Topic: Do you believe in ICO Ratings? - page 38. (Read 6918 times)
ICO ratings should be used as guides only, so it's fine to look at them and see what they have to say, but I wouldn't part with any funds based solely on their opinion. Best to do your own research, coupled with ICO ratings, plus it doesn't hurt to check forums - like here - to see what others have to say.
As an investor the ico rating and ico bench both the portals are most beneficial for me because before investing in any ico first of all i will check the ratings and reviews of that particular ico and then i will invest and according to me 90% of rating is valid.
The ratings of new projects are quite good help to pick up a new project, because many people are simply not very knowledgeable in this business and this is too difficult for them!
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!
ICO ratings are very important too. Yes, they might be wrong sometimes, but for a general idea they should be considered. TAU, ADA, POWR for instance have normal ratings and a few great comments and undoubtedly, they are working tremendously in the industry. 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!
Honestly,I don't believe this properly.There are many scam ICO still spreading in the forum.First of all,we need to know the project then we search for its ratings.Sometimes ratings can be wrong.So,we need to our own research about this matter.
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!
We should always check the ICO ratings for a reference so that we know how they are working, but the main concentration should be upon research of investors. You should see for yourself. The ICO ratings of PRG, ICX were not that satisfying but I am investing in them and they are working great.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!
This is your choice, because many people feel the market is falling and sells this coin, and then buys the same thing only when it is at a lower price, but this tactic is also quite good, but I do not practice it!
I do not trust sites that assign rating to crypto projects, I believe that all ratings are often appropriated unobjectively. Perhaps they assign a high rating to the project, for a part of the award, I took part in critical projects with high ratings, and in the end I lost all my money. Only study crypto projects yourself.
I do not suggest you trust completely but I suggest you still have a little faith in the ranking sites because although they can get rewarded when they appreciate a project but not all, they also often have comments, accurate analysis, we can not deny that. What they summarize from the project is something that we should care about, then we can re-analyze it according to our thinking, failure in the past is also a part of your mistake when you trust too much on them, you should remember that this is an investment market, not a charity, can not trust too much on anyone 
I give my two cents on some ICO rating sites. Some of them are biased towards the project. I always did my own research in some ICO's that i participated.
that's really what you say mostly in following the project as it really helps to improve the higher rankings
I give my two cents on some ICO rating sites. Some of them are biased towards the project. I always did my own research in some ICO's that i participated.
I'm not believing on the things that somebody else have made a conclusion instead of me, and furthermore I have heard about one woman who helps her husband to get a higher ratings on the ICO bench.
How exactly is she helping him get the high rating? What ICO are we talking about?
I believe on the ICO ratings but even they have high ratings, I still don't trust their ratings. Every ICO I participated is very full of research by mine, I just don't watching the ratings of every ICO, I also consider the technical side of the project and their technology behind also. Most of ICOs nowadays are scam.
I think ICO rating is only one factor in project evaluation. On the other hand, many of the ratings are based on objective criterias that hard to fake, such as number of social media followers and etc
I don't really believe in the ratings of review websites since getting premium listings can possibly boost your rating there.
What I look at in ICOBench is the reviews of the experts, factoring in what they are saying about the ICO, and not focusing on how they rate it.
Another good thing about ICOBench is they display the KYC compliance of the team behind the ICO.
This is a very good thing to consider before joining an ICO because this means that the team behind it is very transparent and that they are confident to stake their reputation on the line for investors to know who really is behind the project.
What I look at in ICOBench is the reviews of the experts, factoring in what they are saying about the ICO, and not focusing on how they rate it.
Another good thing about ICOBench is they display the KYC compliance of the team behind the ICO.
This is a very good thing to consider before joining an ICO because this means that the team behind it is very transparent and that they are confident to stake their reputation on the line for investors to know who really is behind the project.
Relies upon the measurements they utilize, regardless of whether it can be ascertained impartially or despite everything it contains obstinate appraisal. There are a ton of ICO survey organization at the present time, and the most ideal approach to get the target evaluation of a venture is to do our exploration by crosschecking it on numerous ICO audits and asking specifically to the group behind it on their message gathering. We must be more watchful on the grounds that ICOs are not managed and can undoubtedly perform leave trick without being distinguished and hauled to court by us.
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!
I'm not believing on the things that somebody else have made a conclusion instead of me, and furthermore I have heard about one woman who helps her husband to get a higher ratings on the ICO bench. 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 don't trust the rating of ICO. Although many have the good rating but not in terms of their sales. So it's just as an additional. The product and the team will determine whether the ICO could not succeed and if what is done and the results are good then by all means, ICO will be successful and have a lot of funds.
Few days ago I found information about icobench and I was surprised.
Buy a rating, it turned out quite easily.
Buy a rating, it turned out quite easily.
I check ICO rating sites from time to time.
I take it as a good way to find projects that might be interesting.
After picking up some high ranked ones, I'd do my own research before deciding to invest into it.
I take it as a good way to find projects that might be interesting.
After picking up some high ranked ones, I'd do my own research before deciding to invest into it.
You can trust them only partially, as many people want to pump and promote their ICOs with the usage of such ratings.
Jump to: