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.
Stars beside a post are paid reactions — Telegram Stars, bought with money and spent on that post. They are a different unit from reactions and are never added to them, here or anywhere else on this page.
Citation-graph rank — 588,713 of 1,169,250entries 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 1 registered channel — 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.
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 12 August 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“🅰️ Wacy Time” (@AW_Time), 12,405 subscribers as measured 12 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/AW_Time.
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.