Topic: What are your criteria to assess an ICO? (Read 249 times)

i always try to look for a minimum viable product in a ICO first and then research the development team. see their past experience, if they really believe in it, their goals and so on.

There are many criteria by which I analyze new projects. But the most important criterion for me is his idea. If I like the idea, it's clear and simple, it's likely I'll be participating in this project.

Did you really just say whitepaper? You will get screwed before you even know it. Concentrate more on digging up the team and you will be fine, without forgetting to find out if there is a product.
Some times, I go as far as contacting some of the team personally even on skype to be very sure I got my investment in the right hands, and as long as you start giving me some questions and doubts, I start paving way. I cannot start boring myself with the whitepaper only to find out the team will not be able to pull it off or there is no product to even invest in.

First of all, I evaluate developers team. Secondly, I check preico phase. If preico is successful so ICO will be successful too

thanks you. I like your opinion

There are many similar topics on the forum. I go to the project site, I look at the idea (it's better to choose something that is related to energy, storage of information ...), I look at the team, the road map. The best is when there is already a working product.

Recently I met with a very interesting way of choosing promising ISO. The key is to monitor which projects are invested in successful venture capital funds that specialize in investing in blockchain start-ups.

Well for me, the very first thing that I look at an ICO is the concept of their project as to whether it solves real problems or creates an imaginary problem for it to solve. After that, if I somehow liked the concept, I then proceed to look at the developing team to make sure if they are experienced people in creating ICOs and are really good at what they do. Then, I look at the community it has supporting it and ask a few questions. And then, I proceed to reading the white paper to know their whole plan for the project. And lastly, I ask more about the things on the white paper to make things clearer for me so that I can be sure that my investments are in good hands.

Hope this helps you man, good luck.

Before I decide to assess an ICO first I will look at and read  at their white papers what are their goals in creating their project platforms how credible their ducuments as specified. I will do also a certain research about their projects. Because their some ICO also are scams. So its better to be meticulous before we assess an ICO.

1. strong team with experience in what they offer
2. whitepaper and other documents of company
3. social media
4. listing
5. value of investing in this project

Some of the most important thing  to consider when joining new project are; Roadmap, White paper, Team, and Vision

If I were you, I will take whitepaper as nothing these days. If you are on the lookout for whitepaper, you will get some smart scammers that would design one for you, write it pretty well and then you will then start wondering where you missed it eventually when you get scammed. Some have made scamming their office now and they will do all it takes to deceive people. For me, the team and the product is all I need, and every other thing is secondary.

In my list of criteria the first one that I do not ever miss is the team. If the team cannot do it for me based on their past achievements and based on digging them to be real, then there is really no reason for me to go further reading anything about the project, even though I always try to get a quick glimpse of the project first with the website. After that, I can then access the project and find if there is a product and the possibility of being a useful one.

Same here bro! Gone are the days when you will have to start digesting some whitepaper and expecting some huge gains only to end up in the hands of scammers. Anyone can design a good whitepaper by paying an English man, and then design a good road map and website, but I always ask if the team can do it for me, and if I have any doubts about the team, I would rather wait for a launch on exchange before deciding to buy. After all, these days, the prices on exchange even end up getting lower than ICO price anyway.

I think the most important thing to consider is the team member and see if they are god enough to make the coins high in the future.

Yeah, product and team will always come first for me as well. What is the point investing in an empty promise as that is what some ICOs always end up doing ?

As long as you can see a product or some code, then you should be able to access the team to see what they are capable of doing and if they are for real. If a team does not look like some that can do the job or just some school boys looking to make some quick cash, I always stay away. I am investing in a project with future not promises.

We look at the project that we will follow and see, and before that, we see the first whitepaper that must be in every ICO project we see first read so that we are not wrong for ICO project because For ICO I see if ICO project is good Then it will be successful

I think it's difficult to identify a truly potential ICO. Those scammers out there, they make up everything, from development team to the whitepaper or roadmap. They even build a website and a support team to take our money 

These days scammers and theft disguises themselves to be a legit project, you can't just stop assessing an ICO because they have a fancy whitepaper, website, a legit look-alike team member and a responsive support during the pre-sale and the actual crowdsale, check their whitepaper if they are developing a believable and a working products or platform, don't just fall from their promotions and bonuses there's a case that the actual release from the exchange is cheaper from the deal, check the background and the authenticity of the team member mostly the founder you must validate their identity if they are a real person, be cautious as anyone can create their own ICO.

Although the background of the development team is important to assess but the project concept is still the most important thing to consider as many new development teams we do not know so is it possible to consider because we are also new people here

White paper and technical route and open source code, this is a new ICO project, I care about three factors.
From the white paper and the technical route, we can find out whether the project has the potential, and the open source code can tell whether the technical team of this project has the ability to realize it.

I think, it is:
1. The team of developers
2. Support and comunication
3. Whitelist
4. Cap
5. Idea

I consider a lot of things. E.g
1 What it is created for, I.e is it solving a real life problem
2 is there a working prototype for the project.
3 the team. Whether it has a good number of hallstars
4 the hard cap

I only research projects that experts has rated. I compare rating of different expert and choose the top rated. At least with a rating of 50% and above. I most times confirm the information  then check the idea or product, consider the hardcap, bonuses level (i prefer no bonuses to 10% bonuses), percentage sold at presale and its bonuses.

It has to be something that is of interest for me, like for example, artificial intelligence, than i go and check the team bacground and see if the project is legit, after that i try to see how would that act in this market and would it be possible to have some bright future

I fully agree with DmitriySar - as long as I believe in their idea and the whitepaper looks not copied or strange I think about investing.

I had similar query when starting out and got an answer for starting out and the credit goes to the original replier:


If you are curious the thread is at https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/altcoin-and-investment-2964644

1. Use case of the product. If it serves a purpose that will stand the tests of time it is something to consider. A token used as loyalty reward points for a antique store is less capable of sustaining it's longevity than a coin that has high TPS that uses a new and further decentralized system for proof.

2. Validation of Team and criteria of WP. Google the names. Reverse image search every member, check linkedin background. Check if WP is plagiarized or even coherent (Incomprehensible calculations with no explanations / Typos)

3. Soft Cap and Hard Cap, Are they reasonable according to the goals of the project? What are the percentages for allocated funds and what is the total supply? etc.

4. Is foul play involved in PR and marketing? This is arbitrary but still useful information. For instance is their social media inflated with fake users and comments and so on.

5. Communication efforts, Are the developers engaging with the community? Do they respond with answers to every speculative question or ignore it?
(It's super awesome to see lead devs interact with the community in excitement, even to those who doubt - Vitalik Buterin is a good example of that)

6. Roadmap, is it promising? is there an alpha already or beta? What are the teams deadlines etc.

All together these are my main focus points, there are a few other subtle intricacies i may have forgot to brush over.

I check the nature of their project.check their Twitter handle .I check their telegram chat and also check them on Linkedin and also check them on Facebook . I will see people reaction and action on these channel.I will also look at their partners and advicers/partnership integrity.

It is not a easy to predict in potential ICO. Because so many scam projects are available in the market so you must read the white paper and Roadmap of the project then finally analyse the developing team. But already many peoples are ask the same question so you should check properly you can understand everything in the ICO related doughts.

1. The idea of the project should solve real problems.
2. A team of people with experience and reputation, live contacts, an opportunity to talk with the team
3. Presence of finished product.
4. compliance of information in all documents, clear description of the project, no suspicious information when verifying the domain

It must be long term project and team must be experienced and knew how to use the money they raise. They also should be ethical but hard to assess these criteria

there are many things to consider before you invest in ICO and one of them is about who formed the ICO team and you have to do detailed research about the team in the ICO program. after that you have to listen to your conscience because smart Investors will learn to trust their instincts. I think you should do it so that you have the ability naturally as an investor and of course you will become an Intelligent Investor and avoid ICO scams.

It's a difficult question. As for me I prefer read a lot about team and advisors and their previous work, also project must be popular and simple to understand, beest way if project already have beta version of soft that I can chek out. After that I asked some friend about it and decide what to do. But after do all of this things you can be scammed, always remember about risks.

I read the ICOs white paper and all about the project's details in there. I a lso check if the team is compose of real people in their respective position, the developer, founder, marketing etc. The total supply and the prjects plan in the ICO. Is the project consist of unique products or has potential in the blockchain world to develop? That's the things I consider before joining the ICO.

Experienced development teams are highly likely to create successful ICOs, and with the right project plan, ICO may be a success,
This question is asked a lot of people in this forum,
ICOs that have potential future project management teams have in-depth knowledge, a clear roadmap, and on the website should show a clear capital mobilization.

Too many threads have already dealt with this topic, but for your benefit i would say apart from all the main points checked by you, like dev team, vision, project usefulness, name etc, which will all be quoted herein, every ico needs equal and individual attention and research, one that surpasses the safety net set by everyone.

My basic guides:
1. Relevance of the project.
2. The team behind.
3. The community support.

There are ICO review teams out there, you may also start there.

In my opinion, this is not enough to judge a potential ICO. I think we should analyze many aspects of the project. There are a lot of investors pointing to youtube to choose an ICO project, or you can go to potential ICO project review sites so that they can choose the right project.

First of all im looking for information on special sites like icobench and look at rate, and then i make the desition invest or not.

A thoroughly written whitepaper is something that each ICO must possess. Good goals and plans are something that each participant and investor must study if he/her wants to actually gain profit and not with the loss if developers run in the middle of the campaign with the invested money.
I personally had some fail investment at the start of my joining to the market.
I didn't make enough research and I actually followed bigger investors which were probably in cooperation with the developers.
From that day of my loss, I am never doing the same mistake. If you don't take enough of your time to study the project better don't invest!

I mainly look at the project layout of the ICO and the development team, an experienced development team has a high possibility of creating a successful ICO, and with a proper project plan, the ICO might just be a success.

For an ICO i look into the product the project brings into the market, is the product addressing any particular problem existing in the market or does it add any value in the market, if it does then the project is worth having a look at

This question a lot of people ask on this forum. But I also offer some basic evaluation criteria as follows: First you analyze the ICO's products that have potential in the future, the project management team has in-depth knowledge, clear roadmap, and on the web site must show a clear capital mobilization. Join the group Telegram or facebook to see the opinions of other members.

The background of the team and the state of the product (if any) are obviously two of the major factors for consideration.

Hello guys 
What convinces you to join a brand new project? I suppose that this is the wonders of many investors, so why don't we share our opinions in this topic?
Thanks