Topic: Do you believe in ICO Ratings? - page 82. (Read 6918 times)
I think the ratings are needed for each project, but I saw a lot of projects with ratings of 5/5 that did not even earn soft cap. It turns out that they do not always reflect the real state of affairs.
Ico rating can't be used to judge project most time ico review are biased and what if they are paid to rate them high to attractive massive investors therefore i don't believe in ico ratings.
yes of course because of that ranking we can see the potential altcoin done in sales transactions on the ico. after that we can also get the latest information in an ico that is always fast in providing info. and in the presence of this we can easily see the potential of an altcoin.
I think that you should not rely on the opinions of such sites. The rating there is built on the opinion of the majority of users. But I'm sure only a small part of these users conduct a detailed analysis of ICO.
In a way, I do believe in ICO rating. I'm using ICO bench for this. I consider ICO rating as one factor before joining any ICO. It's a third party tool out there that did there own researched about the ICO/Project. But I'm not using it as a sole factor for my decision.
This is how I choose the right ICO to participate/invest on:
first is I filter ICOs by judging their ratings, second is by reading their whitepaper, third is their community.
first is I filter ICOs by judging their ratings, second is by reading their whitepaper, third is their community.
No I do not believe in ICO ratings and reviews because most of them are paid and ICO pay the site to give them good rating so in these scams ICO makes their rating good also so best is to do own research instead of relying on someone else because like this you will be easily able to find good ICOs.
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 don't beleive on hype when it comes on finding a basis to whether an ICO will be successful or not. The mentioned case about Lalaworld is true and is already a proof that despite of having a low rating, it still managed to sold their tokens out. And some ICO despite of having a high rating are not able to sell all of their tokens on the crowdsale. 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 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 do honestly believe on ICO rating because it measures the popularity of a certain ICO project. Also, popularity is equivalent with demand such that if something is popular, it will have a high demand which would make the success of that ICO more assured.I'm not saying that it always happen but the fact is that, this is what usually happen. So it will depend to you wether you will consider the rating of a certain ICO or not. 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!
Maybe the web like ICO rating is not all free, there are some paid ICO web sites. I think for the ICO rating web site that not free I less trust, because they issued a rating it was paid, not because good ICO. But to this day I still use ICO web rating as a reference
Yeah, I see the ratings by ico sites as a mere hype and not to be used as a yardastick or determinant to measure how successful the project would end up. I ve seen projects with low ratings perform extremely well while those with high rating end up flopping badly. So i just draw my judgement by my own personal research.
I usually check ratings on ICOdrops resource. They usually evaluate a project without being payed for this. So in most cases you can trust their ratings. Of course it doesn't mean that you should blindly trust and invest only according to the ratings. Good ICO rating means that you can pay attention on it an do you own investigation.
ICO rating assessed by a portal. And I think is a very honest assessment. because a portal must of course give our best in order not to disappoint the public. because the community is of course the hope is full so that the information provided is real.
Used to use those sites and did trusted them but now not so much as most off them are sell outs and those high rankings are payed for high ranking and not deserved.Now i just use them as a way to follow what new icos are coming out and some more details about them
Icobench is a really very good ICO rating website. There are many options to see in ico bench. Like icobench research everything about the project, then icobench asked the ICO Project team to verify KYC. The gives ratings by seeing project's team member, ico profile, and verified kyc. Some project has 4.1 rating only for their ico profile but they haven't verified kyc. So, that project is not worthy of investment. Kyc verified but overall rating 3.5 is better than the 4.3 rating who got the rating only for ico profile. Basically, I believe in icobench.
An ico rating website can be usee as a guide sometimes. But you still have to do your own research anyway cos some of them are being paid by the project developers to make their project look good.
We can use it as a basis but yoy never know that kind of ICO is good for them but not for you the best to trust is the one that you research not others because you know what you want and get the information you want
I do not really know that because I did not read icoratings and icobench looking for some ico's because I don't think that they provide ico it will legit and successful so I really appreciated their beliefs to those ico that really matter but I don't really base my expectations to those site.
ICO rating can be a guideline for us to choose the best projects. But yes, the result may differ from what we expected. At least ICO rating can make our researches more easier.
Ir depends on people's rates because sometimes some other is just rnking that some project is not good even if it is really good but sometimes i believe with some rates because when they join icos they explain what are their experience in that projects
Jump to: