Which Telegram bots make over $10K/month now?

Which Telegram bots actually make over $10K/month right now?

Nine products in DefiLlama’s Telegram Bot category currently clear $10,000 in 30-day protocol revenue, although only seven look like straightforward Telegram-bot businesses.

The live ranking puts GMGN in a league of its own at roughly $41.1 million of 30-day revenue. Pump.fun’s Terminal follows at about $2.74 million, then Maestro at $1.33 million and Trojan at roughly $878,000. After that, revenue falls sharply: BONKbot and MEVX are around $47,000, RayBot about $33,000, SolTradingBot about $31,000 and Banana Gun roughly $10,500.

We use protocol revenue rather than trading volume, token value or gross user spending wherever DefiLlama separates those figures. Referral rewards and cashback can absorb a large share of what users pay.

GMGN and Terminal also need a label of their own. Both came out of the Telegram trading world, but today they operate as broader trading products rather than simple bots living entirely inside a chat window.

Product	30-day protocol revenue	What it is today
GMGN	~$41.1M	Hybrid trading platform + Telegram bot
Pump.fun Terminal	~$2.74M	Trading terminal with Telegram roots
Maestro	~$1.33M	Telegram trading bot
Trojan	~$878K	Telegram trading bot + terminal
BONKbot	~$47K	Telegram trading bot
MEVX	~$47K	Telegram trading bot/platform
RayBot	~$33K	Telegram trading bot
SolTradingBot	~$31K	Telegram trading bot
Banana Gun	~$10.5K	Telegram trading bot

Can we really know how much Telegram bots make?

For crypto trading bots, yes; for most other Telegram bots, we usually cannot.

Telegram does not publish a leaderboard showing what individual bots earn. A developer selling access through Telegram Stars can see private payment data, while another bot might charge through an outside payment processor. User counts, channel followers and bot launches therefore tell us very little about revenue.

Crypto bots are unusually transparent because much of the money moves on-chain. DefiLlama can follow the fee collectors used by products such as Maestro, Trojan, BONKbot and GMGN, then separate gross trading fees from referral or cashback payments where the underlying data allows it.

That creates an unavoidable bias in this article. We have strong evidence for crypto bots because their money is visible. A private AI assistant, downloader or subscription bot could quietly make $50,000 a month without leaving anything close to the same public trail.

So the list should be read as “Telegram bots we can currently verify above $10K,” rather than a complete census of every profitable bot on Telegram.

Does GMGN really count as a Telegram bot?

GMGN belongs in a broad Telegram-bot ranking, but calling its entire $41 million monthly business a Telegram bot would now be misleading.

GMGN still offers Telegram trading functionality and DefiLlama classifies the protocol in its Telegram Bot category. GMGN’s own referral documentation also lets users earn commissions when referred traders use either its website or its Telegram interface.

Yet GMGN has grown into a full trading platform. These days, Telegram is one route into the product rather than the whole product.

The scale makes that distinction worth spelling out. DefiLlama currently tracks nearly $50 million of gross fees over 30 days and about $41.1 million left as protocol revenue after referral costs. Its current quarter has already generated more than $80 million of gross fees, compared with about $24 million in the entire previous quarter.

That is more than a normal month-to-month fluctuation. GMGN’s present run rate has jumped several times over from the preceding quarter.

We therefore keep GMGN in the broad answer because Telegram remains part of the product and acquisition loop, but exclude it when we later ask which businesses are still recognizably Telegram-native bots.

Does Pump.fun’s Terminal still count as a Telegram bot?

Pump.fun’s Terminal is another clear $10K-plus business, although today “trading terminal” describes it better than “Telegram bot.”

Terminal was previously known as Padre and remains in DefiLlama’s Telegram Bot category. Users currently generate about $5.2 million of fees over 30 days, of which roughly $2.7 million remains as protocol revenue after cashback and referral payouts.

The product is also growing again. Its current quarter has already produced around $10 million of gross fees, exceeding the roughly $9 million recorded in the entire previous quarter. Earlier, it reached about $14.7 million in a single quarter.

So there is no real question about whether Terminal clears $10,000 a month. It clears that level by more than two orders of magnitude. The argument is about classification.

For a strict list of bots that people mainly use inside Telegram, we would leave Terminal out. For a list covering businesses created by the Telegram trading-bot ecosystem, it belongs near the top.

Which pure Telegram bots are making serious money now?

Maestro and Trojan are the two clearest examples of Telegram-native bots operating at genuinely large revenue scale today.

Maestro currently retains about $1.33 million over 30 days from roughly $1.9 million in user fees. That works out to more than $40,000 of protocol revenue on an average day at the current pace. Its revenue is also spread across several chains, led lately by Robinhood Chain, with Solana, BSC, Base and Ethereum contributing meaningful amounts.

Trojan is smaller but still substantial. DefiLlama currently shows roughly $1.14 million of monthly fees and about $878,000 of protocol revenue. The bot processes well above $100 million of monthly DEX volume on Solana.

After Maestro and Trojan, there is a huge gap. BONKbot and MEVX currently make only around $47,000 a month each, RayBot sits around $33,000 and SolTradingBot around $31,000.

The useful dividing line is much higher than $10,000. Maestro and Trojan have reached the scale of real seven-figure monthly software businesses. The next group is already around 20 to 40 times smaller.

Are the Telegram bots above $10K/month actually growing?

The current $10K-plus group contains both breakout winners and businesses living on a fraction of their former revenue, so crossing the threshold tells us surprisingly little about momentum.

GMGN is the clearest winner lately. Its current quarter has already produced more than three times the gross fees generated during the full previous quarter. Terminal has also passed its preceding quarter before the current one is complete.

Maestro is showing a much healthier current pace than some of the older Solana bots. Trojan still makes close to $900,000 a month, although its historical results show just how much larger it once was.

The long tail looks much weaker. BONKbot generated $21.8 million of gross protocol revenue in one quarter near its peak and another $12.6 million in a later quarter. Its current quarter is around $235,000 so far. SolTradingBot once generated more than $13 million in one quarter; the current quarter is below $100,000. MEVX peaked above $3 million in a quarter and is currently below $100,000 for the quarter to date.

Banana Gun has experienced an even steeper reversal. It has generated almost $87 million of cumulative protocol revenue, yet its latest 30-day figure is barely above $10,000.

A bot can remain above our $10K cutoff long after its best period has ended. Recent trajectory is at least as important as the threshold itself.

Product	Earlier quarterly peak	Current position	What changed
GMGN	~$58.6M before current surge	>$80M current quarter so far	Rapid acceleration
Terminal	~$14.7M	~$10M current quarter so far	Growing again
BONKbot	~$21.8M	~$235K current quarter so far	Revenue collapsed from peak
MEVX	~$3.2M	<$100K current quarter so far	Much smaller than before
SolTradingBot	~$13.1M	<$100K current quarter so far	Much smaller than before

Is most Telegram-bot money going to just a few winners?

Yes. The visible Telegram-bot revenue market is extremely concentrated right now.

The nine products above generate roughly $46 million of combined 30-day protocol revenue at current readings. GMGN alone supplies close to 90% of that amount.

Once Terminal is included, the top two account for roughly 95%. Adding Maestro and Trojan pushes the top four above 99%.

Even that arguably understates the concentration because the lower end barely clears the threshold. Banana Gun is around $10,500, while GMGN earns roughly that amount every few minutes at its current 30-day pace.

The same pattern survives if we remove the hybrid platforms. Among the seven clearer Telegram-native bots, Maestro and Trojan generate roughly 93% of the group’s revenue.

Several bots technically make five figures a month, but almost all of the money sits with a tiny number of trading products.

Why do crypto trading bots make so much more money on Telegram?

Crypto trading works unusually well as a Telegram-bot business because every successful trade creates another chance to collect a fee.

Many trading bots charge around 0.5% to 1% depending on the chain, trade type or product. BONKbot, for example, has used a 1% trading fee, while Banana Gun’s fee schedule varies by feature and chain. GMGN’s tracked trading flow also commonly uses a 1% fee.

A bot processing $10 million of monthly volume at a 1% gross fee can collect $100,000 before referral rewards and other payouts. It does not need thousands of people paying monthly subscriptions.

That changes the economics completely. A conventional $20-per-month bot needs 500 paying subscribers just to reach $10,000 of monthly revenue. A trading bot could cross the same line from $1 million of fee-bearing volume.

Telegram also fits this behavior unusually well. Traders want alerts, token links, wallet information and fast execution in the same place where crypto communities already communicate. The bot can sit directly between the user spotting an opportunity and placing the trade.

That combination explains why the clearest verified Telegram businesses above $10,000 are mostly trading tools rather than productivity bots.

How much trading volume does a Telegram bot need to make $10K/month?

A Telegram trading bot charging an effective 1% can reach $10,000 of gross monthly fees from about $1 million of trading volume.

The required volume rises when the operator gives part of the fee back through referrals or cashback. If the bot ultimately keeps 0.7% of volume, it needs roughly $1.43 million. At a 0.5% effective take, the number reaches $2 million.

Those targets are small compared with the leaders. Trojan currently handles more than $100 million of 30-day DEX volume. Terminal handles roughly $450 million. GMGN operates in the billions.

A crypto product therefore does not need huge market share to cross our threshold. That is one reason a bot can remain above $10,000 even after losing most of its former activity.

Revenue kept per trade volume	Monthly volume needed for $10K
1.00%	$1.0M
0.70%	$1.43M
0.50%	$2.0M
0.25%	$4.0M

Do Telegram-bot fee numbers make the businesses look richer than they are?

Yes. Gross trading fees can overstate what a Telegram-bot operator actually keeps by a large amount.

Terminal makes the difference easy to see. Users currently pay about $5.2 million over 30 days, while the protocol keeps roughly $2.7 million after cashback and referral payouts. Close to half of the gross fee pool goes elsewhere.

Maestro shows the same issue on a smaller scale. Roughly $1.9 million of current monthly fees becomes about $1.33 million of protocol revenue.

Trojan keeps around $878,000 from approximately $1.14 million of monthly fees. BONKbot’s gap is wider: the live DefiLlama category table shows roughly $103,000 of fees over 30 days but only about $47,000 of protocol revenue.

For that reason, we do not call a bot a $100,000-a-month business simply because users paid $100,000 in fees. The retained figure gives us a much cleaner comparison.

Which famous Telegram trading bots have already fallen below $10K/month?

Unibot and BullX show why old reputation is a bad way to judge what Telegram bots earn today.

Unibot once became one of the best-known Telegram trading bots and accumulated tens of millions of dollars in historical fees. DefiLlama’s current Telegram Bot ranking now shows no meaningful 30-day protocol revenue for it.

BullX is another recognizable name that no longer comes close to the threshold in the tracked data. Its current 30-day protocol revenue is below $1,000.

Several smaller names in the category, including BlazeBot, Aimbot, Perpie, Falcon Bot and TradeWiz, currently show zero tracked 30-day revenue.

That turnover is easy to miss because brand recognition fades much more slowly than trading activity. Someone building a list from old articles, X threads or remembered winners would get a very different answer from the live revenue ranking.

Banana Gun could be the next name to move across the line. Its current 30-day revenue remains around $10,500, but its seven-day pace is only around $2,000. If that weaker pace continues, Banana Gun would fall below $10,000 on the next rolling-month comparisons.

Could AI bots, downloaders or subscription bots also make over $10K/month?

Yes, some non-crypto Telegram bots almost certainly make more than $10,000 a month, but public evidence is too thin for us to name them confidently.

Telegram now gives developers native ways to sell digital products and services through Stars. Bots can send invoices directly in chats, charge for access and convert eligible Star balances into developer rewards. Telegram also supports affiliate programs around mini apps.

That makes a five-figure subscription business entirely plausible. A bot charging the equivalent of $10 a month needs about 1,000 retained subscribers; at $20, it needs about 500.

The problem is verification. Telegram’s payment system does not expose each bot’s revenue publicly, and Stripe-style processor data is equally private when a developer charges externally.

User numbers cannot fill that gap. A free AI bot with one million users might make almost nothing, while a niche bot with 2,000 customers could make tens of thousands every month.

We therefore leave unverified AI assistants, utilities, downloaders, dating bots and paid-content tools out of the named ranking. Claiming they make $10K because they look popular would weaken the article rather than broaden it.

Are Telegram mini apps the same thing as profitable Telegram bots?

No. Mini apps can generate much more than $10,000 a month, but lumping all of their revenue into a “Telegram bots” list would make the category meaningless.

Telegram has said that more than 500 million users interact with mini apps each month. Some of those products have already produced eight-figure spending totals. Catizen, for example, had generated $16 million of in-app purchases by the time Pavel Durov publicly highlighted it.

A game like Catizen uses Telegram as its distribution and application environment, yet the user experience looks far closer to a mobile game than a conversational bot.

GMGN and Terminal show the same boundary becoming blurry on the trading side. Telegram may start the customer relationship, while much of the actual product eventually expands into a richer web or mini-app interface.

For this article, we count products with clear Telegram-bot functionality but label hybrids explicitly. Pure games and other mini apps stay outside the ranking unless the bot itself is the product generating the revenue.

Is making $10K/month with a Telegram bot actually durable?

Usually not in crypto trading. Current data shows that Telegram-bot revenue can rise and collapse much faster than normal subscription software.

BONKbot, SolTradingBot, MEVX, Banana Gun and Trojan have all generated far more money in earlier periods than they do today. Some declines are well above 90% from peak quarterly revenue.

A normal SaaS business often loses customers gradually because subscriptions renew until users actively cancel. Crypto trading bots face a harsher cycle. Traders move between chains, memecoin markets cool, new execution tools appear and referral communities can switch allegiance quickly.

The upside is equally extreme. GMGN demonstrates how fast the curve can bend upward when trading activity moves toward a product. Its current quarter has already generated more than three times the previous quarter’s gross fees.

So $10,000 in one rolling month is useful evidence that a bot has real monetization, but we would want several quarters of revenue before treating that level as stable.

For anyone building a Telegram business, repeated revenue across changing market conditions is the more interesting metric. Crossing the line once is fairly easy compared with staying there.

What business model is actually winning for Telegram bots?

The strongest proven Telegram-bot model today is taking a fee from a repeated transaction that users already want to make.

GMGN, Maestro, Trojan, Terminal, BONKbot, MEVX, RayBot, SolTradingBot and Banana Gun all connect revenue directly to trading activity. Their details differ, but the core mechanism is similar: the user discovers or follows a token, executes a trade, and the product takes a small fee.

That model has three advantages. Revenue rises automatically with usage, high-value users can generate far more than a flat subscription, and referral commissions give creators or traders a reason to bring new users into the product.

Subscription bots can still work, especially in AI or specialized utilities, but we do not currently have public evidence of a comparable group generating millions of dollars a month.

Telegram itself has also made monetization easier through Stars, native payments and mini apps. Those tools reduce friction. They have yet to produce a publicly verifiable non-crypto bot cohort remotely comparable with trading bots.

The evidence points to a fairly specific winning model: Telegram becomes unusually lucrative when the bot sits directly inside a valuable transaction rather than merely charging users for access to a feature.

So which Telegram bots make over $10K/month now?

The clearest current answer is Maestro, Trojan, BONKbot, MEVX, RayBot, SolTradingBot and Banana Gun, with GMGN and Pump.fun’s Terminal added when we use the broader Telegram-trading ecosystem definition.

Maestro is the strongest pure-bot example at roughly $1.33 million of 30-day protocol revenue. Trojan follows at about $878,000. BONKbot and MEVX are around $47,000, RayBot roughly $33,000, SolTradingBot about $31,000 and Banana Gun sits just above the line at around $10,500.

GMGN dwarfs all of them with about $41 million of current 30-day revenue, while Terminal adds roughly $2.7 million. We would describe both as hybrid trading products these days because Telegram is only one part of the user experience.

The real market is remarkably narrow. Nine tracked products clear $10,000, but GMGN alone accounts for close to 90% of their combined revenue. Among the clearer bot-native names, Maestro and Trojan take roughly 93%.

And the list changes fast. Unibot has fallen out despite its historical prominence, several former multimillion-dollar bots are now earning only tens of thousands a month, and Banana Gun is close enough to the threshold that a weaker few weeks could remove it too.

Telegram bots can still make well over $10,000 a month. A few make hundreds of thousands or millions. But the evidence points to a concentrated, volatile trading economy rather than a broad population of simple bots quietly printing five-figure monthly revenue.