언젠간 올 대풍년을 기다리며 씨뿌리는 중입니다
투자자 유의 사항
1. 채널에 게재된 내용들은 운영자들의 분석 및 기록용도로 작성하며 외부의 부당한 압력이나 간섭 없이 작성되었음을 확인합니다.
2. 해당 채널의 콘텐츠는 참고자료로만 활용하시기 바라며 어떠한 경우에도 투자 결과에 대한 법적 책임소재의 증빙자료로 사용될 수 없습니다.
3. 해당 글은 필자가 습득한 사실에 기초하여 작성됐으나 제시 또는 인용한 수치는 사실과 일치하지 않을 수 있습니다
Created
11 April 2022 — measured — cross-checked against a third-party dataset (ext.tg_channel)
Personal blog — a classification, not a measurement. An on-box language model (Qwen3.6-35B-A3B-FP8, prompt version 1) read this channel’s own recent posts on 10 September 2026 and assigned it the closest of 31 fixed categories, at 59% confidence. This is a model’s judgement about what the channel is likely to be about, not a fact this register measured the way a subscriber count or a view count is measured — it can be revised on a later pass, and it carries no weight anywhere else on this page. How this classification works, and the other topics.
Observations
These are measurements, not verdicts. Each one below states something we counted, alongside the evidence it was counted from, so you can check it rather than take it. None of them is graded: every observation this register holds is recorded at severity 0, because the precision of the detectors behind them has not been measured yet, and a rating we cannot support is worse than none. Read each as a fact about the data, not as a judgement about the channel. How we measure.
Content that also appears on other registered channels
Posts published here appear in near-verbatim form on 1 other registered channel. The matching is on the text itself, not on Telegram’s forward marker, so it finds a copy whether or not it was labelled as one.
Matching posts — open both and compare (1 of the pairs behind the counts below)
Channels this entry shares post bodies with, where at least one matching post pair has no forward credit between the two channels, or to a common source, recorded in our data
Text overlap is the Jaccard coefficient over the set of distinct three-word phrases in the two bodies: 1.00 is identical wording, and the threshold for counting a pair at all is 0.70. Candidates are generated by simhash LSH (4 x 16-bit bands, exact Hamming <= 3) verified against the bodies with Jaccard over the SET of distinct 3-word shingles. Published first counts which side of each matching pair carries the earlier timestamp — in this corpus, which is the limitation directly below.
What this cannot establish
MEASURED, DOMINANT ERROR SOURCE: a post ingested before 2026-08-06 may have carried a forward header that was not recorded. A 45-pair hand-check against live t.me pages found 14 (31%) where the live page shows a forward header naming the other channel and the database has none, plus 4 more (9%) naming a third party. The text match itself was wrong 0 times out of 45. Read attribution_capture.items_in_trusted_window before treating the unattributed count as a claim.
Telegram lets a channel forward a post with a header naming the source, and we only began reliably recording that header on 2026-08-06. None of the 0 matches recorded here fall after that date, so for this entry we cannot say whether any of them carried a credit. The duplication is measured; the absence of attribution is not.
“Published first” means first in this corpus. We hold 129 comparable posts for this entry, running 5 August 2026 to 10 November 2026. A channel we have read one page deep will look younger than a neighbour we have read in full, and the order would flip with no change in the underlying facts.
The detector’s own notes on this observation, as it recorded them. Names in this_style are fields of the underlying evidence record, which the plain-English paragraphs above read out for this entry.
Verbatim republication has three causes and the text separates only two: a clone/mirror, unattributed copy-paste, or BOTH channels copying a common third source that neither attributes. The spread filter (content held by at most 8 channels) reduces the third and does not remove it.
'Earliest' means earliest IN THIS CORPUS. A channel ingested one page deep will look younger than a neighbour ingested in full; corpus_coverage above is there to be checked before the direction is believed.
shared_verified_est extrapolates the sampled pass rate over the full narrow match count; sampled/passed are the numbers actually measured.
Absence of a forward header is not proof of intent: Telegram lets a channel disable forward attribution, and a credit written in the body is not parsed as attribution here (mention_edge_either_way above is the closest available signal).
Recorded under the key clone_mutual, last confirmed 11 November 2026. An observation that a later pass no longer finds is cleared, and a cleared observation is removed from this page rather than being shown struck through — we do not keep publishing a claim we have withdrawn. Dispute an observation.
Growth
62 measurements spanning 96 days, net +218. Dots are measurements; the straight line between them is drawn to join them, not to claim we know the path taken in between — snapshots are recorded only when a count changes, so gaps mean “no change observed”, never “interpolated”. The vertical axis spans 15,893–16,211 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded, most recent 20 of 62
Measured (UTC)
Subscribers
Change
10 Nov 2026, 12:44
16,148
-2
9 Nov 2026, 03:12
16,150
+7
7 Nov 2026, 17:57
16,143
-1
6 Nov 2026, 19:18
16,144
-23
5 Nov 2026, 19:00
16,167
-6
4 Nov 2026, 16:06
16,173
-1
3 Nov 2026, 16:47
16,174
+11
2 Nov 2026, 19:39
16,163
+18
1 Nov 2026, 17:58
16,145
-3
31 Oct 2026, 21:10
16,148
-8
30 Oct 2026, 18:27
16,156
+10
29 Oct 2026, 21:29
16,146
+48
28 Oct 2026, 23:04
16,098
+1
28 Oct 2026, 00:39
16,097
+2
27 Oct 2026, 03:58
16,095
+1
26 Oct 2026, 04:06
16,094
+11
25 Oct 2026, 05:58
16,083
-5
24 Oct 2026, 07:07
16,088
+2
23 Oct 2026, 09:44
16,086
+17
22 Oct 2026, 06:08
16,069
first reading
Engagement
284 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 73 pages of Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
ERR · 30 days
18.3%
avg views ÷ 16,148 subscribers
Avg views / post
2,950
117 posts measured
Reaction rate
0.598%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
120
of 284 held
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. It is computed over the 111 of 117 measured posts that carry a reaction reading, and over those same posts' views.
What these figures were computed from
Window
Rolling 30 days · latest post in window 11 November 2026
Posts held
284 (5 August 2026 – 11 November 2026)
Views total
344,868
Reactions total
1,984
Forwards / comments
not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken
11 Nov 2026, 18:27 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.
What this channel posts
Photos
≈2,150
Videos
≈17
Links
≈1,620
Lifetime counters from Telegram’s own channel header, read 11 November 2026 — not the date at the top of this page, which is when the subscriber count was last read. A count marked ≈ was rounded by Telegram before we ever saw it — t.me prints these counters in full below 1,000 and to three significant figures above, so ≈142,000 means somewhere between 141,500 and 142,499.
Video runtime
2m 10s
Average length
1m 05s
Measured directly from 2 videos with a duration reading, out of the posts we hold for this channel — not this channel’s whole posting history, only the sample this register has actually read. An exact reading to the second, taken from the post itself rather than from Telegram’s own rounded chrome, so it carries no ≈ mark.
Reaction mix
5,247 reactions across 261 posts, in 5 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 60.9% of them.
Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
Reaction
Count
Share
Share, drawn
❤
3,196
60.9%
👍
1,338
25.5%
🔥
327
6.23%
👌
235
4.48%
👏
151
2.88%
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 266 of the 284 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 5,247 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 284 most recent posts we hold, published 5 August 2026 to 11 November 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.
Recent posts
Telegram’s own ‘edited’ marker: 8 of 120 posts held from the last 30 days (6.67%) carried it when this register last read them. The marker says a post was changed after publishing, not what it said before — this register holds the earlier wording only where an edit fell between two of its own reads (see the edit ledger and how it is measured).
기본적으로 본 채널의 주인장의 섹터별 주요 뷰는 항상 양방향에 대한 %를 따지는 편.
'반드시 ~~될 것이다'와 같은 접근과 마인드는 투자에 있어서 굉장히 멍청한 접근이라고 생각함.
1.AI
-분명 새로운 혁신을 가져올 산업이라고 생각함
-하지만 산업과 주가의 흐름은 다를 수 있다고 생각함
-아직 투자는 ing라고 생각함.
-다만 Optical Interconnect 외 ai hw 섹터에 대해서는 그다지 손익비가 좋다고 생각하지 않음. 이 손익비의 시점은 바로 지금임.
2.에너지
-원유, 특히나 WTI 같은 페이퍼 선물 보는 것은 선물 트레이딩하는거 아니면 의미 없다고 생각함.
-선물 가지고 물가이야기 하는 것은 굉장히 일차원적이고 잘못된 접근이라고 생각함.
-지금 가장 병목은 정유, 천연가스이며, 밸류체인의 중반정도가 수혜를 보고 있다는…
양파농장 pinned «텔레그램 채널과 블로그에는 좋은 정보도 많지만, 지나치게 긍정편향적인 정보나 의견만 언급하는 것에 대해서는 개인적으로 우려를 많이 한다. 비관론자가 명성을 얻고, 낙관론자가 돈을 번다고 하지만, '그저 듣기 좋은 소리'를 하는 것과 낙관론은 엄연히 다르다. 상황을 냉정하게 평가하지 못하는 사람들에게 1)낙관적인 미래만 이야기하고 2)부정적이라고 리스크포인트나 주의할 상황에 대해서 언급하지 않는 것이 과연 좋은 정보일까? 본인이 그것에 대해서 판단을…»
텔레그램 채널과 블로그에는 좋은 정보도 많지만,
지나치게 긍정편향적인 정보나 의견만 언급하는 것에 대해서는 개인적으로 우려를 많이 한다.
비관론자가 명성을 얻고, 낙관론자가 돈을 번다고 하지만, '그저 듣기 좋은 소리'를 하는 것과 낙관론은 엄연히 다르다.
상황을 냉정하게 평가하지 못하는 사람들에게
1)낙관적인 미래만 이야기하고
2)부정적이라고 리스크포인트나 주의할 상황에 대해서 언급하지 않는 것이 과연 좋은 정보일까?
본인이 그것에 대해서 판단을 내리지 못한다면 다른 사람의 말을 듣기보다 스스로 지식을 채우고 경험을 쌓는데 집중하는 것을 권한다.
'님이 그랬어요'라던가, '님이 그러시던데요?'와 같이 권위에 호소하는 오류에 빠지는 것이 투자에서 가장 위험한 오류라고 생각한다. 실패했을 때 배우는 것이 없기 때문에. 성공한 투자자라고 해…
[팬데믹 이후 유가 상승의 근원물가 전이 강도 확대]
» 연준은 팬데믹 이후 유가 상승이 근원물가로 전이되는 강도가 높아졌으며, 인플레이션 지속성 역시 강화된 것으로 분석
» 연구에 따르면 유가 상승에 따른 근원물가의 누적 상승 효과는 약 2년에 걸쳐 확대됨. 특히 전이 강도와 지속성 강화가 맞물리면서 에너지 가격이 안정되더라도 근원물가의 상승 압력이 상당 기간 이어질 수 있다는 분석
» 중동전쟁 발발 이후 6개월 이상 경과한 가운데, 10월 미국 헤드라인 CPI는 에너지 가격 상승세 둔화에 전월비 +0.4%를 기록하며 9월(+0.6%) 대비 상승폭 축소. 반면 근원 CPI는 전월과 동일한 +0.3%를 기록하며 물가의 하방 경직성 확인
» 연준 모형에서는 주요 선진국의 근원 인플레이션이 2027년 중반 고점을 형성한 이후 점진적으로 둔…
< 요 약 >
유튜브와 SNS를 통한 금융ㆍ투자정보 이용이 확대되면서 핀플루언서는 개인투자자의 중요한 정보원으로 자리 잡고 있다. 한국금융소비자보호재단의 2024년 펀드투자자조사에 따르면 전체 응답자의 43.9%가 핀플루언서 금융 콘텐츠를 시청한 경험이 있었고, 시청자 중 20.8%는 추천상품에 실제 투자하였다. 추천상품 투자자의 17.1%는 별도의 정보탐색 없이 핀플루언서 정보에 의존하였다. 또한 시청자의 10.5%는 피해를 입었다고 인식하였으며, 이 가운데 51.3%는 향후에도 핀플루언서 추천상품에 투자할 의향을 보였다.
핀플루언서의 정보제공과 투자추천은 투자자문업자나 유사투자자문업자의 업무와 일부 중첩되지만, 두 유형에 해당하지 않는 핀플루언서에게는 정보의 신뢰성이나 이해상충을 사전에 관리하는 장치가 상대적으로 부족하다. 선행매매 등의…
해양시추 많이 물어보시는데... 일단 해양시추를 어쩌다 보게 되셨는지는 모르겠지만, 개인에게 그다지 추천드리지 않는 섹터입니다.
자료 트래킹이 너무 어렵고, 노하우 안쌓이면 자료 찾는거 자체가 헬인 섹터라서.
좋게보냐 나쁘게 보냐와 같은 이분법적인 답변 저는 안드리는거 이 채널 오래 보신분은 아실꺼고...
산업적으로 정유를 지금 보는 것보다 장기적인 시계열로 봐야한다고 생각합니다
저도 이런거 만들어서 쓰곤 있지만, 단순히 숫자만 나열해서는 아무런 의미 없음.
저 숫자는 이미 대부분 주가에 '선반영'되어 있기 때문.
그 다음을 내가 정확하게는 못맞춰도 어느정도 그림은 그릴 줄 알아야하는데, 그 그림이 없으면 그건 투자가 아님.
내용이 겉으로 보긴 되게 좋아보이지만, 내눈엔 썩 좋은 내용이 아님
❤20👍1🔥1
Showing the 12 most recent of 284 posts we hold for @Onionfarmer. 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.
Posts edited after publishing
@Onionfarmer edited 1 post after it first published — the same permalink now carries different wording than the one this register originally read, caught because our own crawl held a copy of the earlier text.
An edit is not deception. Typo fixes, price updates and corrections look exactly like this too — this register can tell you the wording changed and when, not why. How this is measured.
First edit seen
7 November 2026
Most recent edit
7 November 2026
Posts recorded as deleted after publishing
We recorded 6 posts on @Onionfarmer as deleted — posts this register held that were missing from the channel’s public page on two separate reads, taken from different network addresses at least an hour apart.
A deletion is not wrongdoing. This register can see that a post it held is no longer on the channel’s public page, and when — not why. Expired ad placements, reposts, rotating links and corrections all look the same. This is a count of recorded detections, not an exact total: it misses deletions we could not see, because only a post we held and later re-read inside the page can be seen to go, and it may include a small number of wrong records. How this is measured.
First seen missing
16 August 2026
Most recent seen missing
28 August 2026
Median time before seen missing
5 days
Seen missing in the last 30 days
0
Forward network
Republished by
Channels on the register that have forwarded this channel's posts into their own feed.
Built only from forwarded posts we have actually read, on both sides. Coverage is early and deliberately incomplete: a missing link means we have not read the post that would prove it, never that the relationship does not exist. Counts are distinct forwarded posts observed, so they only ever go up as we read more.
Mentions
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.
Handles this channel named that no longer answer
Dead references
1
handles named in this channel’s posts, vacant today
Evidenced gone
0
we ourselves saw one of these resolve, at some point
Never seen alive
1
vacant every time we have ever looked
@Onionfarmer named 1 handle that resolve to nothing today. That is a fact about the reference, not necessarily a fact about the handle’s history — see the two groups below.
Most of these may never have existed as a live channel at all. A handle a channel names can be a typo, an aspirational name nobody registered, or a channel that was already gone before this one ever mentioned it. Unless a row below is marked evidenced, all we know is that it references a handle that is not a live channel today — not that anything “died”. How this is measured.
Never seen alive
References a handle that is not a live channel — we have no record it ever was one.
@consensusgurus named in 3 posts, 4 November 2026 – 6 November 2026
Appears in Telegram’s recommendations for other channels
The reverse of the list above, and a different kind of signal. This does not require this channel to have ever been asked about directly — each row below is a channel we DID ask Telegram about, whose Telegram-generated list happened to include this one. A channel can appear here with an empty list above it, because being named by someone else’s query is independent of having been queried itself.
피카츄 아저씨⚡️ @pikachu_aje · 24,917 Telegram ranks this channel #3 of 91 here — alongside 90 others — read 14 September 2026
Rafiki research @rafikiresearch · 20,656 Telegram ranks this channel #5 of 88 here — alongside 87 others — read 26 September 2026
YIELD & SPREAD @yieldnspread · 22,083 Telegram ranks this channel #7 of 89 here — alongside 88 others — read 21 September 2026
AWAKE - 52주 신고가 모니터링 @awake_realtimeCheck · 22,881 Telegram ranks this channel #7 of 92 here — alongside 91 others — read 20 September 2026
엄브렐라리서치 Jay의 주식투자교실 @Jstockclass · 26,513 Telegram ranks this channel #7 of 90 here — alongside 89 others — read 13 September 2026
루팡 @bornlupin · 49,242 Telegram ranks this channel #7 of 91 here — alongside 90 others — read 2 September 2026
기술적 분석으로 보는 주식시장 (by 소라게아빠) @hermitcrab41_1 · 21,506 Telegram ranks this channel #8 of 81 here — alongside 80 others — read 28 September 2026
조기주식회 공부방 @EarlyStock1 · 24,363 Telegram ranks this channel #8 of 91 here — alongside 90 others — read 16 September 2026
회색인간의 매크로 + 투자 @mistergray_11 · 19,792 Telegram ranks this channel #9 of 78 here — alongside 77 others — read 1 October 2026
유진투자증권 코스닥벤처팀 @SmallCap · 22,994 Telegram ranks this channel #9 of 96 here — alongside 95 others — read 19 September 2026
💯똥밭에 굴러도 주식판 @daegurr · 23,776 Telegram ranks this channel #9 of 83 here — alongside 82 others — read 18 September 2026
HS아카데미 대표 이효석 @HS_academy · 36,220 Telegram ranks this channel #9 of 90 here — alongside 89 others — read 8 September 2026
키움증권 미국주식 톡톡 @kwusa · 36,213 Telegram ranks this channel #9 of 92 here — alongside 91 others — read 2 September 2026
그로쓰리서치(Growth Research) [독립리서치] @growthresearch · 40,090 Telegram ranks this channel #9 of 90 here — alongside 89 others — read 2 September 2026
선수촌 @athletes_village · 22,138 Telegram ranks this channel #10 of 88 here — alongside 87 others — read 23 September 2026
AWAKE - 실시간 주식 공시 정리채널 @darthacking · 65,571 Telegram ranks this channel #10 of 91 here — alongside 90 others — read 2 September 2026
TNBfolio @TNBfolio · 25,163 Telegram ranks this channel #11 of 93 here — alongside 92 others — read 15 September 2026
KK Kontemporaries @kkkontemp · 21,169 Telegram ranks this channel #12 of 84 here — alongside 83 others — read 30 September 2026
카이에 de market @cahier_de_market · 23,110 Telegram ranks this channel #12 of 85 here — alongside 84 others — read 20 September 2026
이지스스트레티지 리서치 @jeilstock · 26,239 Telegram ranks this channel #12 of 93 here — alongside 92 others — read 12 September 2026
습관이 부자를 만든다. 🧘 @habit4117 · 28,313 Telegram ranks this channel #12 of 87 here — alongside 86 others — read 10 September 2026
도PB의 생존투자 @survival_DoPB · 22,047 Telegram ranks this channel #13 of 90 here — alongside 89 others — read 21 September 2026
가치투자클럽 @corevalue · 67,126 Telegram ranks this channel #14 of 93 here — alongside 92 others — read 2 September 2026
[하나증권 ETF] 박승진 @globaletfi · 20,575 Telegram ranks this channel #15 of 86 here — alongside 85 others — read 28 September 2026
This channel appears in 48 seed channels' Telegram-generated recommendation lists in total, of which the 24 where it ranks highest are shown above. Each is Telegram’s list for THAT channel, not this one — see how this is measured.
Cite this entry
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 10 November 2026 — this
entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“양파농장” (@Onionfarmer), 16,148 subscribers as measured 10 November 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/Onionfarmer.
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.
