Channel
@ArtavestPro
On this record: Growth · Engagement · Posts · Citations · Telegram's recommendations · Cite this entry
3,329subscribers
+4 since we began measuring on 7 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 3,162–10,000.
| Telegram ID | -1001295992381 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @ArtavestPro |
| Created | Between 1 March 2018 and 30 June 2021— estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated. |
| First recorded | 7 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 14 August 2026 |
| Measurements held | 3 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 14 August 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/ArtavestPro |
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 14 Aug 2026, 11:36 | 3,329 | +4 |
| 7 Aug 2026, 23:50 | 3,325 | no change |
| 7 Aug 2026, 00:46 | 3,325 | first reading |
20 posts held, back to 22 July 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 3 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.
| Window | Rolling 30 days · latest post in window 6 August 2026 |
|---|---|
| Posts held | 20 (22 July 2026 – 6 August 2026) |
| Views total | 39,724 |
| Reactions total | — |
| Forwards / comments | not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated |
| Readings taken | 7 Aug 2026, 23:28 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.
SHARP DECLINE IN $APP 🔴 After the upward wave that I believe ended at $740 at the end of last year, the price entered a correction phase. Upon closer examination, I see that this decline is in a double zigzag (wxy) form. The sharp decline that occurred at the opening today was already a possibility, so don't let this scare anyone. I expect a reversal from the $320 level. With this reversal, the price will make new …
POST-EARNINGS ROADMAP FOR $SNDK 🗺️ I’ve been noting that the downtrend began on June 9; following my post, the price has lost nearly 50% of its value. Right now, there’s one question on everyone’s mind: What happens next? Let me explain. If we agree that the price peaked at the $2,350 level and has since entered a correction phase, the price has been moving in a series of three-wave downtrends since then. Looking f…
Our account is growing rapidly, and our content continues to expand. 🎉 We've managed to achieve over 30% profit on $PLTR, and we continue to share dozens of similar articles on X. If you haven't followed us yet, now's the perfect time! 🥂
+30% Profit on $PLTR 💪 In my August 27th post, I stated my bullish expectation and highlighted the 125-130 levels as suitable buying zones. My wave analysis worked again and didn't disappoint me. My relationship with the market is really good these days, and things are going well. My bullish expectation remains unchanged; I anticipate a rise to the $170 level. After that, a final bottom should be tested with a reve…
THE KEY TURNING POINT IN $META 📌 The minor 2 wave ended at $520. After that, the price rose in a 5-wave pattern to $690. Following this rise, the price entered a correction phase. This correction, lasting 104 days, progressed in a flat pattern, almost scraping the void level of $520 before starting an upward move. The expected rise will lay the foundation for a long-term trend. I expect the price to continue this m…
$COP IS RISING LIKE FIRE 🔥 After the 3rd wave, which ended at $135 in April, the price entered a correction phase. A detailed analysis of the downward movement shows that the wave analysis indicates this structure progressed in a double zigzag form and ended near the psychological level of $100. With the upward movement that started at $102, the price rose to $122 and is now preparing to make a correction from here …
RDDT'S DECLINE ACCELERATED 📉 After an upward wave that ended near $300, the price entered a correction phase. We have now reached the end of wave A, a diagonal pattern that has been ongoing since September 2025. We will see a temporary rise in price after wave A. My target for the decline after wave A is $100; the price will ease after this level.
A RISING WAVE HAS BEGUN IN $MSFT 🌊 Following the opening, the price movement, progressing with a gap, resulted in a rise of nearly 15%. As I mentioned in previous posts, according to my wave analysis, the 4th wave, progressing in a triple zigzag form, ended at $349.20. The price did not disappoint me again, and the rise I expected has begun. After the upward movement, which I expect to reach around $500, a small co…
Hi everyone! Our X account is growing rapidly and we're much more active here. 💯 Don't forget to follow us so you don't miss our detailed analyses and reviews.🔥
$MU'S CORRECTION IS ENDING ☀️ The stock, which experienced an incredible rise in 2025, entered a correction in June at $1250. I expect this correction to be in a horizontal form according to Elliott Wave theory. The zigzag downward movement will end in the coming days, but this decline is the first wave of the correction I expect to be in a horizontal form. Therefore, I expect a reversal from around $650, with the …
Artavest - Stocks & ETF pinned a photo
THE FINAL WAVE OF CORRECTION IN $LLY 🚀 The upward wave in a 5-wave pattern, starting from $850, ended at $1250. A correction was expected to follow this rise. In this context, this pullback carries correction signals. Examining the downward movement in detail, I see a potential second wave of zigzag pattern. The b-wave of the zigzag pattern is nearing completion; the correction will end with the final downward wave …
Showing the 12 most recent of 20 posts we hold for @ArtavestPro. 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 — 300,771 of 1,336,469entries 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.
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 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.
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 14 August 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“Artavest - Stocks & ETF” (@ArtavestPro), 3,329 subscribers as measured 14 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/ArtavestPro.
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.