Channel
@signalsreviewstelegram
On this record: Growth · Engagement · Reactions · Posts · Citations · Cite this entry
1,073subscribers
-187 since we began measuring on 7 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 1,000–3,162.
| Telegram ID | -1002527966938 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @signalsreviewstelegram |
| Created | Between 1 March 2025 and 31 July 2025— estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated. |
| First recorded | 7 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 17 August 2026 |
| Measurements held | 6 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 17 August 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/signalsreviewstelegram |
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 17 Aug 2026, 22:43 | 1,073 | -49 |
| 14 Aug 2026, 17:59 | 1,122 | -47 |
| 11 Aug 2026, 18:04 | 1,169 | -55 |
| 8 Aug 2026, 13:18 | 1,224 | -36 |
| 7 Aug 2026, 22:48 | 1,260 | no change |
| 7 Aug 2026, 16:28 | 1,260 | first reading |
20 posts held, back to 16 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 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 9 of 17 measured posts that carry a reaction reading, and over those same posts' views.
| Window | Rolling 30 days · latest post in window 7 August 2026 |
|---|---|
| Posts held | 20 (16 July 2026 – 7 August 2026) |
| Views total | 3,890 |
| Reactions total | 26 |
| Forwards / comments | not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated |
| Readings taken | 7 Aug 2026, 22:48 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.
29 reactions across 9 posts, in 6 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 37.9% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| 👍 | 11 | 37.9% | |
| 🔥 | 7 | 24.1% | |
| ❤ | 5 | 17.2% | |
| 💯 | 3 | 10.3% | |
| 👏 | 2 | 6.90% | |
| 🤨 | 1 | 3.45% |
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 12 of the 20 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 29reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 20 most recent posts we hold, published 16 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.
Telegram Channel Review: FREE XTREMETRADER FOREX SIGNALS Channel ID: @xtremetradersignals https://www.telegramsignalsreviews.com/post/telegram-channel-review-free-xtremetrader-forex-signals
❤2👍2🔥2
Look for Educational Content💯 The best signal providers often include analysis (technical/fundamental) explaining why they took a trade. Channels that only post entries without reasoning are less trustworthy.👍 Learning from signals helps you grow as a trader rather than blindly following them. 🏅
Check for Transparent Risk-Reward Ratios🔎 Reliable signals always include Stop Loss (SL) and Take Profit (TP) levels with a clear risk-reward ratio (e.g., 1:2 or 1:3). Avoid vague signals like "Buy gold now" without specifics. 🚩 Channels that don’t provide SL/TP are gambling, not trading.
👍1
Forex Magic Pips Review – Uncovering a Telegram Channel Scam Channel ID: @forexmagicpipsofficial https://www.telegramsignalsreviews.com/post/forex-magic-pips-review-uncovering-a-telegram-channel-scam
❤1👍1🔥1
Avoid "Guaranteed Profit" Claims🙅♂️ No legitimate trader can promise 100% winning trades. If a channel claims "no losses ever" or "risk-free profits," it’s a scam. Real signal providers disclose both wins and losses transparently. Look for channels that discuss risk management openly rather than making unrealistic promises. 📍
Demand Real-Time Performance Proof ⚠️ Legitimate providers post signals before trades execute, not after. Ask for live screenshots of trades (with timestamps) from their personal account. Be wary of channels that only share "winning trades" without losses—real trading involves drawdowns. If they refuse to show real-time proof, assume they’re hiding something.
Giselle - The Pips Radar Telegram Channel Review: Pretty Face Hides a Loser Game Channel ID: @giselle_fx https://www.telegramsignalsreviews.com/post/giselle-the-pips-radar-telegram-channel-review-pretty-face-hides-a-loser-game
👍2👏2🔥2
Verify Their Conflict Disclosure📍 Ethical channels disclose if they have broker affiliations or receive compensation for referrals. Hidden conflicts of interest often lead to biased signals.
Look for Transparency About Team Members ❗️ Reputable providers disclose who analyzes markets and executes trades. Anonymous "teams" or constantly changing analysts raise red flags about accountability.❗️
A Critical Review of Trading Central FX | Forex Signals Telegram Channel Channel ID: @tradingcentralglobal https://www.telegramsignalsreviews.com/post/a-critical-review-of-trading-central-fx-forex-signals-telegram-channel
Assess Their Gold-Specific Expertise🚩 For gold signals, ensure they understand unique XAU factors like real yields, USD inverse correlation, and physical market flows. Generic "buy/sell" calls without this context are unreliable.
Check for Realistic Trade Durations😠 Be wary of channels where every trade hits TP in minutes - real trading involves patience. Quality signals include both quick scalps and multi-day swings appropriate to the setup.🤪
Showing the 12 most recent of 20 posts we hold for @signalsreviewstelegram. 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.
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.
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 17 August 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“Telegram Signals Reviews (Forex, Gold)” (@signalsreviewstelegram), 1,073 subscribers as measured 17 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/signalsreviewstelegram.
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.