5 measurements spanning 10 days, net +132. 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 5,665–5,839 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded
Measured (UTC)
Subscribers
Change
15 Aug 2026, 16:35
5,819
+125
12 Aug 2026, 14:23
5,694
+1
9 Aug 2026, 10:11
5,693
+8
6 Aug 2026, 19:35
5,685
-2
6 Aug 2026, 04:06
5,687
first reading
Engagement
23 posts held, back to 27 July 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 8 pagesof Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
ERR · 30 days
5.48%
avg views ÷ 5,819 subscribers
Avg views / post
319
23 posts measured
Reaction rate
3.57%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
23
of 23 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 20 of 23 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 August 2026
Posts held
23 (27 July 2026 – 11 August 2026)
Views total
7,340
Reactions total
222
Forwards / comments
not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken
12 Aug 2026, 03:57 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
Video runtime
3m 47s
Average length
3m 47s
Measured directly from 1 video 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
212 reactions across 18 posts, in 4 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 49.5% of them.
Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
Reaction
Count
Share
Share, drawn
custom 5222312664339863317
105
49.5%
🔥
55
25.9%
custom 5219910592210427358
29
13.7%
❤🔥
23
10.8%
Custom emoji. 2 of the rows above are Telegram custom emoji, which the public preview renders as an element carrying only a numeric id — no character, and no image we can reach. The id is printed as-is rather than substituted with a look-alike glyph, because a stand-in would be our invention showing where a measurement should be. The counts beside them areTelegram’s.
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 20 of the 23 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 222reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 23 most recent posts we hold, published 27 July 2026 to 11 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.
Telegram Stars
Stars received
5
across the posts below
Posts paid on
1
of 23 we hold a reading for · 4%
Most on one post
5
single highest reading
A paid reaction is a reader spending Telegram Stars — bought with money — on a post by @yahontova_profinance. Telegram publishes the count on the public post preview alongside ordinary reactions, and this register reads it there. It is the only figure on this site that measures money moving rather than attention.
Stars are not reactions, and the two are never added. They are rendered in the same strip on Telegram and counted in the same shape, but one is a tap and the other is a purchase. The reaction totals and the engagement rate elsewhere on this page exclude every figure in this section, and no rate here is computed against a reaction count.
This is not revenue, and we publish no currency figure. What a Star costs a reader and what it pays a channel are different numbers, Telegram takes a share we cannot observe, and the terms have changed. Converting a Star count into money would be an estimate dressed as a measurement, so the count is where we stop.
Counted over the 23 most recent posts we hold for this entry, published 27 July 2026 to 11 August 2026. Star counts above 1,000 reach us in Telegram’s short form and carry the same three-significant-figure rounding as everything else on this page.
4 простых способа найти клиентов финансисту
В предыдущем посте я рассказала, где НЕ НАДО искать клиентов и почему. Для кого-то это стало открытием.
Встречный вопрос:
если на Авито дорого, на Яндекс нет смысла вкладывать деньги, соцсети развивать долго — где же тогда искать клиентов?
➡️Я бы остановилась на 4 каналах привлечения. Не скажу, что там можно найти клиента за 1 день, чудес не бывает.
Но если знать, что ко…
Где НЕ НАДО искать клиентов?
Но многие начинают именно с этих каналов привлечения и ,как результат, теряют кучу времени, нервов и денег.
1⃣ Авито
Если 5-10 лет назад это был хороший источник заявок на услуги финансиста, сейчас это один из самых дорогих и низкоконверсионных каналов.
Даже если у вас будет хорошо упакованный аккаунт без платного продвижения никто не придёт.
Единственный способ — тратить от 50 тысяч …
Ваших клиентов забирают более слабые специалисты
И нет, это не несправедливость мира и не желание собственников сэкономить.
Если вы финансист с опытом и сидите без клиентов, пока «зеленые» коллеги берут новые проекты — читайте ниже⬇️
Я уже рассказывала вам, что неправильно искала клиентов и неосознанно дела всё, чтобы их оттолкнуть. Спойлер: так делает половина финансистов.
Остался последний вопрос, который меня …
У меня к вам предложение
Но сначала хочу сказать спасибо за ваш отклик на тему привлечения клиентов❤️.
Я понимаю, насколько эта тема актуальна и насколько в ней мы чувствуем себя уязвимыми, где-то даже беспомощными.
Проблема в этом не в том, что вы знаете, где искать клиентов. Спроси любого из вас — назовёт минимум 3-4 способа: HeadHunter, партнёрские программы, сарафанное радио, соцсети, Авито и прочее.
Проблема…
Как прошли первые групповые разборы в клубе?
Вчера в клубе прошла встреча в формате групповых разборов.
Групповой разбор — это формат работы, где на встрече я выбираю 3-5 человек. Задача участника — сформулировать запрос. Моя задача — дать подробный план действий на ближайшие 2-3 недели.
Что мы сделали ?
✅Определили профессиональные цели участниц
✅Выяснили, что каждой из них сейчас мешает двигаться дальше
✅ Распис…
2 причины, почему клиент вас не выбирает
Ровно по этим же причинам не выбирали и меня
После вчерашнего поста я ещё раз посмотрела на то, как раньше представляла себе поиск клиентов.
Если с вопросом «где искать» проблем не было — я понимала, где находятся мои потенциальные клиенты.
Но с «как искать» была беда. Глобально я бы выделила 2 проблемы.
* для справки: канал привлечения — ГДЕ мы ищем клиентов, способ — ЧТ…
Внимание всем, кто приобрёл подписку на клуб «Яхонт»
Коллеги, у нас назрела проблема, и я хочу с ней разобраться.
Заметила, что более 10 человек до сих пор не дошли до закрытого канала и сообщества в Телеграм. А также не все поступили к обучению.
Хотя мы отправили несколько писем с инструкциями подключения🤔.
В чём причина? У некоторых из вас по 2 аккаунта в GetCourse.
И кто-то оплатил клуб на один аккаунт, а заш…
5 ошибок, из-за которых я теряла клиентов
Причем не просто теряла, а они до меня даже не доходили😳.
Как я писала в предыдущем посте, на старте карьеры в финансовом аутсорсинге я долго не могла найти клиентов. Все неудачи списывала на нехватку опыта.
Пока не поняла: опыт тут не причем. После того как я прозрела, мне стало интересно:
а где именно теряется клиент? В какой момент человек, которому нужен финансист, реш…
Клиентам плевать на наш опыт?!
В начале пути в финансовом аутсорсинге я долгое время считала, что клиенты выбирают специалиста по опыту:
чем больше ты знаешь, чем сложнее проекты за твоими плечами, чем увереннее разбираешься в финансах — тем проще тебе будет находить клиентов.
Вроде бы всё логично🤔. Ты учишься, работаешь, набираешься опыта, а потом клиент смотрит на твой профиль и понимает: вот хороший специалист, …
Дашборд с ИИ: бесплатный урок
Финансисты знают эту боль:
➡️Данные по клиенту находятся в разных местах.
➡️Чтобы подготовить отчётность, приходится вручную переносить цифры, пересобирать показатели и отдельно готовить презентацию.
➡️Вы открываете перед предпринимателем таблицу — и вместо обсуждения бизнеса начинаете объяснять, где здесь деньги и на какую строку ему вообще нужно смотреть.
Итог — вы проделали огромную…
Где я взяла первых клиентов?
Долгие годы я работала главным бухгалтером на стабильном окладе 90 тысяч рублей. На тот момент это были хорошие деньги, казалось бы, живи и радуйся.
Но чем больше я работала на этой должности, тем больше понимала, что нахожусь не там, где хочу, и это абсолютно не та работа, которая мне нравится.
Я перебрала много направлений, пока попала на вебинар по финансовому моделированию.
💡И поня…
Showing the 12 most recent of 23 posts we hold for @yahontova_profinance. 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.
Stars beside a post are paid reactions — Telegram Stars, bought with money and spent on that post. They are a different unit from reactions and are never added to them, here or anywhere else on this page.
Polls
The 3 polls we hold for this entry, as Telegram rendered them when we read the post. A poll’s figures keep moving after that, so each one is dated.
Какой(ие) навык(и) вы больше всего хотите приобрести?
Привлекать клиентов41%
Продавать услуги финучета39%
Внедрять управленческий учёт самостоятельно30%
Проводить финанализ24%
Использовать ИИ для решения рутинных задач39%
Автоматизировать финучёт37%
Организовать работу на аутсорсе22%
Преодолевать стресс и страх перед новыми действиями28%
Свой вариант в комментариях4%
The shares total 264%, above 100: this poll accepts more than one answer per voter. No per-option vote count is published, so the number of voters who chose each option is not derivable and is not shown.
Shares as published. No per-option vote count is published by Telegram, so none is shown.
Percentages only — there are no per-option vote counts here, because Telegram publishes none.The public post preview gives each option’s share and a single voter total, and nothing else. Multiplying one by the other would produce a per-option tally that looks measured and is not: the shares are rounded to whole numbers before we ever see them. We print what was published and leave the column that does not exist empty.
The shares need not add up to 100.Rounding alone puts many polls at 99 or 101. A poll that allows more than one answer per voter runs well past 100 by design, and several here do. The bars are drawn against a fixed 100% track at each option’s own percentage rather than normalised to the total, so a poll that exceeds it shows that it does instead of being quietly rescaled.
Read from the 23 most recent posts we hold, published 27 July 2026 to 11 August 2026. Telegram labels each poll by kind — an anonymous poll, a quiz, a closed set of final results — and that label is reproduced rather than paraphrased.
Citation-graph rank
Citation-graph rank — 145,302 of 1,480,688entries in the measured graph. A weighted position computed from the forward and mention edges below — republished posts weigh more than named mentions — 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 channel’s 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 — a named-by count costs nothing to manufacture. The top 100 by this measure, or how it is computed.
Mentions
Named by 7 registered channels — 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.
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 15 August 2026 — this
entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“Яхонтова про финансы и удаленку” (@yahontova_profinance), 5,819 subscribers as measured 15 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/yahontova_profinance.
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.
