Topic: Do you trust ICO Rating sites? - page 27. (Read 9148 times)
I haven’t visited such sites for a long time, because I’ve seen for a long time that they have no coincidence between ratings and projects!
at the start icobench was good. But for now its not for me.
I never trust them. I check ICO details myself and join if i like the project and team.
I never trust them. I check ICO details myself and join if i like the project and team.
I always read their comments and ratings but I never trust them with my decision to invest or not. We all know that they are getting paid to rate an ICO and most of the time, they give a high rating to ICO that pays them well. ICO's paying low will receive a lower rating than what they deserve. ICO with high ratings can still fail and be a scam. Its hit and miss.
The problem of the success of the ICO actually requires many investors who want to join the projects.
But the most important thing for investors is seeing a trusted team. In addition, it is also necessary to see the work partners of the ICO.
But the most important thing for investors is seeing a trusted team. In addition, it is also necessary to see the work partners of the ICO.
I could not really say that I trust or distrust ICO rating sites because as far as I know this sites can also be manipulated by ICO who wants to commit fraud or just intends to scam its investor but this site can also provide information to us if what are the new ICO available today and it is up to us to investigate if what ICO is real and what is not.
ratings are not very accurate) and I have repeatedly seen the information that they can be bought. But they can draw attention to the project, and on such sites a lot of information about the project is collected, conveniently. But for the selection of the project to be oriented only on such a rating - it is impossible
Yes I believe that ICO rating is still a good thing to find the right reference to find the best ICO, almost a year I have followed the development of ICO via rating and happy because everything is smooth.
ICO rating sites can help investors to choose a good project where they can invest their money with and at the same time , it can also help my fellow bounty hunters choose ICO bounties where they can work with and earn rewards. But not most of the time, the ICO/s with high ratings become successful, sometimes it's the lower ones.
I only check the ratings on the trusted ICOrating websites. I trust ICOBench, ICOMarks and ICOdrops. There are a lot of professionals among their teams and the ratings are based on team, product and community.
Most of them are really biased since they are paid after all for giving ratings to the ICO companies but then ICO rating sites also is useful to me in some way. Like if I'm looking for an ICO with bounties I go there and find me a bounty which later I will join.
Because in this rating you will know how legit or good this ICO but be careful many ICO is just paying advertisement to have that good ratings. You should double check too if the project deserve that ratings. And trust the people or site that have good ratings too that giving the ICO's ratings.
Sometimes I see a picture of when ICO with high ratings on these sites are scams. In my opinion it shows that the ratings on such sites should not be trusted. Although many people invest in ICO , trusting it to these sites. Personally, I made the opposite conclusion. It is necessary to analyze the ICO itself.
Because in this rating you will know how legit or good this ICO but be careful many ICO is just paying advertisement to have that good ratings. You should double check too if the project deserve that ratings. And trust the people or site that have good ratings too that giving the ICO's ratings.
Sometimes I study the information that is on these sites. But I try to think critically and do not trust the rating completely. I independently analyze projects.
If you are going to invest in ICO, then you need to conduct your own analysis, because such sites ICO rating can not be trusted ...
I also think that the rating of many sites on ICO are not always true. Many companies pay big money to get on these sites a positive rating. But on the other hand, some projects do not buy rating from such sites and quite successfully collect the required amount on ICO.
At first I trusted these sites, but then I had more experience. And, as my experience shows, most projects buy rating, and it's sad
They seem biased to me. A friend of mine who's doing an ICO told me that they paid 10ETH for 5 quality ratings and that's that! I noticed that some ICOs with good project, team, and good social media presence are struggling with getting good reviews.
With all that said, should it still be a factor to look at when investing in ICO?
Some of it But mostly I don't. Its all about money! they were paid to list and review. That's the mere fact and the high ICO rating don't guarantee that the ICO is legitimate and it wont turn into scam if they raised more money from the campaign. It happen already during (HashCard ICO) the team is vanish after having successfully raised millions of dollars. With all that said, should it still be a factor to look at when investing in ICO?
If you are going to invest in ICO, then you need to conduct your own analysis, because such sites ICO rating can not be trusted ...
FoxICO started completely new rating system - all projects are rated by community. You are welcome to share your opinion. Check "how it works section" at first.
No i don't cause they can be bought. Many scam projects pay these rating sites to give them a good review. Even some communities are paid to spread good words about a project. It's better to research on your own and judge it for yourself. And then you can decide if you want to take the risk.
Even scam project may buy advertisment in rating and nobody cares. Rating needs to become transparent, but even when they do, you shoudl make descisons basing on the WP and data you had found, rating is one of the many ways to estimate the project. Remember it and never buy promoted tokens without double checking.
Jump to: