Comparison
Proxy MTProto | پروکسی vs ربات چت ناشناس ملوگپ
A side-by-side look at two public Telegram channels — audience size, reach, engagement, growth and an audience-quality estimate, all from public data.
| Metric | @iproxy | @melogapm |
|---|---|---|
| Subscribers | 7.4M | 2.5M |
| Avg views | 946,104 | 6.2M |
| Engagement rate | 12.8% | 254.5% |
| 30-day growth | +1.9% | +12.1% |
| Language | فارسی | فارسی |
| Category | — | — |
| Channel age | 2899 days | 2760 days |
Audience quality
An estimate from public metrics — we have no admin access to Telegram’s native analytics, so treat this as a signal, not a verdict.
@iproxy
Looks reliable
- Reach and engagement sit in a normal range for this size
@melogapm
Mixed signals
- Engagement swings sharply between snapshots — unstable reach
We compare only what we observe from the public surface. Engagement rate is approximate (average views per subscriber) and audience quality is an estimate, not a verdict — see the methodology.