X2 in one day.
👍90🔥83🫡7💯2

Channel
@zorathzzz
On this record: Growth · Engagement · Reactions · Stars · Posts · Citations · Cite this entry
9,138subscribers
+292 since we began measuring on 7 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 3,162–10,000.
| Telegram ID | -1003630363052 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @zorathzzz |
| Created | Between 1 December 2025 and 31 May 2026— 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 | 5 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 17 August 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/zorathzzz |
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 17 Aug 2026, 18:33 | 9,138 | +78 |
| 14 Aug 2026, 18:57 | 9,060 | +149 |
| 11 Aug 2026, 00:21 | 8,911 | +42 |
| 8 Aug 2026, 01:57 | 8,869 | +23 |
| 7 Aug 2026, 12:32 | 8,846 | first reading |
58 posts held, back to 5 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 14 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 15 August 2026 |
|---|---|
| Posts held | 58 (5 August 2026 – 15 August 2026) |
| Views total | 207,680 |
| Reactions total | 10,391 |
| Forwards / comments | not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated |
| Readings taken | 15 Aug 2026, 10:28 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.
10,391 reactions across 58 posts, in 6 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 46.7% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| 🔥 | 4,855 | 46.7% | |
| 👍 | 4,852 | 46.7% | |
| ❤🔥 | 257 | 2.47% | |
| 🤔 | 190 | 1.83% | |
| 🫡 | 131 | 1.26% | |
| 💯 | 106 | 1.02% |
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 58 of the 58 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 10,391reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 58 most recent posts we hold, published 5 August 2026 to 15 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.
A paid reaction is a reader spending Telegram Stars — bought with money — on a post by @zorathzzz. 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 58 most recent posts we hold for this entry, published 5 August 2026 to 15 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.
X2 in one day.
👍90🔥83🫡7💯2
My plan was to take 3 days off, but then i saw $ace go up 4x in one day. my first trade hit a -$5k stop-loss, the second trade made me $10k, and this is my third trade. maybe i’m about to 2x my account in just one day.
🔥84👍79🤔2🫡1
#Beat Hit 200m.
🔥91👍74🫡8
At this point, I feel like the crypto market is offering very few clear opportunities for traders. Instead, we keep seeing aggressive long and short liquidations, where liquidity seems to be the priority rather than creating a clean, tradable trend. If 1,000 people participate in the market, I think only 5–10 of them can actually make money consistently, while most of the rest become liquidity for someone else. So …
🔥137👍99💯13❤🔥7
Photo, posted without a caption
🔥186👍106🤔14🫡10❤🔥6💯1
It took me 10 years to figure this out. He solved the problem with one question. The real value of money is that it can buy efficiency. Money isn’t only for buying things. Money can also buy performance. If you can use money to save time, then that money is creating value for you. For example, instead of spending an hour solving a problem yourself, you can pay someone else to do it. You’re not just buying a servi…
🔥123👍75❤🔥13💯11🫡8
In the past, I also received some incredibly important advice from other people, but at the time, I didn’t value it. I was winning too much, which made me feel confident and believe that I was already good enough. If I had been willing to listen back then, maybe I would be in a much higher position today. But if you only listen to advice from friends who are at the same level as you, or from people who don’t have th…
🔥95👍76🫡5
There’s a lot of deception in this market. Something as simple as people copying my results and reposting them as if they were their own achievements. People like that create a mess where everyone ends up constantly questioning each other, never knowing who’s real and who’s fake. That’s why, as members of the crypto community, we tend to observe and verify things carefully before believing anything. This is also a …
👍94🔥77❤🔥5💯4
This time, I ended my winning streak with a -$92K loss. Looking back, the problem wasn’t a single trade. I was becoming increasingly overwhelmed as I kept increasing my position size. When your account grows from $20K to $1.3M, your standards for profit change as well. Small profits no longer feel satisfying, and that’s when the pressure starts to build. The crazy part is that I’ve been through this many times befo…
🔥138👍97❤🔥14🫡9🤔2
#SPCX Hit 141
🔥85👍74🤔10
🔥 Clean setups, clean results Setups like this are shared inside Zora Premium group before the move happens $SPCX +5% $HOLO +20% No need to chase every move. Wait for the setup, execute the plan, and let the trade play out. 👉 Join Zora Premium here: t.me/Ivanovich8866
👍76🔥63💯3🤔3❤🔥2🫡1
just tell me why it’s going up, and i’ll decide whether to short or long. with calls from famous people, most of them will dump hard once the fomo wears off.
🔥86👍62❤🔥6🤔4
Showing the 12 most recent of 58 posts we hold for @zorathzzz. 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 — 125,673 of 1,481,306entries 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.
Named by 1 registered channel — 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 17 August 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“Zora Alerts” (@zorathzzz), 9,138 subscribers as measured 17 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/zorathzzz.
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.