Topic: Scoring coins on Tech, Community, Devs, Name and Market Cap (Read 689 times)
The developer column on Coingecko is really cool!!! And speaks volumes!
Awesome!!! Wow, that was quick :-D Oh! And look... all the usual suspects...
I wish they included technical analysis. There are few top coins that would lose ground on lack of technical merit.
Hi mate, this is Bobby, co-founder of CoinGecko. Thanks for informing OP of our website. Really appreciate the support that you provide!
Our original vision started out to also do technical evaluation of the innovation behind each coin. We had an initial version of our matrix calculation ranking innovation but we found that this exercise becomes very subjective because what is important and innovative to one coin community might be described as a pure useless feature by another coin community. We decided to just focus on objective metrics that are quantifiable and verifiable to remove any such debate behind our partiality.
We are always looking for feedback and suggestions to improving CoinGecko. If you have any comments on how we can improve, do drop me a PM or email me at [email protected]. Thanks!
Especially if you put market cap in there instead of liquidity (volume) which is way more important.
Yes! ^^^^ Volume is critical and should not be overlooked.
Simplifying information into arbitrary numbers is a terrible idea imo.
Especially if you put market cap in there instead of liquidity (volume) which is way more important.
Also, the name being as important as the tech (copy paste coin or not) doesn't make much sense either.
Especially if you put market cap in there instead of liquidity (volume) which is way more important.
Also, the name being as important as the tech (copy paste coin or not) doesn't make much sense either.
no much difference in http://coinmarketcap.com/. The top coins are always involed with much efforts of dev's participation.
Awesome!!! Wow, that was quick :-D Oh! And look... all the usual suspects...
I wish they included technical analysis. There are few top coins that would lose ground on lack of technical merit.
Awesome!!! Wow, that was quick :-D Oh! And look... all the usual suspects...
...It's kind of the obvious thing to do. Fund someone to do some real reasearch on all coins, and score them according to some useful criteria.
But before I do it, I'm sure it's been done before. Anybody seen efforts like these?
For example, just a quick unvalidated score for Bitcoin, out of 5:
Tech: 3
Devs: 5
Community: 5
Market Cap: 5
Name: 4
Overall: 4.4
Tech: The technology behind it. Is it sound, well understood and useful? Does it do what it says it does?
Devs: Are the developers seasoned? Have they been working on this for several years? Do they work on other projects, currently? (bad) Have they worked on many other projects in the past? (good) How are they funded and motivated?
Community: Is the currency known and do enough trusted individuals use and actively promote it? (From the perspective of a few non-computer Joe-Averages on the street!)
Market Cap: Is there enough money in it?
Name: If you asked 100 random people if they liked the name and if it explained sufficiently well what it is, would most of them respond yes, or no?
To overcome a scoring bias and be of actual use, it needs to be done properly and in a wide enough audience, though. But it needs to be concise enough to be of use.
So has anyone seen such efforts? Any ideas to improve such an effort?
But before I do it, I'm sure it's been done before. Anybody seen efforts like these?
For example, just a quick unvalidated score for Bitcoin, out of 5:
Tech: 3
Devs: 5
Community: 5
Market Cap: 5
Name: 4
Overall: 4.4
Tech: The technology behind it. Is it sound, well understood and useful? Does it do what it says it does?
Devs: Are the developers seasoned? Have they been working on this for several years? Do they work on other projects, currently? (bad) Have they worked on many other projects in the past? (good) How are they funded and motivated?
Community: Is the currency known and do enough trusted individuals use and actively promote it? (From the perspective of a few non-computer Joe-Averages on the street!)
Market Cap: Is there enough money in it?
Name: If you asked 100 random people if they liked the name and if it explained sufficiently well what it is, would most of them respond yes, or no?
To overcome a scoring bias and be of actual use, it needs to be done properly and in a wide enough audience, though. But it needs to be concise enough to be of use.
So has anyone seen such efforts? Any ideas to improve such an effort?
Jump to: