If anyone have 2000 Usd inbox me now @GOLD_HYBRID_TRADING Daily Profit 3000$
π1

Channel
@wiserfx9
On this record: Growth Β· Engagement Β· What this channel posts Β· Reactions Β· Posts Β· Citations Β· Telegram's recommendations Β· Cite this entry
15,705subscribers
+592 since we began measuring on 7 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register Β· movement among entries of 10,000β31,623.
| Telegram ID | -1001304167729 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @wiserfx9 |
| Description | Full transparency channel, real trader, real results. FREE Education FREE Webinar FREE Livetrade FREE Analysis Owners |
| Created | Between 1 March 2018 and 31 July 2021β estimated from Telegramβs id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated. |
| First recorded | 7 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 25 August 2026 |
| Measurements held | 18 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 25 August 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/wiserfx9 |
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 25 Aug 2026, 22:33 | 15,705 | +100 |
| 24 Aug 2026, 23:33 | 15,605 | +499 |
| 23 Aug 2026, 09:54 | 15,106 | +18 |
| 21 Aug 2026, 20:36 | 15,088 | -5 |
| 20 Aug 2026, 17:23 | 15,093 | -6 |
| 19 Aug 2026, 17:26 | 15,099 | -12 |
| 18 Aug 2026, 16:04 | 15,111 | -18 |
| 17 Aug 2026, 17:46 | 15,129 | +19 |
| 16 Aug 2026, 13:55 | 15,110 | -8 |
| 14 Aug 2026, 19:47 | 15,118 | +8 |
| 13 Aug 2026, 08:36 | 15,110 | +3 |
| 12 Aug 2026, 07:43 | 15,107 | +4 |
| 11 Aug 2026, 11:16 | 15,103 | -3 |
| 10 Aug 2026, 08:18 | 15,106 | +21 |
| 9 Aug 2026, 11:01 | 15,085 | +2 |
| 8 Aug 2026, 08:28 | 15,083 | -30 |
| 7 Aug 2026, 09:30 | 15,113 | no change |
| 7 Aug 2026, 09:28 | 15,113 | first reading |
161 posts held, back to 6 August 2026 β the reader has not yet reached the start of this channelβs public history, so older posts may sit further back, unread. Read across 48 pagesof Telegramβs post history, 20 posts per page.
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) Γ· viewsβ note the denominator is views, not subscribers. Telegramβs 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 141 of 161 measured posts that carry a reaction reading, and over those same posts' views.
| Window | Rolling 30 days Β· latest post in window 26 August 2026 |
|---|---|
| Posts held | 161 (6 August 2026 β 26 August 2026) |
| Views total | 183,080 |
| Reactions total | 815 |
| Forwards / comments | not exposed by the public surface β not measured, not estimated |
| Readings taken | 26 Aug 2026, 09:02 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 βcorrectingβ the number into something nobody can reproduce.
Precision. Telegram publishes view counts on its public widget in short form β 8.12K, 3.7M β 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 β read a large reaction total as three significant figures per contributing emoji rather than as the figure it prints.
Lifetime counters from Telegramβs own channel header, read 26 August 2026 β not the date at the top of this page, which is when the subscriber count was last read. Below Telegramβs rounding threshold, so these counts are exact.
815 reactions across 140 posts, in 12 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 59.5% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| β€ | 485 | 59.5% | |
| π | 158 | 19.4% | |
| β‘ | 50 | 6.13% | |
| π³ | 22 | 2.70% | |
| π | 21 | 2.58% | |
| πΎ | 19 | 2.33% | |
| π | 16 | 1.96% | |
| π | 13 | 1.60% | |
| π | 12 | 1.47% | |
| π₯° | 9 | 1.10% | |
| π | 8 | 0.982% | |
| π― | 2 | 0.245% |
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 β π is thanks in one channel and mourning in another β 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 β 4.34K, 1.2M β 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 141 of the 161 sampled posts in this sample. Summed by Telegramβs own count on each post β not by adding up the per-emoji breakdown above β those same posts carry 815reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by βa reaction total printed elsewhere on the pageβ.
Measured over the 161 most recent posts we hold, published 6 August 2026 to 26 August 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.
If anyone have 2000 Usd inbox me now @GOLD_HYBRID_TRADING Daily Profit 3000$
π1
Photo, posted without a caption
π2
XAUUSD BUY TP 1HIT 50 PIP'S PROFITS DONE ππ―
π6π³1
XAUUSD BUY 4625+4620 Sl 4615 TP 4628 TP 4632 TP 4636 TP 4640 TP 4650
π6π1
XAUUSD βοΈ All TARGET HIT 190 PIPS
π5
GOLD BUY TP 3HIT 140 PIP'S PROFITS DONE ππ―
π4
GOLD BUY TP 2HIT 90 PIP'S PROFITS DONE ππ―
π6
GOLD BUY TP 1HIT 40 PIP'S PROFITS DONE ππ―
π6
XAUUSD BUY 4641+4635 SL 4625 TP 4645 TP 4650 TP 4655 TP 4660
π6π³3
XAUUUSD SELL TP4HIT 250 PIP'S PROFITS DONE ππ
π5
XAUUUSD SELL TP1HIT 70 PIP'S PROFITS DONE ππ
β‘7
XAUUSD sell 4629+4635 Sl 4645 TP 4625 TP 4620 TP 4615 TP 4610 TP 4600
β‘5π2
Showing the 12 most recent of 161 posts we hold for @wiserfx9. 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 β was rounded by Telegram before we ever saw it β t.me prints views in full below 1,000 and to three significant figures above, so β1,200,000 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.
Citation-graph rank β 1,244,726 of 1,604,161entries in the measured graph. A weighted position computed from the forward and mention edges below β republished posts weigh more than named mentions β and recomputed periodically, over the whole graph. Published only as this ordinal position, never as a score: a position is a fact, and a score printed beside one channelβs name would read as a verdict this register does not make. The two counts beneath stay separate for the same reason mentions are never summed with forwards anywhere else on this page β a named-by count costs nothing to manufacture. The top 100 by this measure, or how it is computed.
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.
Names
Channels on the register whose handles appear in this channel's posts.
A mention is a weaker signal than a forward and is counted separately for that reason β 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 β the βNamed by N registered channelsβ figure above is a different count, of distinct NAMING CHANNELS rather than posts, and is not the sum of the rows under it.
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 β 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 elseβs query is independent of having been queried itself.
This channel appears in 3 seed channels' Telegram-generated recommendation lists in total. Each is Telegramβs list for THAT channel, not this one β see how this is measured.
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 25 August 2026 β this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
βππππΏ_πππ½πππΏ_πππΌπΏπππβ (@wiserfx9), 15,705 subscribers as measured 25 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/wiserfx9.
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 Β· 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.