What’s actually slowing this PC down?
Pick the symptom - the matching free tool is one click away.
iTechGuides is reader-supported. When you buy through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases. Learn more
In the Pinlyx study of public Telegram channels, reach means average views per post divided by subscriber count, calculated for each channel and then summarized as a median within subscriber-size bands. Across 3,205,346 public channels in a catalogue snapshot taken on 11 September 2026, median reach falls from 31.4% in the 1,000–5,000 subscriber band to 3.3% for channels above 500,000 subscribers. These figures are useful for peer comparison, but they measure views relative to subscribers, not the number of people who saw a post.
What the metric measures
Reach = average views per post ÷ subscribers
The calculation is made for each channel first. A channel with 10,000 subscribers that averages 1,500 views per post has 15% reach. The published band figures are medians of these individual channel ratios; they are not a single ratio of total views to total subscribers across the band.
| # | Preview | Product | Price | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |
|
Telegram Marketing Secrets: Basics for Beginners (Marketing Matters) | $1.47 | Buy on Amazon |
| 2 |
|
The Zimmermann Telegram | $201.10 | Buy on Amazon |
| 3 |
|
How To Make Money on Telegram: Developing and Monetizing Telegram Mini Apps and Bots | $11.99 | Buy on Amazon |
| 4 |
|
Telegram Marketing | $3.00 | Buy on Amazon |
| 5 |
|
Telegram Marketing Basics | $5.99 | Buy on Amazon |
The ratio is built from two stored inputs, the subscriber count and the average views per post. The study did not use an engagement field that was still being backfilled when the snapshot was taken.
The Tool Desk
Outbyte Driver Updater FREEScan for outdated or missing drivers - takes under a minuteDriver Scan →Outbyte PC Repair FREERepair Windows errors before they cause bigger problemsFix Now →The population and what was excluded
The source catalogue held 3,205,346 public Telegram channels. API snapshots were captured on 11 September 2026, so every figure describes that snapshot and not Telegram as it stands at any later date.
Not every catalogue entry receives a reach score. Excluded cases are labelled rather than counted as zero:
- below_floor: channels under 1,000 subscribers are left out of the reach figures.
- not_a_channel: entries that are groups rather than channels.
- no_view_sample: channels with no recorded view count.
The floor shapes how the whole dataset should be read. Of channels with a known subscriber count, 85.7% fall below 1,000 subscribers. The reach medians therefore describe the roughly 14% of channels above that floor, not the typical entry in the catalogue.
Results by subscriber band
Reach is reported as a median for five subscriber bands. The “channels measured” column is the count behind each median, not the number of channels that exist in the band.
Free tools Windows power users keep installed
One-click scans. No signup required.
Rank #2
| Subscriber band | Median reach | Channels measured | Basis |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1,000–5,000 | 31.4% | 7,179 | Sample estimate |
| 5,000–20,000 | 15.8% | 2,750 | Sample estimate |
| 20,000–100,000 | 9.1% | 1,201 | Sample estimate |
| 100,000–500,000 | 6.0% | 8,380 | Every channel in band, within the catalogue |
| 500,000+ | 3.3% | 1,211 | Every channel in band, within the catalogue |
The two largest bands are full counts: every channel in the catalogue within those ranges is included, so their values are exact for that snapshot. The three smaller bands are estimated from a database TABLESAMPLE draw, so their medians are sample percentiles.
Reading the sample-based bands
A sample percentile estimates the median of the population it was drawn from. The report projects that the 1,000–10,000 range covers roughly 338,000 channels. It also warns that estimates for rare large-channel populations, drawn from a separate sample, can miss by a material amount. Where a projection conflicts with a full count inside the catalogue, the full count is the one to trust.
No confidence intervals for the individual medians are given. The clearest finding from the sample-based bands is the direction of the decline. The exact size of the step between two adjacent sample-based bands is less certain than the overall pattern.
The public table and the underlying output
The study’s internal output includes a 101-point percentile ladder for each band, along with sample sizes and rebuild timestamps. The public page shows only the medians. Figures quoted from the public page should be described as medians for their band, not as the full distribution.
Crashes, No Sound, or Screen Glitches?
Random freezes, missing sound and display glitches usually trace back to one bad driver. Find and replace yours safely.Free scan · under a minuteWindows Errors? Fix Them Before They Spread
Repair common Windows errors and clear accumulated junk for a smoother, more stable PC - no reinstall needed.Free scan · no reinstallWhy the median, not the mean
The mean of channel ratios is pulled in two opposite directions by extreme values, and the report argues that the median is the more practical peer benchmark. It names two sources of extremes:
- Ratios above 1.0, where views exceed subscribers, can come from forwards, cross-posts, or paid promotion.
- Ratios near zero can come from padded or inactive subscriber counts, which inflate the denominator.
Either tail can move a mean away from the channel that is typical of its band. A median is not moved by how far the extremes sit, so it reports the middle channel. This is the report’s rationale. The material does not test how much each mechanism contributes to the extreme values in practice.
Rank #4
A worked illustration
The numbers below are invented for illustration and are not drawn from the study. Five channels have reach of 2%, 3%, 4%, 5%, and 180%. The mean is 38.8%, a value that describes none of the five. The median is 4%, which is the middle channel. A single channel whose views far exceed its subscriber count lifts the mean from 4% to 38.8%.
Independent reader supportYour contribution helps us test, update, and keep practical guides available for everyone.What the figure does not show
The most common misreading is treating reach as the share of subscribers who saw a post. The metric does not support that reading.
Quick wins for a faster PC:
Scan for outdated or missing drivers - takes under a minuteDriver Scan →Clear out junk files and repair common Windows errorsFree Scan →Fix the driver behind crashes, sound loss and screen glitchesFind Drivers →- Post view counters can include views from forwards and web previews by people who are not subscribers. A ratio above 100% therefore does not prove that more distinct people viewed the post than the channel has subscribers.
- Inactive or purchased subscribers enlarge the denominator and lower the ratio, even when the audience that reads posts is healthy.
A 31.4% median in the smallest band should be read as a ratio of average views to subscriber count, with both caveats applied. It is not an estimate of the share of subscribers who saw each post.
Best Value
Category, country, and language fields
Category and country data were sparse. Only 719 of the 15,240 sampled channels had a category label, and the publisher says that label reflects labelling behaviour rather than Telegram’s overall channel mix. The country field was empty in that sample, so the study makes no geographic claim.
Language was detected automatically from short channel descriptions. The publisher considers Russian, English, Arabic, and Persian reliable enough to display. The long tail of other languages is noisy and should not be relied on.
Provenance and disclosure
- Dataset version 1, DOI 10.17632/2z2vtj7x36.1, licensed CC BY 4.0. Contributor: Emirhan Güven.
- The report is published with a CSV file and a JSON file.
- The author works on Pinlyx, the CRM whose catalogue supplies the figures. Readers should weigh that affiliation when assessing the results.
- The available sources do not include an independent crawler audit of the collection process.
- No statement from Telegram, a regulator, or an independent standards body was found in the material. Findings should be paraphrased and attributed to the Pinlyx report rather than presented as an official position.
The method, the medians, and the sample design together make a reasonable peer benchmark for the subscriber bands covered. They do not establish how many subscribers read a given post.
Quick Recap
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
