Rating sites like ICObench, kickico etc. all use different parameters in rating ICOs but the general ones that i know is that, they look at some of the parameters below:
1. The experience of the team members
2. the feasibility of the project's use case
3. The token economics
4. Established partnership with relevant companies
5. Any developed product already working
This together with other intricate details are what some of these ICO ratings consider when rating crypto projects.
These parameters are often manipulated because it has become a public secret if most of the ico rating websites receive payment to promote a project well. There is even one project that gets an almost perfect assessment but it turns out the development team is fake (using someone else's profile and edited in such a way). In my opinion, it is more effective to assess the quality of a project than the discussion process with several members here, there are many who are open, and are happy to provide information if there are projects that indicate scams in here. 1. The experience of the team members
2. the feasibility of the project's use case
3. The token economics
4. Established partnership with relevant companies
5. Any developed product already working
This together with other intricate details are what some of these ICO ratings consider when rating crypto projects.
