Nice to see so many people have the same thought about crypto ratings. Crypto rating agencies clearly did something very wrong to get a universal distrust from every crypto user. Maybe if they stop being bias and honest about their rating, there wouldn't so much distrust for them as right now.
Almost everyone doesn't trust ratings because it can be manipulated. I think the rating is only for additional information to find out about these projects such as CMC and Coingecko.
Topic: Do you believe in crypto ratings? - page 4. (Read 4226 times)
Nice to see so many people have the same thought about crypto ratings. Crypto rating agencies clearly did something very wrong to get a universal distrust from every crypto user. Maybe if they stop being bias and honest about their rating, there wouldn't so much distrust for them as right now.
Almost everyone doesn't trust ratings because it can be manipulated. I think the rating is only for additional information to find out about these projects such as CMC and Coingecko. 
oh no, I just believed how the project worked in the first 3 months since the crypto coin was released. because it is real proof crypto coins seem to provide potential or not
I haven't paid attention to crypto ratings since 2018. After the hard crash on Bitcoin price and many other altcoin, those ratings mean worthless too me. All about the crypto market and crypto rating company won't able to lead it anywhere they want to, manipulate their rating reports.
Personally I don't believe in most of them. Mainly which one are website based. But here it's a different case. But its fine if two rating's are different from each other. Each crypto rating providers measure different factors. For example those who provide Chinese crypto rating are always prefer Chinese projects. That's why they prefer eos ,neo wanchain rather than eth. Cause these projects have great community in china. So they prefer these projects. And in certain point this is absolutely fine.
Well, looking at the two rating companies, it's obvious they used different rating measures, but for me I can't accept that, I would rather rate a project on my own by checking several functions,which include their use case , their trading volume and probably their road map,I don't subcribe to rating sites. It is best to carry out research personally
Yes, it's best to do your own research than believing the crypto rating agency and their mismatch in the report from different agencies. Their rating comes with the cost of pushing their agenda toward any coin they have invested anyways.
Crypto ratings, benchy websites, all of them are paid to list a coin. There is a simple rule, more you pay, better rating you get. I didn´t see any honest independent crypto rating company. They rather take money from developers than spending a lot of hours researching for nothing 
.
. 
Well this is my first time seeing crypto rating. I only know ICO rating siting sites which is untrustable. I wondering where they get data to rate crypto or maybe they get paid from the project it self?. We should be more wise and careful dont trust anyone.
Yeah, also i haven’t seen such crypto rating sites. Because mostly we are useful to search ICO & IEO rating websites as like icobench,icodrop,iconow but i don’t believe rating on those sites. I see a same project but different ratings in these sites, definitely here mostly paid ratings.
Crypto currency project ratings are supposed to be an additional guide to potentially expose you to more facts. Also, A crypto project rating does not mean that the project is good enough, it only means that the project passed the rating website bare minimum criteria. Do i believe in such ratings? No, i do not. I rather do further research about such claims.
I dont care any of the crypto ratings,what i care about is the price of token what i hold in my wallet.I would not to buy crypto due to their high rating.Just because i think in order to survive,whatever websit is hard to avoid pleasing their sponsors ,and the result is obviously hard to convince.
The more money they gave, the higher their ranking. That's it .
These kind of ratings are just similar to the ICO ratings way back 2-3 years ago where investors are basing which project to invest on the ratings on the project in the ICO rating website. I don't believe in these kind of ratings for some reasons but I'm not saying too that some of these aren't real. Maybe there are some which are true.
You are right about a terrible truth about the ranking pages of crypto projects, outside of the sparkles and good reviews of trends and programs of a project, it's just an advertising contract, developers want the best view of them and they do it with their money, I also believe in some ratings on a 10 or 5 point scale, all of which are very high but unfortunately, to succeed and get listed isn't their last path, disappearing is the only thing they do. There are very few projects that can guarantee the quality as currently evaluated, this life is too difficult .These kind of ratings are just similar to the ICO ratings way back 2-3 years ago where investors are basing which project to invest on the ratings on the project in the ICO rating website. I don't believe in these kind of ratings for some reasons but I'm not saying too that some of these aren't real. Maybe there are some which are true.
Let be honest, crypto ratings are outdated and weren't in its prime time anymore. When ICO and new projects pop up everywhere around 2017, yes we need some crypto ratings to remove low-tier project but today, crypto ratings weren't useful anymore so you don't need to care about them or different between each crypto rating agency.
The more money they gave, the higher their ranking. That's it .
These kind of ratings are just similar to the ICO ratings way back 2-3 years ago where investors are basing which project to invest on the ratings on the project in the ICO rating website. I don't believe in these kind of ratings for some reasons but I'm not saying too that some of these aren't real. Maybe there are some which are true.
.These kind of ratings are just similar to the ICO ratings way back 2-3 years ago where investors are basing which project to invest on the ratings on the project in the ICO rating website. I don't believe in these kind of ratings for some reasons but I'm not saying too that some of these aren't real. Maybe there are some which are true.
I myself don't believe in cryptocurrency ranking, because data from coins can be manipulated by site managers, both in terms of transaction volume and other matters related to the quality of the coin itself, it all depends on the payment provided by the coin.
I don't trade or buy any digital asset based on ratings. Most often that none, they are influence and cannot be taking to be a real source for any investment.
I don't believe in cryptocurrency ratings most especially those websites that are paid to rate the ICO/IEO projects. Their ratings are usually highly and most of the projects they rate so high fails to deliver and stand the trial of time.
Before you believe in crypto ratings, you should find out first, how these crypto ratings work. Not a few dirty businesses are running in 2020 because money can change everything.
just as an experience, that there used to be a famous ICO Rating website called ICOB * NCH ... to be listed there and get positive reviews, you have to pay a certain amount of Bitcoin. If you don't pay, then your project won't shine on the website. Developers who pay for this, usually use recognition from ICOB * NCH as a marketing medium.
And again, people are being fooled into the hope that the trustworthiness of a big website is a sign of a good project
just as an experience, that there used to be a famous ICO Rating website called ICOB * NCH ... to be listed there and get positive reviews, you have to pay a certain amount of Bitcoin. If you don't pay, then your project won't shine on the website. Developers who pay for this, usually use recognition from ICOB * NCH as a marketing medium.
And again, people are being fooled into the hope that the trustworthiness of a big website is a sign of a good project
How can they get so different results?
The reason for that is because crypto ratings gets paid. They publish ratings depends on how they want it to be. Just the same as the example, it shows positive review for bitcoin, and the other one is negative. It means that the other crypto rating website is against bitcoin or they have any other reason to make it look like a bad investment for everyone. 
AFAIK, crypto ratings are being paid to give a positive rating for a certain project. Even those project that is not good enough is receiving a good feedback because of money. I do not believe in crypto ratings because of that reason, there are so many victims of a scam and fake projects.
I don't believe crypto rating websites as you do. The best profits are in new altcoins, but all new altcoins aren't good. We shouldn't believe in crypto rating but we can get some information from those websites. At least I have a top listed name to verify by my technique.
Sometimes Crypto rating can't be standars for a good project. But Crypto rating can help to review a new projects.
I personally use icobench and icoholder to research about new projects . It can help to get profiles in their projects.
I personally use icobench and icoholder to research about new projects . It can help to get profiles in their projects.
Jump to: