4 measurements spanning 7 days, net -11. 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 1,444–1,459 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded
Measured (UTC)
Subscribers
Change
13 Aug 2026, 11:56
1,446
-8
10 Aug 2026, 19:13
1,454
+4
7 Aug 2026, 16:37
1,450
-7
6 Aug 2026, 17:32
1,457
first reading
Engagement
11 posts held, back to 17 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 1 pageof Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
ERR · 30 days
13.1%
avg views ÷ 1,446 subscribers
Avg views / post
190
11 posts measured
Reaction rate
16.4%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
11
of 11 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
Window
Rolling 30 days · latest post in window 5 August 2026
Posts held
11 (17 July 2026 – 5 August 2026)
Views total
2,087
Reactions total
342
Forwards / comments
not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken
6 Aug 2026, 17:32 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.
Reaction mix
342 reactions across 11 posts, in 6 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 23.7% of them.
Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
Reaction
Count
Share
Share, drawn
💯
81
23.7%
🔥
74
21.6%
❤
68
19.9%
👍
61
17.8%
😍
56
16.4%
🤯
2
0.585%
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 11 of the 11 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 342reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 11 most recent posts we hold, published 17 July 2026 to 5 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
80
across the posts below
Posts paid on
11
of 11 we hold a reading for · 100%
Most on one post
16
single highest reading
A paid reaction is a reader spending Telegram Stars — bought with money — on a post by @coinkyt. 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 11 most recent posts we hold for this entry, published 17 July 2026 to 5 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.
❗️ Многие думают, что комплаенс в крипто — это только про крупных игроков. Но это уже не так
Комплаенс — это система правил и контроля, которая помогает бизнесу работать в рамках закона и избегать проблем при операциях с цифровой валютой.
📔 Вчера был подписан закон «О цифровых валютах и цифровых правах» — и требования по комплаенсу теперь касаются любого бизнеса, работающего с цифровыми активами. Иначе компания рис…
‼️ Два взлома за один день на BNB Chain
2 августа аналитики КоинКит зафиксировали два инцидента на BNB Chain. В одном из случаев хакер нашел забытую функцию «забрать токены» и вызвал ее целых 4 раза. Общий ущерб от двух атак $1,59 млн
LpdFi (~$690 тыс.). Злоумышленник взял крупный заем и искусственно завысил цену токена LPD. Протокол оценивал доходность по этой мгновенной, резко завышенной цене. В итоге система выд…
‼️ Как злоумышленник «угадал» ключи от 500 Bitcoin-кошельков и вывел $38 млн
AML-аналитики КоинКит разобрали инцидент с аппаратными кошельками COLDCARD — одними из самых уважаемых на рынке. 30 июля злоумышленник получил доступ к 500 кошелькам из-за 1 ошибки.
Причина — ошибка в генераторе случайных чисел прошивки. COLDCARD строил расчеты на предсказуемых данных — ID микросхемы и системных таймерах. Хакер узнал это …
‼️ Как хакеры обошли защиту Across и Garden Finance на $3,17 млн
AML-аналитики КоинКит разобрали два инцидента. Смарт-контракты обоих проектов работали корректно, в отличии от механизмов оплатой.
🔴 Across Protocol (17 июля, ~$2,8 млн). Хакер научился подделывать данные о депозитах в Solana. Программа проверки (релеер) не проверяла специальную метку и приняла фальшивку за настоящий перевод. Система выдавала хакеру р…
Как хакер напечатал $731 тыс из воздуха
AML-аналитики КоинКит разобрали инцидент, который произошёл 26 июля со смарт-контрактами экосистемы WEMIX. Злоумышленник захватил admin-права сразу нескольких связанных контрактов и получил возможность действовать от имени протокола.
Хакер выпустил из воздуха более 5,2 млн токенов WEMIX$ — стейблкоина экосистемы — и тут же обменял их на 724 198,27 USDC.e и 30 736 WEMIX.
Боль…
Как хакер получил доступ к кошелькам Triple-A и вывел $11,8 млн за 31 час
AML-аналитики КоинКит разобрали инцидент с платёжным сервисом Triple-A, который начался 24 июля. Хакеры получили доступ к казначейским кошелькам в семи блокчейнах — Ethereum, TRON, Polygon, Arbitrum, Solana, TON и Bitcoin
Атака длилась больше суток. Атакующие удерживал контроль над кошельками, поэтому автоматически забирал все новые входящие …
‼️ Как один спящий адрес стоил BSquared Network $3,86 млн
AML-аналитики КоинКит разобрали инцидент, который произошёл 23 июля со стейкинг-контрактом BSquared Network. Хакер воспользовался старым админским кошельком, права у которого разработчики забыли отозвать.
Этот кошелек имел доступ к обновлению контракта, но не проявлял активности больше года. Злоумышленник захватил его, подменил официальный код пула на свой в…
‼️ 21–22 июля протокол 42DAO на BNB Smart Chain потерял около $1 млн — и для этого хватило всего одной аномальной цифры. Оракул передал в протокол цену BTCB, заниженную в сотни раз, а 42DAO принял её без единой проверки.
Все позиции под залог BTCB мгновенно «просели» ниже порога платёжеспособности, и злоумышленники тут же запустили их ликвидацию — забрали чужой BTCB и заодно выпустили BLC, токен самого протокола. Вс…
‼️ Хак через фальшивые сообщение: как Wanchain выдал 2.83 млн ADA злоумышленнику
AML-аналитики КоинКит разобрали инцидент, который произошёл 21 июля с мостом Wanchain на Cardano. Хакер подделал сообщение, которое одобряет транзакцию и заставил систему напечатать миллионы токенов.
Из-за бага в логике кодирования смарт-контракт не смог отличить фальшивку от оригинала и признал подделку подлинной. Мост послушно выдал …
15–19 июля произошло сразу 5 взломов, нацеленных на разные уязвимые точки криптопроектов. В общей сумме было украдено $24,27 млн. AML-аналитики КоинКит провели расследование и разложили по полочкам, как именно проекты лишились своих активов.
1️⃣ Ostium — $20 млн
Злоумышленник украл приватный ключ поставщика цен и начал подписывать любые котировки сам. Около 20 сделок — и из хранилища вышла треть всех средств проток…
1 млрд украден за полгода или как хакеры поменяли тактику за полгода. Аналитики КоинКит подсчитали: за 6 месяцев произошло 189 инцидентов
Массовые атаки на пользователей были главным источником потерь в криптомире давно. Но в 2026 году хакеры поменяли тактику, в особенности в последние 3 месяца: место массовых атак заняли редкие, но точечные удары на десятки миллионов долларов.
Мы разобрали, как изменилась логика а…
🔥11❤8👍6💯5😍3
Showing the 11 most recent of 11 posts we hold for @coinkyt. 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 — 950,369 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.
Mentions
Named by 3 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.
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 13 August 2026 — this
entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“КоинКит | Блокчейн-аналитика в крипто” (@coinkyt), 1,446 subscribers as measured 13 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/coinkyt.
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.