Telegram RegisterThe public register of Telegram
Telegram profile photo for НАФИ: аналитика, исследования, прогнозы

Channel

НАФИ: аналитика, исследования, прогнозы

@nafi_research

On this record: Growth · Engagement · Reactions · Posts · Citations · Telegram's recommendations · Cite this entry

5,865subscribers

-9 since we began measuring on 6 August 2026

Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 3,162–10,000.

Register entry

Telegram ID-1001786418096
TypeChannel
Username@nafi_research
Created4 March 2022measured — cross-checked against a third-party dataset (ext.tg_channel)
First recorded6 August 2026
Last confirmed live2 September 2026
Measurements held10
Confirmed unchanged1 time, most recently 2 September 2026
On Telegramt.me/nafi_research

Growth

5,8655,8745,869.56 August 2026 — 5,874 subscribers6 August 2026 — 5,874 subscribers6 August 2026 — 5,873 subscribers9 August 2026 — 5,866 subscribers11 August 2026 — 5,867 subscribers15 August 2026 — 5,868 subscribers18 August 2026 — 5,872 subscribers21 August 2026 — 5,869 subscribers25 August 2026 — 5,872 subscribers2 September 2026 — 5,865 subscribers6 August 20262 September 2026
10 measurements spanning 28 days, net -9. 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 5,864–5,875 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded
Measured (UTC)SubscribersChange
2 Sept 2026, 22:075,865-7
25 Aug 2026, 04:075,872+3
21 Aug 2026, 19:045,869-3
18 Aug 2026, 10:265,872+4
15 Aug 2026, 18:375,868+1
11 Aug 2026, 22:485,867+1
9 Aug 2026, 05:025,866-7
6 Aug 2026, 13:015,873-1
6 Aug 2026, 04:015,874no change
6 Aug 2026, 03:535,874first reading

Engagement

9 posts held, back to 22 July 2026the reader has not yet reached the start of this channel’s public history, so older posts may sit further back, unread. Read across 9 pages of Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.

ERR · 30 days
7.47%
avg views ÷ 5,865 subscribers
Avg views / post
438
3 posts measured
Reaction rate
2.59%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
3
of 9 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.

What these figures were computed from
WindowRolling 30 days · latest post in window 11 August 2026
Posts held9 (22 July 202611 August 2026)
Views total1,315
Reactions total34
Forwards / commentsnot exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken12 Aug 2026, 03:46 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.

Reaction mix

98 reactions across 8 posts, in 7 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 37.8% of them.

Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
ReactionCountShareShare, drawn
🔥3737.8%
2222.4%
👍2121.4%
👾1111.2%
😍44.08%
🙏22.04%
🫡11.02%

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 9 of the 9 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 107 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.

Measured over the 9 most recent posts we hold, published 22 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.

Recent posts

11 Aug 2026, 15:38 UTC434 views11 reactionsread 12 August 2026
Photo

📊Исследование «Купера» и НАФИ показало: 94% пользователей доставки считают гарантию качества важным критерием при выборе сервиса. Для каждого третьего — 34% — именно качество становится главным фактором. Особенно высок запрос на качество у женщин и пользователей старше 55 лет — по 97% в каждой группе. Среди семей с детьми этот показатель составляет 95%. Что ещё важно пользователям при выборе доставки продуктов? 🔸ш

🔥43👍2👾1🫡1

6 Aug 2026, 10:03 UTC455 views11 reactionsread 12 August 2026
Photo

💻 Аналитический центр НАФИ представляет результаты ежегодного замера уровня цифровой грамотности россиян на платформе «Цифровой гражданин». Ключевые факты: 🔶 Индекс цифровой грамотности россиян по итогам 2025 года составил 68 пунктов из 100 (годом ранее – 71 п.) 🔶 Большинство россиян находятся на базовом уровне владения цифровыми компетенциями — 75%. Продвинутый уровень демонстрируют 21%, начальный — 4%. 🔶 При это

🔥6👾32

5 Aug 2026, 10:25 UTC426 views12 reactionsread 12 August 2026
Photo

📊Товары собственных торговых марок стали привычной частью потребительского выбора. Чаще всего такие товары выбирают в категории продуктов питания — ее назвали 82% покупателей СТМ. Реже товары для дома, бытовую химию, косметику и товары гигиены. Главным барьером для более частых покупок является сомнение в качестве: так считают 32% россиян. Повысить доверие к СТМ могли бы гарантии качества от магазина или торговой се

👍5🔥32👾2

4 Aug 2026, 12:19 UTC428 views26 reactionsread 12 August 2026
Forwarded from @eawfrusPhoto

♾️О силе смыслов и непрерывном развитии Сегодня в рубрике #ОдинДеньКоординатора мы знакомимся с человеком, который умеет погружаться вглубь, превращать сложную аналитику в понятные выводы и влиять на изменения ландшафта социума. Мы проводим день с координатором проекта Совета ЕЖФ, генеральным директором Аналитического центра НАФИ, предпринимателем и исследователем в душе и по профессии - Гузелией Имаевой. Главный и

🔥146😍4👾2

31 Jul 2026, 12:35 UTC508 views11 reactionsread 12 August 2026
Photo

🔸Индекс качества розничного сервиса В июне Индекс качества розничного сервиса остался на уровне 85,7 пункта. Онлайн-магазины и маркетплейсы сохраняют преимущество над традиционной розницей, но в июне немного просели — до 86,8 пункта. Офлайн, напротив, вырос до 84,6 пункта: лучше всего потребители оценили магазины выпечки, хлеба и кофе с собой, а также аптеки. Подробнее ➡️ 🔸Россияне переосмысляют семью Ко Дню семьи,

🔥6👾2🙏21

29 Jul 2026, 13:07 UTC519 views13 reactionsread 12 August 2026
Forwarded from @womensinvestmentsPhoto

Сравнение мужчин и женщин ⚙️ По оценке перспектив развития рынка, мужчины также немного впереди: 53,5 пункта против 52,5 пункта у женщин. Таким образом, различия между мужчинами и женщинами связаны не столько наличием барьеров, сколько уровнем вовлеченности, уверенности и доверия к финансовому рынку. Для финансовых организаций это важный сигнал. Универсальная коммуникация «для всех» может быть менее эффективной, ч

👍64🔥2👾1

28 Jul 2026, 13:28 UTC518 views5 reactionsread 12 August 2026
Photo

🎉Поздравляем сегодня всех, кто превращает факты в смыслы, а смыслы — в решения. С Днем PR-специалиста! 📌PR давно не строится только на громких заявлениях, потому что сегодня аудитория, СМИ и профессиональное сообщество ждут аргументы, факты и понятную связь с реальностью. 🔸Именно поэтому исследование становится сильным PR-инструментом. Оно помогает не просто рассказать о компании, продукте или инициативе, а показат

👍32

23 Jul 2026, 12:26 UTC625 views9 reactionsread 10 August 2026
Photo

🔸Исследования общественного мнения помогают увидеть не только уровень поддержки инициативы, но и установки, опасения, мотивы, барьеры и реальные ожидания разных групп. Такие данные особенно важны, когда решение затрагивает широкую аудиторию, требует доверия или связано с изменением привычного поведения. С помощью исследований общественного мнения можно понять: 🔸как люди воспринимают инициативу, программу, территорию

👍52🔥2

22 Jul 2026, 07:35 UTC≈512 views9 reactionsread 6 August 2026
Photo

Роль искусственного интеллекта в финансовых решениях 💡 Среди россиян, которые уже сталкивались с ИИ-сервисами, заметна позитивная оценка их роли в финансовых решениях. Это говорит о том, что аудитория в целом открыта к использованию таких технологий. Тем не менее потенциал ИИ в личных финансах пока раскрыт не полностью. Если для части аудитории ИИ уже стал помощником, то для многих он по-прежнему остается неизвестн

Showing the 9 most recent of 9 posts we hold for @nafi_research. 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.

Forward network

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 8 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.

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.

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.

FMCG Report
@fmcg_ru · 42,893
Telegram ranks this channel #94 of 97 here — alongside 96 others — read 29 August 2026

This channel appears in 1 seed channel's Telegram-generated recommendation list in total. 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 2 September 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.

“НАФИ: аналитика, исследования, прогнозы” (@nafi_research), 5,865 subscribers as measured 2 September 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/nafi_research.

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.