Telegram RegisterThe public register of Telegram

Channel

ORBT Protocol

@ORBT_Protocol

On this record: Growth · Engagement · What this channel posts · Reactions · Stars · Posts · Citations · Cite this entry

49,405subscribers

-237 since we began measuring on 7 August 2026

Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 31,623–100,000.

Register entry

Telegram ID-1002939996600
TypeChannel
Username@ORBT_Protocol
DescriptionModular Stablecoin. Built to Earn, Designed to Last. 𝕏 https://x.com/ORBT_Protocol 🌐 https://orbt.xyz 👾https://discord.gg/orbtprotocol
CreatedBetween 1 August 2025 and 31 October 2025— estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated.
First recorded7 August 2026
Last confirmed live12 August 2026
Measurements held7
Confirmed unchanged1 time, most recently 12 August 2026
On Telegramt.me/ORBT_Protocol

Growth

49,40549,64249,523.57 August 2026 — 49,642 subscribers7 August 2026 — 49,627 subscribers8 August 2026 — 49,600 subscribers9 August 2026 — 49,569 subscribers10 August 2026 — 49,506 subscribers11 August 2026 — 49,471 subscribers12 August 2026 — 49,405 subscribers7 August 202612 August 2026
7 measurements spanning 5 days, net -237. Dots are measurements; the straight line between them is drawn to join them, not to claim we know the path taken in between — snapshots are recorded only when a count changes, so gaps mean “no change observed”, never “interpolated”. The vertical axis spans 49,369–49,678 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded
Measured (UTC)SubscribersChange
12 Aug 2026, 06:5249,405-66
11 Aug 2026, 08:3649,471-35
10 Aug 2026, 07:0749,506-63
9 Aug 2026, 09:5149,569-31
8 Aug 2026, 10:3549,600-27
7 Aug 2026, 12:3649,627-15
7 Aug 2026, 02:0149,642first reading

Engagement

21 posts held, back to 13 March 2026the reader has not yet reached the start of this channel’s public history, so older posts may sit further back, unread. Read across 17 pagesof Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.

ERR · 30 days
9.42%
avg views ÷ 49,405 subscribers
Avg views / post
4,660
6 posts measured
Reaction rate
1.45%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
6
of 21 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.

What these figures were computed from
WindowRolling 30 days · latest post in window 11 August 2026
Posts held21 (13 March 202611 August 2026)
Views total27,930
Reactions total405
Forwards / commentsnot exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken12 Aug 2026, 19:47 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
35
Videos
33
Links
80

Lifetime counters from Telegram’s own channel header, read 12 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.

Video runtime
1m 39s
Average length
8s

Measured directly from 13 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

1,749 reactions across 21 posts, in 10 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 41.3% of them.

Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
ReactionCountShareShare, drawn
🔥72341.3%
🎉34819.9%
🤩26515.2%
17910.2%
915.20%
❤‍🔥824.69%
👍543.09%
😁30.172%
🥰30.172%
🤣10.057%

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 21 of the 21 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 1,749reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.

Measured over the 21 most recent posts we hold, published 13 March 2026 to 11 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.

Telegram Stars

Stars received
1
across the posts below
Posts paid on
1
of 21 we hold a reading for · 5%
Most on one post
1
single highest reading

A paid reaction is a reader spending Telegram Stars — bought with money — on a post by @ORBT_Protocol. 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 21 most recent posts we hold for this entry, published 13 March 2026 to 11 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.

Recent posts

11 Aug 2026, 15:12 UTC≈3,070 views61 reactionsread 12 August 2026
Photo

Intents describe the outcome. Liquidity determines whether it clears. ORBT is where they meet. 🔗 https://x.com/orbt_protocol/status/2087186988609015897?s=46

🔥601

30 Jul 2026, 15:45 UTC≈3,890 views13 reactions1 Starread 12 August 2026
Photo

Every chain runs its own liquidity pool. Solvers hold idle inventories across 100+ isolated venues and most of it earns nothing. ORBT consolidates it into a single chain-agnostic pool, routing liquidity to wherever settlement demand exists. 🔗 https://x.com/ORBT_Protocol/status/2082854944835858559

👍94

24 Jul 2026, 13:16 UTC≈4,390 views68 reactionsread 12 August 2026
Video

DeFi liquidity has scaled across 453 chains and 5,000+ protocols. The result is idle capital at scale. Pools becomes too shallow and efficiency collapses across the stack. ORBT ends fragmentation at the source, consolidating liquidity into one layer every intent draws from. 🔗 https://x.com/ORBT_Protocol/status/2080639133014462634

🔥62👍3🥰3

21 Jul 2026, 17:18 UTC≈7,140 views97 reactionsread 12 August 2026
Photo

Depositors fund every intent that settles yet get back the least of what those settlements generate. ORBT restructures where value lands. Settlement liquidity consolidates into one unified layer, and every fee generated returns to the depositors funding it. 🔗 https://x.com/ORBT_Protocol/status/2079611129966502316

🔥97

16 Jul 2026, 13:50 UTC≈4,820 views67 reactionsread 12 August 2026
Photo

Routing is now a commodity on the intent stack. Every solver pathfinds the same liquidity, leaving no edge in the route. Settlement is where the trade clears, and clearing them needs capital. ORBT is building the liquidity layer that clears intent-based settlements at scale. 🔗 https://x.com/ORBT_Protocol/status/2077747728751452667

🔥67

14 Jul 2026, 13:07 UTC≈4,620 views99 reactionsread 12 August 2026
Video

Intents won the execution debate. However, the settlement layer underneath it never got the attention. Here's why settlement layer is the moat in DeFi 🧵 🔗 https://x.com/orbt_protocol/status/2077015614280048706?s=46

91👍62

8 Jul 2026, 08:02 UTC≈4,920 views65 reactionsread 12 August 2026
Video

Intent volume is going vertical across the market. @NEARProtocol alone cites more than $20B routed through intents. But the obvious question no one is asking is: where does all of it settle? 🔗 https://x.com/orbt_protocol/status/2074533434576548141?s=46

🔥65

3 Jul 2026, 15:42 UTC≈5,050 views68 reactionsread 12 August 2026
Photo

Five independent revenue streams feed a single ORBT pool. Each one scales to cover different market conditions. When settlement flow slows down, base rates and spread capture keep the yield running. Diversified revenue is what turns yield into an asset class. 🔗 https://x.com/orbt_protocol/status/2073059201409056782?s=46

🔥662

29 Jun 2026, 14:35 UTC≈10,100 views70 reactionsread 12 August 2026
Video

Up to 95% of DeFi liquidity does nothing. Idle, fragmented across seven million pools, earning nothing. This is the real gap in DeFi, and unified intent-based settlement is the way to close it. 🔗 https://x.com/ORBT_Protocol/status/2071602355909566575

67👍2😁1

25 Jun 2026, 14:13 UTC≈5,230 views70 reactionsread 12 August 2026
Video

This is how ORBT's flywheel works: higher intent volume → more revenue → higher yield → higher TVL → deeper settlement capacity → cheaper execution → more volume settled. The unified liquidity layer compounds. 🔗 https://x.com/ORBT_Protocol/status/2070144985450914218

🔥682

23 Jun 2026, 15:13 UTC≈5,170 views74 reactionsread 12 August 2026
Photo

How ORBT's intent-based settlement works: • An intent states the outcome, • Solvers compete to fill it, • Intent is settled against the unified liquidity layer. That last step is what makes ORBT different. 🔗 https://x.com/ORBT_Protocol/status/2069435891324756168

🔥74

15 Jun 2026, 16:32 UTC≈5,780 views96 reactionsread 12 August 2026
Video

Intent-based settlement is becoming the default way DeFi executes. Be ready for ORBT. 🔗 https://x.com/orbt_protocol/status/2066558265467773114?s=46

🔥48🤩399

Showing the 12 most recent of 21 posts we hold for @ORBT_Protocol. 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

Citation-graph rank — 207,968 of 1,160,990entries 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.

Mentions

Named by 6 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.

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.

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 12 August 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.

“ORBT Protocol” (@ORBT_Protocol), 49,405 subscribers as measured 12 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/ORBT_Protocol.

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.