🤔 This or that? Get paid in…
- ₿ Bitcoin69%
- 💵 Dollars31%
Shares as published. No per-option vote count is published by Telegram, so none is shown.
🤯1

Channel
@cryptolifebro
On this record: Topic · Observations · Growth · Engagement · What this channel posts · View velocity · Reactions · Stars · Posts · Polls · Citations · Telegram's recommendations · Domains linked from posts · Cite this entry
972,202subscribers
-162,778 since we began measuring on 6 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 316,228–1,000,000.
| Telegram ID | -1002220287165 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @cryptolifebro |
| Description | This channel is about living your life using only crypto. Earn in crypto, spend in crypto |
| Created | Between 1 June 2024 and 30 September 2024 — estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated. |
| First recorded | 6 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 10 November 2026 |
| Measurements held | 66 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 10 November 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/cryptolifebro |
Crypto & trading — a classification, not a measurement. An on-box language model (Qwen3.6-35B-A3B-UD-Q6_K_XL, prompt version 1) read this channel’s own recent posts on 8 August 2026 and assigned it the closest of 31 fixed categories, at 99% confidence. This is a model’s judgement about what the channel is likely to be about, not a fact this register measured the way a subscriber count or a view count is measured — it can be revised on a later pass, and it carries no weight anywhere else on this page. How this classification works, and the other topics.
These are measurements, not verdicts. Each one below states something we counted, alongside the evidence it was counted from, so you can check it rather than take it. None of them is graded: every observation this register holds is recorded at severity 0, because the precision of the detectors behind them has not been measured yet, and a rating we cannot support is worse than none. Read each as a fact about the data, not as a judgement about the channel. How we measure.
329 average views per post against 982,231 subscribers — an engagement rate of 0.034%. Across the 1,146 registered channels in the same cohort — 316,286–999,325 subscribers — the middle half sit between 1.56% and 11.1%, with a median of 4.14%.
| Window | 30 days (6 October 2026 – 5 November 2026) |
|---|---|
| Posts measured | 128 of 128 published in the window (128 exact, 0 rounded by Telegram) |
| Views totalled | 42,154 |
| Mature posts only | 0.034% over 124 posts read at least 24h after publication |
| Subscribers | 982,231 measured 4 November 2026 |
| Cohort | b316228 · 1,146 channels · p10 0.432% · p25 1.56% · p50 4.14% · p75 11.1% · p90 24.1% |
| Position in cohort | 0.611th percentile · 1/125 the cohort median |
| Uncertainty | ±0.029% of the figure, from Telegram’s rounding |
| Post language | English · 100.0% of the window’s posts |
When this is recorded. A channel is listed here only when its engagement rate sits at or below the 1st percentile of its cohort and is at least 3× away from that cohort’s median — below it — on both the all-readings figure and the mature-only figure. The percentile alone would be circular: a percentile cut puts the same share of every cohort in the tail whatever the data looks like. The distance from the median is what makes it a statement about this channel.
This is not a verdict, and the direction is not a quality signal. A low rate has many innocent causes — audiences that read in the Telegram app without opening the channel, a subscriber base built long before the current output, an audience in a different timezone from our reading. A high rate has innocent causes too: a post that travelled far beyond the channel’s own subscribers will do it. We publish the measurement and the distribution it sits in. The full cohort baselines are downloadable, so this comparison can be reproduced rather than trusted.
Recorded under the key err_low, last confirmed 5 November 2026. An observation that a later pass no longer finds is cleared, and a cleared observation is removed from this page rather than being shown struck through — we do not keep publishing a claim we have withdrawn. Dispute an observation.
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 10 Nov 2026, 23:08 | 972,202 | -2,612 |
| 9 Nov 2026, 08:21 | 974,814 | -2,367 |
| 7 Nov 2026, 21:47 | 977,181 | -1,857 |
| 6 Nov 2026, 16:16 | 979,038 | -1,762 |
| 5 Nov 2026, 16:50 | 980,800 | -1,431 |
| 4 Nov 2026, 17:26 | 982,231 | -1,590 |
| 3 Nov 2026, 16:46 | 983,821 | -1,372 |
| 2 Nov 2026, 18:58 | 985,193 | -1,794 |
| 1 Nov 2026, 16:48 | 986,987 | -1,851 |
| 31 Oct 2026, 14:50 | 988,838 | -1,780 |
| 30 Oct 2026, 15:30 | 990,618 | -1,557 |
| 29 Oct 2026, 17:07 | 992,175 | -2,140 |
| 28 Oct 2026, 14:30 | 994,315 | -1,493 |
| 27 Oct 2026, 15:05 | 995,808 | -2,402 |
| 26 Oct 2026, 11:37 | 998,210 | -614 |
| 25 Oct 2026, 13:26 | 998,824 | -1,193 |
| 24 Oct 2026, 10:31 | 1,000,017 | -1,687 |
| 23 Oct 2026, 10:06 | 1,001,704 | -1,676 |
| 22 Oct 2026, 08:34 | 1,003,380 | -2,630 |
| 20 Oct 2026, 22:26 | 1,006,010 | first reading |
462 posts held, back to 3 August 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 196 pages of 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. It is computed over the 88 of 125 measured posts that carry a reaction reading, and over those same posts' views.
| Window | Rolling 30 days · latest post in window 10 November 2026 |
|---|---|
| Posts held | 462 (3 August 2026 – 10 November 2026) |
| Views total | 47,554 |
| Reactions total | 152 |
| Forwards / comments | not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated |
| Readings taken | 11 Nov 2026, 01:29 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.
Lifetime counters from Telegram’s own channel header, read 11 November 2026 — not the date at the top of this page, which is when the subscriber count was last read. A count marked ≈ was rounded by Telegram before we ever saw it — t.me prints these counters in full below 1,000 and to three significant figures above, so ≈142,000 means somewhere between 141,500 and 142,499.
How fast this channel’s own posts pick up views, from re-reading them repeatedly in the hours and days after they were published rather than the single reading most entries on this register get. Coverage is early and only a small minority of channels hold it at all — a gap in this section means the post has not been re-read again yet, not that nothing happened.
Computed from 112 of this channel’s own posts over the last 30 days (3 of the 24-hour readings behind this are interpolated, not measured directly): across 102 of this channel’s own posts with a clear reading, a typical one reaches half of its last-observed view count within 9.3 hours of being posted; a typical post has already reached 25.6% of its 24-hour view count within the first hour, and 59.6% within the first six; the median 24-hour reach across those posts is 204 views — 0.02% of this channel’s own subscriber count (90th percentile 293).
| Post | Readings | Latest reading | Curve | 24h reach | Half of last-observed views by |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| /26798 Oct 2026, 08:18 UTC | 1815 minutes – 14 hours old | 215 viewsno reaction reading | 60 minutes: 65 interp. → 3.0 hours: 106 → 6.0 hours: 158 → 12 hours: 203still climbing at last reading | not yet at 24h | 3.0 hoursprovisional — final view count still climbing |
| /26788 Oct 2026, 08:18 UTC | 1715 minutes – 14 hours old | 214 views1 reaction | 60 minutes: 62 interp. → 3.0 hours: 104 → 6.0 hours: 158 → 12 hours: 203still climbing at last reading | not yet at 24h | 3.1 hoursprovisional — final view count still climbing |
| /26748 Oct 2026, 08:15 UTC | 1717 minutes – 14 hours old | 96 viewsno reaction reading | 60 minutes: 32 interp. → 3.0 hours: 57 → 6.0 hours: 69 → 12 hours: 95still climbing at last reading | not yet at 24h | 2.2 hoursprovisional — final view count still climbing |
| /26778 Oct 2026, 08:15 UTC | 1717 minutes – 14 hours old | 135 views1 reaction | 60 minutes: 45 interp. → 3.0 hours: 73 → 6.0 hours: 102 → 12 hours: 129still climbing at last reading | not yet at 24h | 2.5 hoursprovisional — final view count still climbing |
| /26738 Oct 2026, 08:11 UTC | 1821 minutes – 14 hours old | 162 views1 reaction | 60 minutes: 63 interp. → 3.0 hours: 95 → 6.0 hours: 120 → 12 hours: 155still climbing at last reading | not yet at 24h | 2.1 hoursprovisional — final view count still climbing |
| /26727 Oct 2026, 08:19 UTC | 445 minutes – 38 hours old | 315 views2 reactions | 60 minutes: 68 interp. → 3.0 hours: 101 → 6.0 hours: 135 → 12 hours: 198 → 24 hours: 279still climbing at last reading | 279measured | 8.3 hours |
| /26717 Oct 2026, 08:17 UTC | 397 minutes – 36 hours old | 257 views2 reactions | 60 minutes: 59 → 3.0 hours: 89 → 6.0 hours: 117 → 12 hours: 173 → 24 hours: 235still climbing at last reading | 235measured | 7.3 hours |
| /26687 Oct 2026, 08:17 UTC | 367 minutes – 36 hours old | 113 views1 reaction | 60 minutes: 38 → 3.0 hours: 52 → 6.0 hours: 64 → 12 hours: 86 → 24 hours: 101views have flattened out | 101measured | 3.9 hours |
Curve is every standard checkpoint we hold a reading for (+1h, +3h, +6h, +12h, +24h, +48h, +7d after posting) — measured where a real reading landed close enough to that age, interpolated where it did not but readings on both sides let one be worked out between them. Nothing is ever extrapolated past the last real reading. Latest reading is the newest view and reaction count we hold for the post, side by side, so a gap between how views and reactions moved is visible without following it into the Observations section above. 24h reach is that one checkpoint on its own, labelled the same way. Half of last-observed views is the age at which a post’s view count crossed half of the highest figure we have read for it so far — an upper bound when the very first reading was already past half (we cannot see the actual crossing), and biased low while the post is still climbing, since “half of final” is dividing by a number that has not finished growing yet. Both caveats are printed inline wherever they apply, never silently dropped.
387 reactions across 247 posts, in 8 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 25.8% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| 👍 | 100 | 25.8% | |
| ❤ | 98 | 25.3% | |
| 🔥 | 87 | 22.5% | |
| 🤯 | 64 | 16.5% | |
| 👏 | 13 | 3.36% | |
| 😁 | 9 | 2.33% | |
| 🤔 | 9 | 2.33% | |
| 🥰 | 7 | 1.81% |
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 258 of the 462 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 389 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 462 most recent posts we hold, published 3 August 2026 to 10 November 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.
A paid reaction is a reader spending Telegram Stars — bought with money — on a post by @cryptolifebro. 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 462 most recent posts we hold for this entry, published 3 August 2026 to 10 November 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.
Telegram’s own ‘edited’ marker: 0 of 125 posts held from the last 30 days (0%) carried it when this register last read them. The marker says a post was changed after publishing, not what it said before — this register holds the earlier wording only where an edit fell between two of its own reads (see the edit ledger and how it is measured).
🤔 This or that? Get paid in…
Shares as published. No per-option vote count is published by Telegram, so none is shown.
🤯1
📊 Yesterday: Your AI assistant should… 7 of you voted — 🗂 Run your budget won with 86%. News | Memes | 𝕏 takes
🔥1
🤖 AI for your money life: Scan Investment Pitches for Scam Red Flags A quick AI check can surface manipulation tactics you might miss when you're excited or under pressure to act fast. 📋 Copy this into any AI assistant: Act as a skeptical financial fraud analyst. Review this investment message I received: "[paste message text]". It was sent via [platform, e.g. WhatsApp/Telegram/email] by [sender name or unknown]. I…
📅 On this day in crypto — November 10 What $100 bought on this date, and what it's worth today: ₿ 2016 · BTC was $713 → $100 is now $10,412 ₿ 2021 · BTC was $64,912 → $100 is now $114 ₿ 2023 · BTC was $37,325 → $100 is now $199 ₿ 2025 · BTC was $105,979 → $100 is now $70.04 Ξ 2021 · ETH was $4,632 → $100 is now $45.22 Ξ 2025 · ETH was $3,566 → $100 is now $58.73 😏 Past you bought coffee money in crypto. Present yo…
🔥1
🤔 This or that? Your AI assistant should…
Shares as published. No per-option vote count is published by Telegram, so none is shown.
📊 Yesterday: Check your portfolio… 17 of you voted — 📱 Every day won with 94%. News | Memes | 𝕏 takes
👍1
📜 FTX: The $8 Billion Hole That Ended an Empire Crypto legends & cautionary tales FTX, a Bahamas-based exchange with over one million users, was once the third-largest crypto platform. On 2 November 2022, CoinDesk revealed Alameda Research held billions in FTX's own token, FTT. Binance's Changpeng Zhao, holding 23 million FTT worth $529 million, announced he'd sell, sparking $6 billion in withdrawals and an 80% FTT …
👍2❤1🥰1
📅 On this day in crypto — November 9 What $100 bought on this date, and what it's worth today: ₿ 2016 · BTC was $721 → $100 is now $10,298 ₿ 2021 · BTC was $66,945 → $100 is now $111 ₿ 2023 · BTC was $36,707 → $100 is now $202 ₿ 2025 · BTC was $104,695 → $100 is now $70.92 Ξ 2021 · ETH was $4,732 → $100 is now $44.59 Ξ 2025 · ETH was $3,583 → $100 is now $58.88 😏 Past you bought coffee money in crypto. Present you…
🔥1
🤔 This or that? Check your portfolio…
Shares as published. No per-option vote count is published by Telegram, so none is shown.
🤯2
📊 Yesterday: You'd rather… 12 of you voted — ⏰ Retire early won with 92%. News | Memes | 𝕏 takes
👍1
📅 On this day in crypto — November 8 What $100 bought on this date, and what it's worth today: ₿ 2016 · BTC was $711 → $100 is now $10,659 ₿ 2021 · BTC was $67,555 → $100 is now $112 ₿ 2023 · BTC was $35,639 → $100 is now $213 ₿ 2025 · BTC was $102,286 → $100 is now $74.11 Ξ 2021 · ETH was $4,812 → $100 is now $46.43 Ξ 2025 · ETH was $3,400 → $100 is now $65.70 😏 Past you bought crypto; present you checks the math…
❤1👍1
🤔 This or that? You'd rather…
Shares as published. No per-option vote count is published by Telegram, so none is shown.
Showing the 12 most recent of 462 posts we hold for @cryptolifebro. 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.
The 6 most recent of 84 polls we hold for this entry, as Telegram rendered them when we read the post. A poll’s figures keep moving after that, so each one is dated.
🤔 This or that? Get paid in…
Shares as published. No per-option vote count is published by Telegram, so none is shown.
🤔 This or that? Your AI assistant should…
Shares as published. No per-option vote count is published by Telegram, so none is shown.
🤔 This or that? Check your portfolio…
Shares as published. No per-option vote count is published by Telegram, so none is shown.
🤔 This or that? You'd rather…
Shares as published. No per-option vote count is published by Telegram, so none is shown.
🤔 This or that? Get paid in…
Shares as published. No per-option vote count is published by Telegram, so none is shown.
🤔 This or that? Check your portfolio…
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 462 most recent posts we hold, published 3 August 2026 to 10 November 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.
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 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.
Names
Channels on the register whose handles appear in this channel's posts.
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.
Telegram’s own answer, not this register’s. When this register asks Telegram’s API what is similar to this channel, this is the list it returns, in the exact order Telegram returns it — never re-sorted by subscribers or by anything else this register measures. The relationship, and the order, are Telegram’s; we record them and date them, and make no claim of our own about which of these channels actually resemble this one.
Read from Telegram’s recommendation API, most recently 8 August 2026. Telegram holds a list like this for a small and growing share of the register — how this is measured, and why most channel pages show nothing here.
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 83 seed channels' Telegram-generated recommendation lists in total, of which the 24 where it ranks highest are shown above. Each is Telegram’s list for THAT channel, not this one — see how this is measured.
2 domains this channel’s own posts have linked to, measured by scanning the post bodies themselves — not the channel’s description, which is the separate Declared links section below when this entry has one. Appearing here is not a claim about who runs the linked site or why the channel linked to it; an advertisement, a news citation and a malicious link all leave the same kind of row.
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 10 November 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“Crypto Life” (@cryptolifebro), 972,202 subscribers as measured 10 November 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/cryptolifebro.
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.