ANS trading:
19800 http://19800.com.hypestat.com/
Daily Unique Visitors: 550
Daily Volume: 4,328,514
Yuanbao http://yuanbao.com.hypestat.com/
Daily Unique Visitors: 3,700
Daily Volume: 776,415
Yunbi http://yunbi.com.hypestat.com/
Daily Unique Visitors: 16,000
Daily Volume: 571,346
Western Exchanges:
Poloniex http://poloniex.com.hypestat.com/
Daily Unique Visitors: 133,500
Bittrex http://bittrex.com.hypestat.com/
Daily Unique Visitors: 64,500
Yobit http://yobit.net.hypestat.com/
Daily Unique Visitors: 32,800
C-CEX http://c-cex.com.hypestat.com/
Daily Unique Visitors: 28,150
Liqui http://liqui.io.hypestat.com/
Daily Unique Visitors: 520
BTC Exchanges:
Bitfinex http://bitfinex.com.hypestat.com/
Daily Unique Visitors: 19,800
Okcoin CNY http://okcoin.cn.hypestat.com/
Daily Unique Visitors: 15,667
Huobi http://huobi.com.hypestat.com/
Daily Unique Visitors: 21,500
Also, I have a thought. If the second ICO was limited to China, Onchain would have only raised half and the ICO price would be around 12k to 15k satoshis. However, the token sale was global. It's totally unfair that half of the ICO buyers can't trade at the three Chinese exchanges. Onchain should have waited on token distribution until the Western exchanges can support a ANS wallet that has a Linux version. The price could have held up along the ICO price since the Western altcoin markets trade with BTC price in mind and not their local fiat, CNY.
No mate, they don't even give a rough idea. Alexa ranking is meaningless especially for Chinese sites.
I checked four of my sites:
Site #1:
Actual Daily UVs: 120
Hypestat UVs: 1150
Site #2
Actual Daily UVs: 10000
Hypestat UVs: 5450
Site #3
Actual Daily UVs: 70
Hypestat UVs: 4200
Site #4
Actual UVs: 3000
Hypestat UVs: 600
You can see the difference.
Chinese exchanges might be inflating volumes but HIGHLY INACCURATE metrics like Alexa rankings cannot be used to prove that.