Channel
@algotitan_ai
On this record: Growth · Engagement · Reactions · Posts · Polls · Citations · Cite this entry
1,791subscribers
-38 since we began measuring on 7 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 1,000–3,162.
| Telegram ID | -1003933159053 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @algotitan_ai |
| Created | Between 1 April 2026 and 8 July 2026— estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated. |
| First recorded | 7 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 13 August 2026 |
| Measurements held | 4 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 13 August 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/algotitan_ai |
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 13 Aug 2026, 09:24 | 1,791 | -21 |
| 10 Aug 2026, 08:47 | 1,812 | -14 |
| 7 Aug 2026, 17:38 | 1,826 | -3 |
| 7 Aug 2026, 05:31 | 1,829 | first reading |
21 posts held, back to 8 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 2 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 7 August 2026 |
|---|---|
| Posts held | 21 (8 July 2026 – 7 August 2026) |
| Views total | 8,785 |
| Reactions total | 289 |
| Forwards / comments | not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated |
| Readings taken | 7 Aug 2026, 17:27 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.
369 reactions across 19 posts, in 10 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 40.7% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| 👍 | 150 | 40.7% | |
| ❤ | 121 | 32.8% | |
| 🔥 | 71 | 19.2% | |
| 🤝 | 13 | 3.52% | |
| 🐳 | 4 | 1.08% | |
| ✍ | 3 | 0.813% | |
| 😁 | 3 | 0.813% | |
| 🎉 | 2 | 0.542% | |
| 🍾 | 1 | 0.271% | |
| 👏 | 1 | 0.271% |
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 19 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 369reactions 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 8 July 2026 to 7 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.
Strategy Journey: Follow one strategy for 14 days Most traders judge a strategy too quickly. One good day feels like proof. One bad day feels like failure. Neither tells you much. A strategy needs time to reveal its rhythm: when it trades, when it stays out, how it behaves during losses, and how long recovery can take. 🧠 That is why AlgoTitan starts with a 14-day paper trial. Instead of jumping between strategies…
❤1👍1
👀 Watching isn't learning. Sitting through it is. You can read every article about drawdown. You can watch a hundred demo screenshots. None of it teaches you what a real red day feels like. 🟣 Paper trading isn't a demo. It's practice for the one skill that actually matters: staying calm while a number goes down. The first time you see it happen, you'll want to switch strategies. The tenth time, you'll check the dra…
❤7🎉1👍1
💼Would you survive five losing days in a row? Most traders think risk means losing one trade. But the real test is a drawdown: a period when your balance falls from a recent peak before recovering. Five losing days can make a solid plan feel broken. You start doubting the strategy, changing rules, increasing risk, or stopping just before conditions improve. 📉 A drawdown does not automatically mean a strategy has f…
❤7✍1
💔 Losing $100 hurts more than winning $100 feels good. That's not weakness, that's how brains work. Make $100 today. Lose $100 tomorrow. On paper, you're even. Emotionally, you're not. 📉 This is called loss aversion. In trading, it quietly messes with your decisions: You hold a loser because closing it makes it feel real. You close a winner early because you're scared to watch it slip away. Small rushed wins. Large…
❤8👍2🤝2
Why most traders close winners too early A profitable trade should feel good. Instead, it creates a new fear: "What if it disappears?" The moment a position turns green, most traders stop following their plan. ⚠️ They exit early because: A small profit feels safer than uncertainty. Old losses are still fresh. Every pullback looks like a reversal. 🎯 The problem isn't taking profit. It's exiting from fear instead of…
❤4👍2🎉1
📊 July recap: BTC Shield, +7.91%. $5,000 capital. 30 days. Here's how it actually went. 23 green days. 8 red. The red days: all small, -0.34 to -0.70. Controlled, not chaotic. The green days did the work: five separate days over +37, one hitting +109.19. ⚠️ Notice the pattern: losses stayed tiny and consistent. Gains showed up unevenly, but big when they landed. That's not luck. That's a low-drawdown strategy doing…
❤6👍5🐳4🔥1
❔ What's your biggest trading challenge? Everyone struggles with something at the beginning. What's holding you back the most?
Shares as published. No per-option vote count is published by Telegram, so none is shown.
👍17❤8😁3
📐 How pros think about risk. It's simpler than it sounds. Beginners say: "I'll risk 2% per trade." Pros ask three different questions instead. How much can I lose before it turns around? That's max drawdown. It tells you the worst stretch you'd need to survive. How long does it take to recover? Some dips bounce back fast. Others take a while. Knowing this in advance stops panic later. How much ups and downs are n…
👍12🔥3
Market Myth #1: More trades = More profit It sounds logical: more trades, more opportunities, more money. The market doesn't work that way. Every extra trade also brings another chance to: • enter too early • chase a move • pay more fees • break your rules 📈 Professional traders don't look for more trades. They look for better trades. Sometimes the most profitable decision is doing nothing. 🔻 Trading rewards pati…
❤11🤝7👍2
💯 Why your first profitable trade teaches almost nothing You spotted an opportunity, entered, and made money. For a moment, you think you've figured it out. That's the dangerous part. One winning trade can't tell you if it was skill or luck. It can't prove your strategy actually works. It can't show you'll stay disciplined during losses. 🤔 A profitable result doesn't always mean a good decision. Bad trades can mak…
👍13🔥5❤2
👀 The hidden cost of checking charts every hour One quick look before breakfast, another during work, one more before bed, nothing important may have changed. But your mood has. 🔴 One red candle creates doubt. 🟢 One green candle creates FOMO. The hidden cost isn't the time you spend looking. It's what every glance makes you feel. You start closing positions too early, changing decisions that were made calmly, tak…
🔥25👍21
✅ The 4-point self-check before going live. The trial's ending. The question isn't "did it profit?" It's "am I ready?" Here's how to actually know. 1. Have you watched for at least 10 days? Long enough to see both moods: active and quiet, green and red. If you can describe the strategy's rhythm in one sentence, you've watched enough. 2. Did you see a red day and stay calm? The most important check. If you saw red, …
❤32👍14
Showing the 12 most recent of 21 posts we hold for @algotitan_ai. 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.
The poll we hold for this entry, as Telegram rendered it when we read the post. A poll’s figures keep moving after that, so each one is dated.
❔ What's your biggest trading challenge? Everyone struggles with something at the beginning. What's holding you back the most?
Shares as published. No per-option vote count is published by Telegram, so none is shown.
Percentages only — there are no per-option vote counts here, because Telegram publishes none.The public post preview gives each option’s share and a single voter total, and nothing else. Multiplying one by the other would produce a per-option tally that looks measured and is not: the shares are rounded to whole numbers before we ever see them. We print what was published and leave the column that does not exist empty.
The shares need not add up to 100.Rounding alone puts many polls at 99 or 101. A poll that allows more than one answer per voter runs well past 100 by design, and several here do. The bars are drawn against a fixed 100% track at each option’s own percentage rather than normalised to the total, so a poll that exceeds it shows that it does instead of being quietly rescaled.
Read from the 21 most recent posts we hold, published 8 July 2026 to 7 August 2026. Telegram labels each poll by kind — an anonymous poll, a quiz, a closed set of final results — and that label is reproduced rather than paraphrased.
Citation-graph rank — 419,934 of 1,480,688entries 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 2 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.
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 13 August 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“AlgoTitan Official” (@algotitan_ai), 1,791 subscribers as measured 13 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/algotitan_ai.
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.