Topic: How to judge whether newly listed coins are worth investing? (Read 715 times)

Key point is that it should have legitimate users. Which in most cases is a tough thing to determine with accuracy. Majority of the social media channels will be filled with bounty hunter accounts and bot accounts so as to show the numbers but it is inorganic.

Though in reality if someone is willing to invest, they should check out every person - which is quite impossible.

Rather a sensible thing would be to question the advisors directly on linkedin about their involvement in the projects. Many times projects just put up their names without consent and on questioning comes very confused and bamboozled responses.

---

Either way 99% of the coins are going to be failures, so why bother look at them when you can buy bitcoin?

Honestly, it was too hard to predict and to tell that particular project was worth invesing. Even though they look promising and even the team could give assurance but it can't assure anything especially when it was not listed to a known exchanger. As I look for the project if that is worth it or not, I put into consideration if that project has an important role in the market, that something they can give to the community. But for the thousands of new projects that have been created, we can't deny how hard to find them.

Some people usually say that we should all be looking at how big the community of a coin is before you we decide to join and invest in that coin. In this case the op is talking about how to know whether newly listed coins are worth investing in or not, and in this case, since the coin is still new it is not going to have a big community behind it yet. At this point it takes the hard work of the team to keep it flowing, and not the community.

Now this is why it’s important to get to know the team and know how hard they are working towards pushing the coin forward. This matters a lot in the start. As time goes on the coin will then have a big community that is supporting it. It’s just like bitcoin, when it started, it didn’t have a community that is as big as it does now.

1. It can be judged by its white paper, understand the basic currency information from the white paper, and see if there is plagiarism from other projects.
2. Whether it is listed on a large and reputable and well-known exchange, there will be a better future.
3. Know its project team. Information about the team and its previous projects should be public and complete.
4. Whether the future development plan of the project is clear and reasonable.

I will check in the marketcap to find out this coin are worth to buy or not based on the market volume summary, I will also check how many holders are in the smart contract, the two basic things above are some of my many considerations in buying coins. if you don't want the hassle of buying, just go to a big market like Binance, and pick the top three coins to start trading.

At least, it should have a big community around and their channels should be active.

However, it's just one of the factors. It's really hard to deal with the market volatility even how good and valuable the project is. Maybe just trust them with limitations and try to play with their coins on the market.

DYOR is really the key but the market itself is really hard to challenge.

I don't think the Binance exchange did anything wrong in that either, because they will add all the coins that meet the written criteria for their exchange, and that's very fair in my opinion, because the screening of the Binance exchange is also very strict on all Altcoins

I would like to add the platform, the platform is very important it is what defines a project and its contribution to the industry, without a platform to speak of, the coin will just become a pump and dump coin, so if you are looking for a coin to invest be sure to check if there's a platform and what it's purpose in the community.

First checking the team background and looking for feedbacks from other investors. After doing small research I put a small amount for test purposes, if the project can convince me to invest more I will go for it. Otherwise, wasting money doesn't worth seeing how the specific token will perform on markets. After getting the positive feedback on the invested project, you can find the account manager on team and ask for special dicounts if you plan to invest big. At the end of day, it all depends on the investing skills and overall score of the projects.

At the same time they often claimed to have developed innovative protocols that actually weren't really that innovative because they gave up on some of the other core values like trading efficiency for security or other trade-offs. An innovation to me is at least in the area of crypto when you can keep as much as possible the core values of decentralization and what comes along with it while improving parts of it like scalability. When the first coins came and said hey we can do 1,000,000 tx per second it turned out that they were almost fully centralized. That is not innovation to me.

Creating a new tech or innovation was so difficult and it's not easy as you said that dude. So many coins were doing more and more improvements from the old protocols and this is totally needed to be used as a sustainable development to make sure crypto will always evolve from time to the time.

Yes i agree with this because i experienced it in one of the coins that i invested years ago, that has a great community and eventually the project succeeded. Having a good community to a project is one of the key for their success because many people will help the coin to ve known by many investors that makes many people will join the more investments they have.

The developer is a big help for us to decide whether to buy or not and personally, I do analyze their background and know their plans about the new project because they might already worked with project before, and just created another project just to have more investors. You can also add to your list the price of that new token, know if there’s a hype and if the price is because of being good or someone si manipulating that project.

If you are new, better check first the top crypto. And then, observe how their price changes in the market. But if you want to venture with new coins, better check the foundation of the coin itself. Do they have working platform? Or just talks only? Because some projects are good at marketing their product even if there is no working product. So make sure that there are really active users of their services, because that will be important in the sustenance of their market.

Analyse the root of the project and the team. When a project is being developed and launched by an established firm or one with a good number of userbase gives the confirmation of growth. This has happened with several projects, and these aren't mere hypes. When such projects get launched it is very hard to participate on the sale, very few get lucky to make profit out of it.

The second point you mentioned regarding the white paper is definitely not a reliable one to judge whether a project is worth investing. It serves as a very rough orientation as to whether you like the direction the project is supposed to once take, the vision. I guess 950 out of 1000 white papers during the ICO mania back in the days have never even been put to practice by 10% of what was written down in those papers. Some of the projects even only got to launch their mainnet and it was game over...

There are a lot, maybe you just not explore too much yet. I think there are a lot of new projects gaining success in exchange this year. Most specially NFT, there are a lot NFT based token which gaining more than 100% profit. New projects don't need a pure new idea, they could replace the old idea with a better one as long as it good, it will works

The real information of the projects is important and of course the team behind if its genuine or not. Because mostly projects nowadays using fake people behind the project that's why they run the money without any hesitation when something bad happens in the market. So when picking a project bear in mind that you must assure that you have enough information before investing and etc, so that afterwards its worth it not a waste of time.

1.project team  There will always be a very large community behind a potential project to promote the success of the project.
2.white paper  Through the white paper, you can learn about many project parties' data, such as transaction volume, currency holding addresses, and the amount of funds in the mining pool.
3.Exchange listing  Many newly-listed tokens will be used on unheard of cryptocurrency exchanges with very low trading volume. If it is listed on Binance, it may be the most anticipated of all projects.

the community is actually the second factor. the main thing is that the team itself and also which exchange is listed determines a token. because what I know is that tokens will be easy to grow if they are listed on a large exchange and have a lot of support from the community. that's the perfect composition

I try to look at all their media channels and communication. Also trying to find out who is behind, and the reputation of those people.
Afterwards its good to analyse the website itself, and road map, and see if it makes sense and if they are following it. The platform it is build on is also a big hint. I will trust more projects on ETH, as ETH already does a selection.

At the moment I am doing word of mouth for Ibiza Token, which for me meets al criteria.
Is new, strong team, roadmap is being followed, unique local concept with international appeal, partnerships are legit, good messaging, active facebook and Instagram, unique local product, on uniswap, build on Ethereum.

Sounds good to me, excited about this project.

A lot of info you can find on their facebook page:
https://www.facebook.com/ibizatoken

Also created a topic here to discuss this project:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/ibz-ibiza-token-local-decentralized-currency-and-nft-20-marketplace-launch-5352596

What you guys think?

For around the last year I have not seen one single coin that has been newly listed worth investing in most coins today are copies of others which have failed. There are no original ideas anymore and most are scams.

This is an exact way I am also into practice for years but unfortunately most devs are easily making up themselves for all these criteria which lead me to disappointments in the end hence I believe we must adopt some other effective methods so that devs cannot artificially manipulate to convince us to decide about investing with them. For this reason, I guess we must need to consider what OP is emphasizing here. I mean not all the things of OP but one or two effective methods me must adopt in additions to what we are following for years. This is in attempt of bringing changes to the final results of our investments.

You have listed different methods, but what do they give you? How do you use all this information?
Personally I, when seeing a new token, I start with investigating docs, ideas, team members, partnerships, community and tokenomics, of course. I just estimate the web-site, read what people say in their chats and look through documents. And usually when I see that idea is too complicated and unclear, I don’t invest.

Another way to judge the viability and authenticity of new coin is to take a dip and long look at the team supporting such coin. Do you see people with cacity and good reputation among the team members supporting such coin? Is there awareness ot such coin in cryptocurrency community and github comkunity!  IlDo such coin have a financial backing from investors in cryptocurrency and outside of cryptocurrency

I don't think that such exchange will be my only criteria when choosing coins to invest at, though I still don't do altcoin investment for now. CoinMarketCap provides more data that one can use as a criteria than just mainly the coin itself. Saying that a coin pumps is like a red flag for me to invest actually, as most likely that word will always derive from "pump and dump" scheme and that wouldn't be for long-term investment for sure. Hate to burst your bubble there, mate.

If you want to invest in a new project, then making the investment immediately after listing may be the worst idea. Either you should invest in the IPO, or make the investment once the prices are stabilized after the listing. In 99% of the cases, because of the hype surrounding the listing, the prices can fluctuate a lot during the initial few days. An example for this is Internet Computer (ICP). When it got listed, the prices were around $600 per coin. Those who invested at this level are now stuck with the coin, as the current exchange rate is $41 per coin.

 

Check the currency's total issuance, price trend and transaction volume.
Whether the currency can be found in mainstream exchanges, exchanges have more industry news and can better judge whether the proportion is good or bad.
Judging its degree of decentralization, the higher the degree of decentralization, the more long-term value it has.

I have literally worked with exchanges to increase volumes and attention of certain coins before. Thankfully 2 of those exchanges are gone now, it is sad that they are gone because they took people's money with them but at least they can't scam anyone else from now on, and I feel like a bad person for doing it but I was working on the coin side and not exchange side, which means that my job was only regarding our crypto currency and had nothing to do with overall exchange so I had no idea they would scam anyone, even people who worked in the company didn't know they would, it was just CEO that did it and maybe few others who knows.

There are "volume bots" everywhere, even in binance, all they do is increase the volume of the coin you want, they buy and sell from each other, pay a big fee for it, but at the end it looks like you have a big volume when you actually don't.

Projects fail even after listing - are you getting that? They get listed because they need to pay only. Exchanges just want the money and then one day when the token fails to have any movement for months, they will delist that token.

Who gained? The exchange. They got their fees and will again force the team to relist after taking another bribe.
Who lost? The investors. That is the truth in this market.

Oh you mean paid news? Majority of the niche crypto news sites are paid by the teams to get articles published otherwise these sites would not have enough money to keep their servers running and their employees paid.

Well if the WP is copy pasted it is an outright scam. But the properly written whitepapers back at one time were existing and even then many of them failed because of a lot of reasons.

Dont confuse a scam project with a failed project.

The traders were betting on the scam token because it's easily to be pumped and dumped. So many people are still in demand to get the profit as fast as they can and that's why they can still be trapped into the scam token. i have been seeing it so many times that if people already known if that's a scam token but they keep use it as a way to catch pump and dump token

How if we are looking at what exchanges they are listed? If it is on reputable exchanges such as at least Bithumb, Okex, Kucoin, and others moreover Binance, the coins may have bigger chances to survive and are also be worth investing in. However, we must also see the market condition and also how the trade or investors responds to the coins. Sometimes, many traders use the utility of new coins to have big profits after listing, and before dropping, they have sold for big profits. And sometimes, we must also see the trading volume and market caps whether many traders are in transactions or not.

In as much as I agree with every other point you made, I think the last point is irrelevant cus having a website start with https does not mean that the project is legit or scam, we never can really be able to differenciate between a scam or legit project by the way of https as this is generally encoded in every websites in this modern edge and time.
But what I do think is that the way to discover a good project is to take a look at the project itself, when I say look, I mean critical look, proper research, read the whitepaper and ask questions no matter how irrelevant the question seam, a good and legit team will have the patience to explain until you understand, this amongst others I think are ways to really know which project is legit and which is fake.

^ These are very accurate on how to judge newly project especially the number 3 mentioned above, in the first place, you should analyze the vision and use of the product and how long it will survive. There are too many things to consider before you will pick a new project and invest. However, I don't sometimes believe on the team, most likely some of them using not a real image as the team of the project, that is why you should have your own research regarding them because people will easily to attract and lure by those promotions.

This is all make sense mate, it is very hard to judge a project by just reading its whitepaper or get attracted by how easily the project get listed in ICO because any newly raised projects are aimed to done this impressively to attract people. But the total judgement of a project takes time I mean a successful token or coin can be said as successful on the improvement the project had made in the long run and also having a great dev team behind the project is also a big factor. OP points out a great factor to consider to screen a newly listed coin and its amazing.

Under most circumstances you just don't know. Whether a cryptocurrency is worth investing or not is something that you can essentially only find out by doing it. I personally think getting into crypto isn' a mistake, but getting into crypto too big right from the start is a mistake!

On a volatile market, its safe to invest on good coins because you already have a price history as you basis and if you’re going to invest on new project, then you’re totally clue less. Maybe, new projects with a good platform that was able to hit an exchange tells a great news, you just have to understand the project and see how it works maybe you’ll invest later on. I’d personally have my own personal standard on investing, exchange listing is one thing for me especially if its on the top exchange.

Community and team strength can define the project worth. Check project by some basic measures;
1: Team
2: Community.
3: Vision and Products.
4: Development Timeline.
5: Acception of Product in future.
6: Survey and analysis about Demand of Products.
7: Last but not the least Investment Approach.

More other factors are need to be focused but these are some those which are from my perspective.

Artificial Hype is too common now, Can't be trusted anyone, Even White Paper can not help you anyway except for the Vision but a Vision can't be true without efforts. ICO rankings are paid now.

It's very hard to judge a token by the whitepaper because it's easy to wrote some impressive stuff about how amazing the project is. It's also easy to get high rankings for an ICO, and it doesn't even involve paying money. Those websites work by rewarding detailed info, so a totally worthless project can get high rates easily. I'd rely on the team if it has famous people, and also on the exchanges where the coin is listed (if it's a good exchange, at least the team is putting money into that, and it will be possible to sell the token easily when needed). A closely related factor is trading volume. I'd wait for it to become significant enough to ensure that the tokens can always be sold. Come to think of it, all of this implies that some time is required to see how the coin performs initially, so it wouldn't be a completely newly listed coin anymore. But at least that would make it a safer investment.

Agreed but remember that even when the first day of trade and those coins could be traded with a very high ROI and that makes it looks like very risky to be used as investment. It's better waiting for the dump but i do believe any coins that already brought by exchange site especially binance has very big potential to be the major players in the crypto.

- Some of the new projects listed are actually pumped by the exchange's reputation system but through that to see the worthiness of these projects is honestly too difficult because this is also just the result of a reasonable marketing process, good brands will launch a successful opening day but then to keep customers coming back is about quality and reliability and to have a good experience, it's features, facilities and roles as well as care team. Many projects are rated one star after only one day of opening because of such problems

If it is listed on a large stock exchange, of course, the increase in market capitalization will increase. The new coins are actually fun to trade. the hype was created and the trade was still bustling.
but many choose top market assets for investment and also choose new coins for day trading. those who know the potential of the project will love the hype.

To judge whether a ratio is valuable and worth investing, it is necessary to analyze and judge the projects behind it.
Read its white paper carefully, analyze its project itself, prospects and technology, and see if there is plagiarism and whether the project is innovative.
Study the founding team to see if their previous projects are related to blockchain projects and if they have any successful experience.
Search the discussion about the project in the forum or website to see the evaluation of it.

See if you can go to the three major exchanges, because the currency information can be viewed on the exchange, the exchange will verify the token, and some junk coins can only be circulated on the trading platform built by themselves.
There are also news related to tokens, because some news will affect the price trend of the currency.
The white paper is just to understand the information, because the white paper also has plagiarism, and it can also be outsourced. It is not trustworthy.

It is difficult for a person to make an accurate assessment of a project because there are cases where:

1 - team members are real

2 - the whitepaper is real

3 - The project idea is also good

But the project fails and becomes a scam, in these cases (unbelievably there are many cases and few people talk about it) the project creators are not very active in the project development after they become rich with the project and of course people can no longer accuse them of scam

To judge whether it is worth buying, the white paper is the most important thing. The best way is to read the white paper. The white paper allows us to clearly understand the purpose and total amount of this token.
To understand the ranking and information of this coin, only by understanding can you know whether it is worth investing in and whether it has a future.
Or take a look at the page design of the official website of the token to see if the technology is excellent.

• Trading platform Whether the currency can be found on mainstream exchanges, the exchange will verify the relevant information of the currency. The rubbish coin will only circulate in the trading platform built by itself.
• white paper Learn about the currency’s issuance mechanism, equity distribution, total amount of tokens and long-term planning from the white paper, and see if it plagiarizes the content of other projects.
• Founding team and investment background The team that really wants to develop the project will deal with the problem seriously, and carry out publicity and maintenance.

listing on binance is the main reference that the coin is done seriously, considering we know that besides requiring large funds to list on binance, of course the coin has a clear target audience because it has a theme that many people need. no wonder when a project announced that it would be listing on binance its coin was immediately invaded by investors

if newly listed on the stock exchange. The first thing we see is what exchange the new token is traded on.
if it is directly listed on the top market exchange, I am sure that there must be a positive value from the new project.
but if it is listed on an exchange with small trades, it will require a more in-depth analysis to be sure.
because a new project that has been listed on the stock exchange may consist of a team that is not professional in developing the project.
For new tokens, the main analysis is the trading volume on the exchange. if it does have busy trading there is a possibility that the new asset can be good for the long term.

• White paper: Check whether there is plagiarism and whether the project is complete
• Team situation: whether the core members are public and whether they have experience
• Social community: watch the interaction between the team and fans in social groups such as Twitter or Facebook, and related forum discussions

That is true.
Listing in Binance may be the most expected by all projects.
But, for a new coin, they may start their coin or token in the middle top exchange.
I know that it is very risky moreover if the project is listed in non-reputable exchanges. that is why it is better to avoid this kind of token except we can really know how to utilize the chance to take profits from it.
If the token or coin has been listed in the middle exchanges, hopefully, they can have a much better trading volume at first. Due to the development, listing in other exchanges such as Okex, Kucoin, Bithumb, and other top exchanges will be also interesting.
And then, reaching Binance and also other tops exchanges, will be a great thing.
However, in this case, the project will be also more successful if after listing in the top coins or before it so, they can do or offer the best progress, continuity, and also further developments. If they have good and strong fundamentals, they will also have a good chance to be more successful.

That's very right. Some newly-listed coins are going for never-heard crypto exchanges, with very low trading volume. But definitely, if it is listed in Binance, we see it as a strong one. If the team can manage to list it in binance, then, they have pretty strong background why they surpassed binance requirements. Also, one important factor for me is their use case. Are there people using their app or services? Because if there is none, then think about its future.

Yeah,it wouldn't be significant if its just listed on a certain exchange that it isn't really that much known unless if its listed on Binance then that would be an another story on where majority of investors
would really be looking this to be that potential since its listed but those people would just simply enter when the dump happens.

because most of the time when a coin is recently listed then it would surely dump and that's the right time for buying time.You should be wise on when to get in

and also you should always research if the said coin does have potential or did really just dump and waiting up for forever for some recovery?

So what if the team in project hasn't joined any projects before? wouldn't it be more difficult to identify the team? Then partner is sometimes also manipulated by project. Maybe add little to see the products on offer

Partners plays a big role to attract more investors, if that new project connected to a good partner then that could be an indication of a good project. Additionally, I always look at the price chart of that new coins after a week since I don’t want to FOMO so I have to wait and see how the public works on that in the last 7 days. It’s too risky to invest on new project but if you do your assignment and your own research, you can have at least a good confidence to invest.

If it is about the newly listed coin, I personally will think twice about where it is listed. If it is on the big and reputable exchanges, I will prefer to also analyze the projects including their roadmap and of course their team. So far, we have seen so many newly listed coins. But they will drop drastically only after several days of listing. That is why it is important to consider the fundamentals of the coins themselves.

First of all, you should always start from the team. Information about the team and its previous projects should be open and complete, this is the first thing to study in order to understand in whose hands and under what leadership the project is located. As a second point, I would study partners and foundations.

On the number two point,  I will like to say that decentralisation is not done just by the team or the 'so call algorithm' that generate large supply of the coin without community participation and fairly distribution. If all the coin or token is minted or generated by the team of such coin or token alone,  such coin can not be said to be well decentalized!

I really do not judge them, I just do not invest into them at all. There is no point on investing into a coin that is barely even there, if it is listed for the first time ever there are so many things that could go wild, I do not even invest in their first month at all. Maybe after a month or so I could potentially do something about it, but usually almost every single I invested so far has been around for nearly 6 months or more and those are the most recent ones, considering nearly 80% of my portfolio is btc/eth/bnb that means all the "new" ones I have that are even older than 6 months are just under 5% of my portfolio so even they are not too much of a part in my calculations.

I honestly do not see the reward at jumping into a brand new coin, it just doesn't make sense to me, it is not really something huge that we could profit that easily, the risks are way too high.

Every new coins that listed on binance in 2019 are now so successful e.g matic and others, the thing is exchanges have a good role to play here if it's top exchange like binance then the project isn't a joke most especially if they raised Funds through binance, gate or Huobi

You can't know until the project experienced a bull run and then survive a bear market while the team had developed a clean product. I have watched some projects come and go even after being listed in an exchange. It's best to just wait and see the development of the project before investing otherwise just stick to investing in BTC.

We probably have seen all kinds of concepts already in blockchain so if it's not new, just move on.

Honestly, you can't simply judge the project if thas it is worth investing in or another nonsense project.
I give a conclusion to a particular project base on its market performance and its role. Though we usually think that once it was listed on reputable exchanges like Binance will have a better future. Well, it can be but we never know how this project become sustainable?

Judging wasn't made so fast but it takes time to do it. Like also we need to check LIQUIDITY, TRADING VOLUME, and DEVELOPER'S participation. These things are much needed if we are going to evaluate coins and this will give us some hints of what could possibly be their future.

Security standards are different from worthiness standards. Everything you describe is a method of choosing a token that is at least safe from fraud, manipulation, rugpull, and the like. If you are looking for worthiness, you have to look at its potential. That is, when you decide to invest, you agree and support the project's vision and mission and will hold the token for whatever time it is until the project's goals are achieved.

Investing in NFT is a pleasure. I have already tested how NFT works. Have you heard of Deedy Digital? Will specialize in NFT

I only invest in projects that are fairly mineable, have no premine and did no ICO, like 0xMR and RVN. That way the founders or VC can't dump on you or exit scam.

An MLM is a scam, however you put it. Whether they run a token to sell in exchange of investors money or not. It is a scam. Period. SO if you ever identify an MLM, you should immediately pull out and advice your friends to do the same too.

No idea what you mean by empty coin, but assuming you are trying to mean "vaporware", again the same, it is also a scam.

Altcoin, I presume? And whitepapers are NOT casually written. They are supposed to be written professionally. If not, then that is a red flag.

That is how the pyramid scheme runs and that is why they scam the new investors money to pay older investors and keep running it till they run out money to pay and then suddenly shut down.

The people running the project are to be publicly known and identified. If not, then it points to a shady operation. Remember that Satoshi remain anonymous but did not sell you some shitcoin or ask you to buy bitcoin, so a team remaining anon and Satoshi remaining anon are not same.

Speaking about projects that start like this, please note that 99% of the projects are failures from the start. So dont expect to use all your points to be able to pin point a needle in the haystack. It will not work but good luck trying to find that needle. Been watching the market since the inception of ICOs and I know things like this. But you will learn your lesson one day too.

Are you sure? The liquidity of those tokens were so small. Raven is the only worth to invest coin from your list but it already dumped again to the bottom.
Whatever it's mineable or non mineable crypto and these coins will always become pump and dump coin. We can't deny the fact just because it's mineable crypto.
IMO as long as people were choosing the reputable coins and they can't be rugpulled

Promise to only rise and not fall

Team leader is good

The code is not public

The project team is unreliable or obscure

The name of the coin is tacky

The coin-listing platform is very small, it is difficult to withdraw coins, and the transaction volume is extremely low
These may be deceptive. Do not believe.

Just invest in mineable cryptos with no dev wallet or premine. That way you can't be dumped on, exit scammed or rugpulled. Cryptos like BSOV, 0xMR, and Raven

All the requirements you mentioned are basic and you will find that many alternative currencies will meet them and increase, but is it worth the investment? So if anyone follows these requirements, they will end up losing money.
Or to ask more precisely, do we need all these new listing coins? Or need to create more? The answer is absolutely no.
If that currency does not have a unique feature, there is no need to invest in it, regardless of the size and capacity of the market for that currency.

Depends on type of "community".
There are community that are just for pure "pump and dump" stuffs, like you'll hear one of the groups saying "oh let's buy a lot so we can screw over these people trying to earn from it".
While in Bitcoin, the reason of why I invested, is because the community is chill. \

Look at the resumes of the core members, whether there is any fraud, whether the founders have successful experience, whether they have invested in the blockchain or have projects, but word-of-mouth alone is not enough. After all, there have been cases where big bosses supported but left after they withdrew from the pool.

It can be judged by its white paper, from the white paper to understand the role, use, total amount and long-term planning of the currency.
Through the progress of the project, the team's ability can be seen, and the relevant market can see the future potential of the project, market prospects and competitiveness in the market.

I never paid attention to any of that-what i do to the invested-coins-based on the rank occupied in-marketcap.

What I do-of course it produces maximum results-in crypto investments I don't use analysis-graphics-and so on-what I do is = buy when the market is burning and sell again when the market is fertile, it works, the time needed is quite 1-2 years-in the future.

The absence of fierce competition does not mean that the project is not good. It may be that the prospect of this project is not optimistic by most people, so too few players have entered.
Most white papers plan the team's work and list time points. We can see whether the team's work results are consistent with the plan.

In fact, the essence of investment currency is to invest in a project, so to judge whether a currency is valuable, what we need to do is to analyze and judge the project behind it, generally by looking at the project itself (white paper), project team and other auxiliary judgment methods.
Regarding the white paper, you can see if there are any similar project white papers, and roughly look at the content distribution of the white paper.
When reading the white paper, it is recommended to check the following points:
1. What is the purpose of this project? What problems or needs need to be solved?
2. To solve this problem, whether it is necessary to apply blockchain, that is, the necessity of applying blockchain. Compared with some traditional solutions, does the application of blockchain technology have outstanding advantages?
3. Whether the project itself is innovative
4. Are there any policy or regulatory risks? This problem not only occurs in countries that ban cryptocurrencies, but also in the world. This problem is also a potential risk faced by every project.

What do you think about this?

1 Alpha/MVP - The new listed coin must have developed at least an alpha or MVP. This can be used as a point to know what kind of product that will be used to give utility and usability for coin.

I see that if some people might use this as the main point to judge whether it's worth investing or not.

https://blockchair.com/bitcoin
u can  find out a lot of data of the project party on this website.Transaction volume, currency holding address, amount of funds in the mining pool, etc.

To my mind you have completely forgotten about marketing  campaigns, community, social media. Sometimes it happens that the project is really interesting, but there are only techies in the team, so people are just not aware of this new project. Moreover, the more new incoming people will be after you, the more the token's price will grow. So advertisement and hype is also very important.

The key is that even if the community has a strong project, few people know it in the initial stage.
How do we judge the value of a project when few people know and participate?
When it develops into a strong community, there is no need to judge, at least it proves that it has been recognized by many people.

Any investment is risky, so how should we distinguish between empty coin and MLM coin?
Aircoin is a white paper written casually by the project team, and the official website packs and collects money.
MLM tokens are mainly used to obtain reward tokens through pulling heads and offline multi-level development, or to obtain tokens by recharging members of different levels and purchasing virtual mining rights of different levels.
How do we know?
1. The attributes of the project itself: public chain currency, Token token
2. Token issuance method: does not rely on the issuance of a specific currency institution, and is generated through a large number of calculations based on a specific algorithm, which is a decentralized issuance method
3. Trading method: Digital currencies can be freely traded on exchanges. There will be multiple exchanges supporting transactions for the same currency, and coins can be deposited and withdrawn freely. At the same time, different people can conduct peer-to-peer transfers and transactions.
4. Implementation method: The token itself is an open source program and is maintained in the Github community. The open source code shows the parameters and methods of its total limit
5. Whether to provide a link to the source code: Generally, decentralized digital currencies will give a link to the source code in a prominent position on the official website. This is to show the operating mechanism of the currency system openly and transparently
6. Does the official website start with https: Generally, the official website and transaction URL of decentralized digital currencies start with https. The purpose of such websites is to protect users' data from being stolen illegally.
Do you have anything to add?