Topic: Do you believe in ICO Ratings? - page 17. (Read 6947 times)
A large portion of individuals are checking ico evaluations as one of their reference on where they will contribute, however for me ico appraisals is only a guide and I am not by any stretch of the imagination accepting on how they rate some icos. Be that as it may, is still depends with the financial specialists how they will trust this appraisals.
If the ICO rating is given by a trusted website, we should consider it. They provide a possible rating based on the appreciation of the people who saw the ICO project. According to them, many people think the project is good. But the final result is certainly determined by the owner of the ICO. He must strive and work hard to keep the trust of people who have given good appreciation to their projects.
I am not so sure with the ICO rating given because it could be the Ico rating can be through the voting of the project campaign participants, because it has been proven ICO with a high rating also did not experience good sales and even with low ratings have good sales.Therefore the ICO rating can not be used as our benchmark to know whether the project is potential or not.
No, IMO do your own research or you might get burned. Who knows how legit these websites are. Literally anyone could get a "good" rating from a website and turn out to be a scam. ICOs are never safe, do your research.
ICO rating is only part of the success factor of its token sales.
ICO can be said to succeed when touching hardcap numbers, and when touching softcap also still not say successful because its financial foundation is still weak.
Hopefully the project you handle touches all Hardcap. Amien
ICO can be said to succeed when touching hardcap numbers, and when touching softcap also still not say successful because its financial foundation is still weak.
Hopefully the project you handle touches all Hardcap. Amien
I do partly, because I still have some doubts. These ratings do have some truth in them since I believe the raters do make their research on a particular ICO. But most of these ratings are paid for so they kinda become sort of an advertisement rather than a reference for investment. But ratings still provide some good insights which we can still use in choosing an ICO.
I always have doubts with the ICO ratings. There are several projects with high ratings of which I followed but the project could not provide idea much. I think the ratings they give is highly subjective and has less bearing on the project success
Well, I don't totally believe them because they can also be paid to rate a project
I really believe, but only in some of them, in icodrops for instance, because they aren't payed shillers. even if they promote project for money, they mark out it with colour. If you are a newbie, stay away of ICO bench, they promote scams and their rates mean nothing
I believe they don't take many factors into consideration. Metrics is really important and some people don't even consider metrics which is really important in my opinion.
ico rstings are good things, btu i thinkmthat it is necessary for people to know that thsy nee to check this information I see many Websites that provide ratings for ongoing ICOs or for the future. Examples such as the ICObench.com Website, ICOrating.com and others.
Which is my question whether you believe in the rating provided by the website. Seeing many ICO's do not match what they value. Many ICOs are arguably good ratings but when the token sales of the project only reach softcap. And there are projects that I see have a fairly mediocre rating but their token sales reach hardcap. I took the example of Lalaworld on ICObench.com they get Rating 3.7 but their token is sold out.
So let's discuss ICO Rating!
yes, i th8nk i may say that i nelieve un them butni would not trust them much, so you need to be careful Which is my question whether you believe in the rating provided by the website. Seeing many ICO's do not match what they value. Many ICOs are arguably good ratings but when the token sales of the project only reach softcap. And there are projects that I see have a fairly mediocre rating but their token sales reach hardcap. I took the example of Lalaworld on ICObench.com they get Rating 3.7 but their token is sold out.
So let's discuss ICO Rating!
I believe they don't take many factors into consideration. Metrics is really important and some people don't even consider metrics which is really important in my opinion.
Not at all guys, because we don't know if that rating was reliable.
We can't be dependent on what ICO says. Sometimes ICO rating will pull as down.
We can't be dependent on what ICO says. Sometimes ICO rating will pull as down.
I actually don't believe in this stupid ratings! those agencies don't even know how to evaluate a crypto! they don't even use particular models for this purpose! wht?? putting some numbers is an evaluation?? ahahahah come on! please!!
You need to understand how the rating is given before trust it or not. Some ratings site just use a check list to see whether certain items like telegram group, whitepaper exist or not. These are far less useful then sites that actually trying to understand what the project and potential is, such as crushcrypto and in some case even some youtuber are better.
I don't believe in them, or just maybe a few of them, I think those sites may get paid just for promoting a project, and their promotion consists on putting them on top without even checking their reliabilty, leading to scams spreading even more on the internet.
Most of them are manipulated or paid ones, but yes,i still trust on them, specially on IcoBench and a few other mores that are top notch too, but it also depends on the project too, those ratings are not always speaking by itself
I very much trusted earlier ratings on these websites (ICObench.com, ICOrating.com). For me these ratings were priority information. But over time I have begun to understand that their values very often aren't true. Many examples can be found when the ratings of ICO on these websites were very small, but the project was very good. These ratings shouldn't confuse us!
I can use those writing just as and confirmation of my own opinion that I have, I never more than that because it is basically and opinion of somebody else, that can always be not worthy.
ICO rating sites are a vital part of the ecosystem and can play an important role in guiding investors who lack the time to thoroughly research a project themselves. However, not all ICO rating websites are created equal. Currently, some ICO rating sites have very few reviews and ratings and the screening process of "experts" responsible for the reviews still require improvement. This means that a single review from a non-expert can significantly improve and ICOs rating from say 3.5 to 4.5 which may be a true reflection of the project's strength but can also easily skew reality. As with any project/product the more verified reviews by real experts the better. I do believe that in time stricter controls will have a positive effect and we will see the user base of ICO rating websites grow in numbers as well as quality.
Jump to: