Topic: Do you believe in ICO Ratings? - page 74. (Read 6918 times)
The rating system and risk assessment is still a sore point for the cryptocurrency market. Attempts to give this direction a tangible form has not yet led to anything concrete. The industry of consulting and analytical services is still being formed. So many of the ratings are unfair
Yes very often rates are good thing to choose good projects to follow, I am looking at www.icoguide.com rates they are trustworthy and realistic.
Yes, I believe that most of the time these ICO ratings have some reference value, but you can't always rely on these ICO ratings. Because some ICO projects are paid marketing, the score is higher.
Actually, it is always better to use all these ratings than do not pay any attention to them. As for me, I prefer to find all the needed information about these projects at this site: https://icorating.com/
I used to reference websites such as ICObench.com when I was in ICO. Later, I realized that their judgment may not necessarily make us more professional. I think we should spend more time understanding the community of the project, which is very important.
People often see that they are actually checking the real ico ratings as one of their referrals which are most selective to investors, but for me ico rating is one is just a guide and I'm not really believe in how quickly they rate some icos. But that would still depend on the willing investors how they would believe in this ICO rating.
We should not believe them. These are the usual advertising platforms. They earn money like this. But we can take information from many sites and analyze it ourselves to make the right decision
I think nobody should trust blind in Initital coin offerings rating sites. I think they are a great oppurtinity to save some of your time. But you also have to do researches about every project before you invest in them. Dont just invest in projects with high ico ratings. Do not forget, its the internet, and its possible that people are paying for good ratings!
I am sure that the ICO ratings are very useful for us. Of course, absolutely should not trust them, but with their help it is possible to reduce the number of projects for analysis and choose most promising ICO.
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 rating website is just a guide for the investors to which project have met the criteria. It doesn't guarantee that they know exactly what will be the outcome of the ICO. ICO rating is just part of the tools while choosing which ICO to invest. 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 trust partly in ICO ratings. Now, there are ICOs that gain a good rating from websites but is never accepted widely by investors. Through rating and benchmark you will find out if the ICO become successful in the future. Rating is very useful because its give additional trust to the ICO.
Most of the ratings a good, except that they don't point out wether the project is decentralised or not, if the project is not decentralised, what's the point to have ICO right ?
For a long time I stopped believing the evaluations they are putting out to projects. Of these, only actual evidence can be taken, such as the number of coins, the amount of money collected, and so on.
Don't fully believe with that. Just make it as consideration when you will choose ICO. And you must research again that ICO before choose it. For me I just use ICO rating site as ICO list site.
Yes, I believe that most of the time these ICO ratings have some reference value, but you can't always rely on these ICO ratings. Because some ICO projects are paid marketing, the score is higher.
I'm not sure which website offers ICO ratings. I think it is a manipulation or at least a means of advertising an ICO (which may already have payments related to the advertising).
I believe part of the ICO rating. Some ICO have received favorable reviews from websites but have never been widely accepted by investors. Rating may leave a good impression on ICO, but I still believe very much about how they follow their roadmap and the attraction of the new logo that it can be accepted. Some ICO got a lower score at the beginning, but it proved that its new project concept is feasible and acceptable.
I pay attention to the rating, choosing ICO... but this is not the only criterion of choice.... It is necessary to evaluate the project itself, whether it will be useful, to read the road map...and much more
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 always compare the ICO ratings between different sources and only after that I analyze the project. Sometimes in the ratings is not true information about the projects.
I believe it but before i join it, I will check again that project. But mostly, many ICO which has good rating in that website, has good whitepaper, team, etc. So maybe you can use it as a consideration.
Jump to: