Bitcoin Forum

Steps to evaluate a good ICO:
1 Overall rating (overview)
2 main page
3 Power Forum (Forum)
4 Transaction Graph (Chart)
5 Trading volume (volume) 24h
6 Scale of investment capital (Market Cap)
7 Price rate
8 Papers proving ... (POS, POW, DPOS)
9 Current Supply (Current Offer)
10 Total supply (Total supply)
11 time a block (s)
12 Master / Supper / Full buttons
13 Mining / Ritual / Havest / Reward
Section / block
15 Budget for finance
16 development teams (development team)
The Elements
18 smart contracts
19 Reward mechanism (Reward)
MultiSig
21 Transaction Fee (Fee)
22 Block size (Blocksize);
23 Purse Purse (wallet)
24 Send Message (Private Message)
25 Inflation (Inflation)
26 Compare crypto with industry
27 WhitePaper
28 Path clearly visible
29 live support (slack, tele)
30 Youtube channels
Social Network (FB, steemit)
32 Twitter channels
33 Blockchain Explorer
34 fully hidden
35 new blockchain / new technology
36 Testnet
37 payment utilities
38 Practical applications
39 Example Name (Alias)
And through the 39 criteria above, I choose AION, ICON, NEO, WANCHAIN, BITDGREE, CURRENT !!

wow it's kinda hard for me to choose with those variables. if i use that criteria to join bounty airdrop, i think i will late by months already after the airdrop no longer available.

There are few things, which you should take into consideration, while deciding, whether to invest your money or not:

1. Description of the project
2. The way tokens are being distributed
3.Business medel
4.Roadmap. How long? Which steps and stages?
5.The team per se
6. Media channels, the way they communicate with the audience
7.Investors. A popular fund, which believes in the ICO - a good sign!
8.ICO listing.
9.Detailed whitepaper
10.Smart contracts

I pay most of my attention to the team members and their abilioty.

From the whole list of OP's catalog, number 10 and 35 are what I look out for first before any other criteria. 35 is very important and it indicates that the team is ready to see there coin through. So, investing with a team that has come up with new technology, maybe by way of separate wallet etc, will make me be optimistic about the coin because they would want to make a name too. I rather dine with such team.

I think idea, team, whitepaper, MVP (https://cryptodetail.com/most-valuable-indicators-potentially-profitable-ico), marketing

However, most of the lists you have listed have been altcoin, which can be traded directly on the exchange.
And many ICO projects use POW mechanism, do not need mining. So there are a lot of things that are not necessary in the back, there is not so much information in the ICO phase.

1. Detailed whitepaper
2. ICO listing
3. The team
4. Investors
5. Roadmap

They are very good but for me I would focus on the team mambers and their history to see if they are able to make it good.

These criteria are all important. The most significant criterion is the team and advisors. The project can be shit but can collect hard cap. There are many examples: EOS, Throne and more. Ilon Mask sold black caps and flamethrowers or how the stars create their own clothing lines. In addition to the team there are many important criteria, but the team is number 1.

These criteria's are very important, but it would take up so much of your time OP, by the time you had decided the ICO is already finished. LOL I guess you need to look on KEY Factors of successful ICO's which are Team, Product, and Community.

It is a great list,  but if I always checked on every step, I'd always be late for token sales ;D it is all good,  but there's no need to do So much research.  I can go with max ten of them.

you poor folks there is no way you will succeed with this bullshit, next successful ico will be the currency of your local community that pays for people that baked bread  ::)

What you write is very complicated and takes a long time, tips from me to find the legit ico is to read the white paper, whether they have a product that already works or not, that's all.

I think you are careful enough and you can earn enough money with the ones yuou choose.

ICO is just a stage of coin's development, then it becomes another coin in the list among many. I believe people are choosing icos BEFORE the token/coin distribution, since later nobody cares how the coin got released. That is why some of your points don't make much sense. 5, 6 can't be known during ico stage as the coin is not traded yet. Oh, and you say you choose NEO - well, the coin did have an ico campaign, but it was a long time ago, whereas now it is just available on exchanges.

The list is comprehensive and a very good check.

For me, the best criteria is how strong the community is. If there is a telegram community with active members more than 5000 people it is a very good sign. Active ICOs also give regular feedback to community and join important crypto meetings, conferences. Secondly, the transparency of the team members and their activity is a must.

Firstly I wanted to say everything what I'm thinking of that kind of people who is not using search and breeding the hundreds of same topics but then I saw your table 1-39. Well, what can I say? Pretty nice table. We should link all that stone-headed fulls to that thread.

I suppose there are too many criteria... I believe there must be white paper (and of course, thoroughly examine it), and it is necessary to "test" the development team whether they are real...

These are criteria on checking if the ICO is good, well. Today everything in the internet can be faked because scammers and bogus individual are now smarter than the legitimate ICOs.
And one thing, AION, ICON, NEO, WANCHAIN, BITDGREE, Current are not ICOs anymore, they're called altcoins today.
Choosing good ICOs through this guide are nothing because in y own experiences, Telegram Channel communities can tell a lot of differences. There are ICOs that has no social communities, stay away from them.

I think this post is much simpler to understand and choose the kind and determine a good ICO I need to add again,. if you want to choose a good ICO see their activities in promoting their projects usually if they are active in attending events in various cripto meetings there they can be rated as a good ICO

There sure too many criteria, Indeed.
But one of the strength of an ICO or a blockchain project is their social community especially telegram channel communities because active members can really do a lot of differences. When you bump into their communities, you could tell that admin and active members are responsive and all your queries are answered.
There are ICOs that has those good criteria lists but their Telegram Channel are terrible, stay away from them.

To determine a worthy ICO, you always need to understand that ICOs are considered high-reward but also high-risk investment ventures; therefore it’s required to consider some very important aspects before investing. Let’s look into the main keys to pay attention to.

✅  First of all, ask yourself: Does the project need to be done on Blockchain? Is it really necessary to create a new cryptocurrency for its work? If there’s a real need to do everything on Blockchain and it hasn’t been started solely for the purpose to stay on trend, then this idea is definitely worth reviewing.

✅  Find out as much information as you can about the team. Is the team approachable? It means that they answer questions in a timely manner and are taking feedback and giving updates on progress in all details.

✅ Decide whether the project has a reachable roadmap and well-developed future plans.

✅ Consider whether the tokens will have any value after the ICO.

✅  Keep an eye on all ICO presentations in mass media and listen to what other people think.

✅ Is the website solid and well-designed? Keep this in mind, because websites represent the company’s face before potential investors.

1. Description of the project
2. The team
3. Advisors
4. The way tokens are being distributed
3. Business model
4. Roadmap
6. Investors. A popular fund, which believes in the ICO - a good sign!
8. ICO listing.
9. Detailed whitepaper

Pretty a long list.  You may be late for a token sale while you are going through all these points  ;D it is a good theoretical base,  but in practice people usually go with around 30% of what you've mentioned.

The list is cool, but it's too long for evaluation of every ico project. It is too time-consuming. Other things just can't be known during the ico stage. There's no market capitalization, price, trading volume and transaction graph at that time. Some points from the list are rather hard to understand, like 28, people can disagree on such matters. I would say that the most important things are good project description, minimum competitors in that sphere, nice investors and interest of crypto community (lot's of pages in ann thread, thousands of subscribers in social networks.

Generally speaking, I only care about the technical team of the ICO project and the code base of the white paper and gtihub. If these are all excellent, then I will choose to invest.

I first look at the development team, the website (in my opinion on the personal site you can immediately see whether it is worth taking on the company) and of course white paper.

ICOs may seem as perfect opportunity for those who wish to start a new business without any loans from banks. But as an investor I would not trust too much to ICOs, coz the time proved that the most of them are simply scam and not effective. On the government's place I would put such projects under control and that would safe a lot of people from being cheated.

First time you have to see how much rating is given on the ICO, the greater the score means the ICO is good. The second is a clear and purposeful in them white paper and allows to help our ease in terms of new things and innovations. Third note the official website, there is usually written in detail related to the details of an ICO is running, such as price per token, duration token sale etc. Then also the popularity in social media such as the number of likes and followers also indicate that the ICO is already known by many people. It's in my personal opinion and that's all I know.

A good ico has several indications, not just one so if you want to see it see it and judge it in an objective perspective moreover do not rely on others opinions rather than your owns and judge each term including the team, the invested amount , the roadmap, the core technology , and the establishment, the support from other coins whether they are using any others blockchain.

You do not need to give too many indicators, I think you should focus on the development team penny, whitepaper, roadmap, telegram ... And you check the amount of traffic poured to that country's website, every day How many people visit that ICO project site? These are the deciding factors of a potential ICO project.

First of all, see what first impression the project does.Hearing about that interesting project and entering their site for the first time is very important. I know that looks are not everything, but when the design of the site is quite poor and sloppy it tells something about developers and we don't want to invest in an unprofessional project that won't succeed. Then check if the project has already gathered some amount of people backing it. Projects often set up their reddit pages or chats and blogs, check out if there is any noise going on there that indicates that this project is not dead. The more users already support it, the more probable it is to succeed. People are the one creating demand and setting the market prices.

A good indication of a bad ico may take you away from a disastrous investment, you may want to notice that after how much time of the ico are the companies giving coins to the investors and what is their predicted rate of return and how much time will it take to get a return on investment, these are all correlated.

The best way to analyze and distinguish between a good ICO and a bad ICO is the whitepaper, the whitepaper is a document that gives every detail required to judge the initial coin offering before making n investment, given that you have analyzed the information presented, there is a less likely chance that you will make a wrong investment.

If you do not have any experience of investing, then in order to invest money for the first time and not make a mistake, you'd better consult with someone who has good investment experience.

I have got to agree that you have done a hell lot of struggle for just choosing a best ICO. But I think even if you go with choosing such things. You might still end up in problem. In this era to technology there is really nothing true when it comes to facts and figures. So only thing as per me which matters the most for an ICO today is the utility of the token. That is the only thing which determines its future. This is why I have my personal favourite VLB token which provides utility of giving blockchain solutions for car servicing.

It is very difficult to choose a project or ico is really good because in addition there are many conditions ico market is also very bad of course this will make a lot of people think not to invest at all or do trading and it is more difficult for us in choosing a project or ico which one will succeed and give us an advantage

If you run the full list you will never find a good ICO that suits all your requisites and it would not make sense to spend all that time trying to find out if it is good or not because things change on the go anyway.

If you take all your criteria into account, I would still not choose any project. I mainly look at the development team for their roadmap and the innovations that they are ready to present to us, well, I give a little time and then I finally decide.

I think, that here we have to much qualities of good ICO. To determine good ICO you just need lke the idea of project, this project need to have good team and good roadmap. It is all.

I personally give a nig attension to the whitepaper, the project it self and not lastly i search for team ratings, their successes and so on

I agree with you. The team, not idea, can realize global project and become successful. But in our time it is harder and harder to find such experienced members in team. Also there are such numbers of fake profiles that you don’t know whom to trust.

Whitepaper is an important factor which most of us Kiss out by those shady marketing tactics it's really important to read whitepaper and also I would personally check if implementation of the project in real life can be used everyday or not then I select ICO.

almost all this can have dull clones. This does not mean that the project is good. Innovations are needed

I think Amon ico can fit into a solid one too! Yes, the facts you gave are good and sure will help. Amon is clear and has a short, doable roadmap as well. https://amon.tech/

If you want to increase your chances of distinguishing between a good ICO and a bad ICO and you are in a dilemma the good thing to do for an amateur investor is to follow the footsteps who have already mastered through this process, this may happen by seeing the expert opinions about the ICOs

ICO is for ICO now, there are many poeple who make ICO specially and they will know our criteria if there is, then they assembly line product ICO to raise money, so I think we should not support ICO now, especially those who claim a high hard camp

I think that really good ICO should be interesting, safe and promising. That's why I want to recommend you to pay attention on the project Red Lanterns. I'm sure this project can surprised you! Read more here https://[Suspicious link removed]/RddguE .

At present, I will not choose to invest in any project, because any ICO project is only hype at this stage.
So it's not rational to invest in ICO.

I use ICO Spreadsheet, that contain reviews of several "influential" people to narrow my search down. I then visit the websites on my own and look at the metrics, these reviewers provide. If a team for example has 8.5 of 10 points by more than 10 reviewers it probably means the team isnt that bad. Most of them do extensive research, and show their work publicly. I don't have the time to look into every whitepaper and research a single project for 3 weeks. People now may say:" blabla not enough research blabla", but let me say you this:

Projects I invested in, by using third party analysts, spreadsheets, youtube and website reviews.

Tron: invested in it shortly after the ico at 0.0021 usd. (Still massive profit, even though people hate it)
ICON: Invested 2.5k at 0.11usd
Vibehub: (Look into it, if you dont believe me) invested lunch money of 60usd and sold it for 8000Usd
Enjin: invested at 0.03 cents + presale bonus and sold at 30cents
Matrix AI: We will see where this goes :)
and a few others....

Everyone that tells me, my research was not good enough, because I reviewed 3 or more projects a day through various sources, should reconsider what they are talking about. I quit my job last year and still have more than enough to not think about employment for the next 20 years. Almost anyone has an opinion. The bad thing about is if you start listening to people that haven't achieved anything for themselves.

And another tip for you: If you are planning to invest in this market, don't try to catch a falling knive. It is fine to buy little buy little on the way down, but you should use the majority of your budget, when the markets starts to recover (not everything of course).

Projects to watch out for:

- NEO, Cardano, Eso, ICON, Wanchain, Zilliqa.

Spreadsheets I use to discover new ICOs

TGO Network       
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1N8mI7JNIl1ZpAFebr0EkURoV0w1UQbDvB-FZ2qdISgs/edit#gid=1739360299

ZAZ
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1O9l9IfMHju3MKsE6WVuQ4N3RETl-ewaxM9s0s5Znikk/edit#gid=297480250

TITAN RESARCH
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Ja83ZCDDOgNXNYatD5w-2grA8IENuSwGjtSHWOG247E

I also recommend to join each of these telegram groups and to search others on your own, because I found quite a few projects, while reading the discussions in these groups.

Every ICO is subject to evaluation based on four big criterias: team evaluation, product evaluation, token economics, and business evaluation. Each criteria contains several sub-criterias, with a variable importance degree in the overall score.
Rating is done on each sub-criteria with a score between 1 and 5. Score of 1 being the worst rating, and score of 5 being an exceptional rating.
An overall average is calculated taking each criteria and sub-criteria into account.
Criterias have a variable degree of importance in the overall score and are calculated as follows

There are so many factors ofcourse but team and advisors, quantity of people following them, size of hard cap and distribution of tokens are the major factors that i can say in the beginning.

I have merited for posting this, honestly I only have 5 points in picking the right ICO to invest but you have covered almost everything I will add this pointer when picking the right ICO to invest, people are lost when picking the right one it's important that you do have criteria.

Not all crypto currencies are going to go up in value.
You need to be mercenary with some of them. That is to say, shorter term trades if a situation changes about a cryptos competitive edge or unforeseen circumstances.

Yes you're right. Having a good team and a good roadmap is one of the basis that the campaign has a potential for us to consider that it is a good ICO.

very well that you created this list.in my opinion it is very useful and in addition incredibly will help other people to learn to choose excellent projects

There are a couple of methods that should be used to check even during the campaign. Such as checking ICO’s wallet address . If after some time there is absolutely nothing there, and on the site other information, then this is definitely a scam.

You should check out this video that explains how to do research quickly and efficiently:

https://bestcrypto.tv/414/how-to-quickly-research-crypto-projects/

This is probably the largest list of all the criteria I’ve ever seen and I think  to check everything on this list will be necessary to spend more than one week.

I think that it is worth looking for information about ICO in social networks. Many consider this not a reliable source, but there often you can find important feedback.

This is a very extensive list which could come in handy if you have enough founds only for 1 ICO but have found 3-4 that you like.
For me the 3 key criteria are whitepaper, product and team.

I like this list, there's even more of what I usually use when choosing a coin. But even with such a check, you can’t be completely sure that the project is not a scam.

There are top 5 values you should consider before investing: Project idea, Technology, Team, Community, Investment potential.

Good list, thanks for compiling and sharing.

For me :

Website
Whitepaper
Developer
The Project
Manager

Five of them are my first priorities before i join and participate in an ICO, if those 5 are convincing enough, then i will join in that ICO.

If I have a choice of ISO, there are several factors why I am either interested in this project or not. 1 This is a team. 2 is documentation 3 social networks and that there is about this project 4 And also who are already investors

The list looks reliable but quite time consuming. I would say I do about a quarter of these checks

1. Know the people behind them
2. Go for disruptive concepts
3. Understand the target market
4. Evaluate the technology
5. Nitpick the white paper
6. Know what the coins are for

I always chose the dev team. After all they serve as the backbone of the project.
I always have a dev team whom I trust, and with that I follow their projects and participate in it.
Another thing, I always check for their target market. If the target market may not be that priority of the market, then maybe I won't join in.

I think it's very hard to analyze like that but it has sense. The main criteria you have to admit are idea, team, technology and will be that project useful. Even the team is not so important because when the idea will be popular then they can hire top developers and finish the idea.
The market of crypto is so unpredictable that even the good idea, good ICO etc could not be done because of many reasons.

1. Investors
2. Trading volume
3. Price rate
4. Whitepaper

1. Team: Do they have a solid team or just Randy from Idaho in his basement?
2. Technology: Is their technology solid, or atleast, could their future technology be unique?
3. Timeline: Is this company going to take 5 years to launch, or is it in the near future?

product based 

1.Team Composition-especially the development team and the advisory board. Look up each team member for relevant experience.
             2.Stage of the project and VC investments-Evaluate the stage of the project.Does it only have  a whitepaper? A beta version? Is there a launched product with limited functionality?VCs (venture capital) tend to invest and support projects from early stages. Look for this information usually on the main page of the project’s website.
            3.Community and Media
            4.Bitcointalk.org Thread- Bitcointalk is the biggest forum for Bitcoin and crypto related issues. It is strongly recommended that you read the messages carefully. Investor’s concerns will be answered  in this thread.
            5.Unlimited / Hard cap
            6.What do they need the token for? Is the blockchain necessary?
            7.Token distribution – when and how
            8.Quality of the code
            9.Evaluating the Whitepaper
            10.The Bottom Line-t is key to investigate and read as much information as possible and write down all the important aspects, positive and negative, before making an investment decision.
 

I pay most attention to the supply of the tokens, ICO price, and the team ability.
On these criteria's i select the ICO.

No one really follows all this criteria when it comes to choosing a good ICO to invest in, it is however important to consider the token metrics, the team, the pre-ico progress and also if it has any really reasonable real life use .
Also a patnership with existing projects can be deceiving so you have to be careful.

The list give by OP is almost complete. We have to check all that details to be able to determine if the project is quite good to be successful in the future. Though the assurance is not 100% when all the criterias were met. That is my suggestion, what are the normal values or data of every criteria or what are the things we should know about every criteria? As for me, I focused on the whitepaper and to the development team. If the two do not passed on my evaluation, I will not check the rest on the list.

This time it's a little bit different to determine which is the best one and we can start it from determine where the ico create its own ICO, I meant about where exchange site that will have made the IEO for that ICO.I thought that that's enough to only use a single indicator like that right now.

I see a kind of promotion at the end of OP's post  ;D, but actually it is ok, we must see carefully to pick ICO because it will affect on our money when we make investment in it. And usually ICO maybe at least have very active developers and do their progress according their roadmap.

It's much better if you're going to emphasize or expand what's on your list like explaining them one by one just like "youtube channels" what's with that? not because they have a youtube channel they're a good ICO it much better if you're going to explain like "they should have youtube channel which gives detailed information about the project and how it works and how it solves the existing problem"

Lastly, It's really irritating to see users who doesn't know how to use ~snip~ it's really irritating to eyes. There are some high rank members who doesn't know how to use it please visit this: THIS IS HOW TO USE SNIP UNCULTURED SWINES (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5095740.msg49168078#msg49168078)

Yes, we must always be vigilant and more careful before investing in an ICO project, making sure that the entire project has a good work map. besides that we also have to see how the team experiences before managing the project that they want to develop, if they have good experience of course the project can also run well.

I actually help in promoting AION and Bitdegree. Believe me you don't need to look too deep before you know a project will have good prospects. Nearly all the projects we have this days are imitation of already existing ones. Good projects are solidly motivated probably because of idea behind them. Bitdegree is still doing great and if not because of the high volatility of the crypto, it would have been one of the top altcoin. Amon is still another great project. Although, the team are having a challenge in getting all the licenses required but I'm very optimistic it will make top list one day

1. Always go through the project’s white paper
2. Team's qualification
3. Business model and future development
4. Open cap or Hard cap

Now, It's a time of IEO While Initial Exchange Offering was present in 2017, it was overshadowed by the Initial Coin offerings. But with problems arising and no regulatory clarity on initial coin offerings, Initial Exchange Offerings have taken the front seat. Now Ieo takes a place of ico's because it is more safer and trustable than Ico's. https://tokensale.moozicore.com/

it is a very good list, but not all bounty hunters can do that, because there are very many bounty campaign programs scattered, so most bounty hunters don't have time to check one by one, and that is also the reason for the many bounty hunters who still hit by a bounty scam trap

You stated a good point in the way to go when selecting good ICO as there will be a reason every project to be launch but ICO used to be good back then and it has turn to scam portal now for crypto and why many prefer using their funds on trading or IEO which is more secure and has no issue with listing.

extensive network, partnership with bona fide agencies, solid teams, high hype, and good marketing (advertising on large platforms). That is one of the best criteria, in my opinion. The seriousness of the project can be seen from the marketing strategy and cooperation carried out with various competent parties.

Perhaps, we are hard to see it in a package instead of seeing them more on scamming activities. But I saw the market turns into good by now, it eventually changing its course for new environmental features where we could see more legit projects than of the fake ones.
It is just have to exert some effort in finding those projects that we could a reliable market demand not just today but looking it forward in the future.

Partnership is important for a new project to succeed. In addition to partnerships with large companies, the solidity of developer teams is also an important part of the success of a new project. Partnertship with large companies will provide a perspective on the business that is happening now and also for the development of a project

Good work map, and maybe a lot of things that can make it plus point need to research by investors. I mean sometime with good roadmap plan, some developers not too able to realize the plans that are on their roadmap. And then the coins not improved.

I guess, we need to talk about IEO not ICO, but certain rules should be used here, some criteria must be taken into account. As IEO are checked by the exchanges, I guess, you need to pay attention to the product.

If you believe that it will be interesting to people and has a good future, you can invest in the project. Nevertheless, trading for me is the better choice still.

That's a good thing, you have many criteria for choosing a good ICO. Everyone must have their own way of choosing good ICO. For me personally, I will focus more on who the team behind, read the whitepaper and roadmap, and analyze the possibilities that can occur whether the project can attract a lot of investor interest and run until success.

Waoh that is a lot of criteria. Perhaps bearing those in mind one should be able to make the the decision when it comes to choosing an ico

I do not see anything positive why you should now invest into ICOs.
Big sales are on cryptocurrencies, on cryptocurrencies that are really working, solving a real problem, so why you want to invest into promises? You will not earn more, trust me.  :)

Nice one, if I must participate in an ICO then the major factor I would consider is the team, I must try to know the team backing the project ,also I go through the white paper to help me understand what the use case is.

I see your point and I agree with you, people should pay attention to existing projects before thinking about investing in some ICO. But still, most of the good projects started somehow, people are waking up and we see many projects popping out, some of them worth attention. Is it a new idea, a better concept, something new on the market..whatever that is and if you like it you need to support it with your investment.

So many points:) In fact, this seems to be a great way. The more detailed the analysis, the less chances of f*ckup. Last ptoject I invested in and meets my needs for the most part is taklimakan network.

   This is great! I think this is the deepest research someone can make about specific project. More things you check from this list more safer you can be with your
investment. I check most of them, but I don`t have time to check everything. It would be exhausting, I have other things to do. That`s why I follow some people
who make great reviews about existing and new projects, people who have time and more knowledge about technology.
   You listed many criteria that we should check, but I`m sure that list can be longer. Checking team members, their CV`s, previous accomplishments, checking WP can
be difficult without proper knowledge.
   I will check AION, WANCHAIN, BITDGREE. ICON and NEO are already on my list. Thanks for good suggestions.

besides the team and the concept one more thing to note is partners, because as good as any concept and team, if they don't have good partners everything will be difficult

Thanks for the detailed list. Everyone says "due diligence" but no one says what that means.

You need to check a lot of factors to make choices. No ICO is really good, but if it meets your criteria then choose and join it. Currently I only monitor IEO projects on Binance exchange. Because I believe Binance chooses ICO very well and is well worth the investment

A lot of good things to check on by the OP but may be too much to think about. There are also other important aspects that you need to consider like what those projects are aiming for. I fully support blockchain technology and believe how it can be used across all industries, and that's why I fully support legitimate blockchain (http://www.hpb.io/?utm_source=lx) companies which improve scalability, security, and blockchain functionality.

Wow this is really a great information, to be very much honest.
I literally loved it.
It will be really helpful for a newbie , so that he will not end in losses.
Lastly, i would advise all the newbies to use their brain and keep themselves aware of the situations.
Never fall into scam ICOs.

It seems ICOs has been relegated to the past even though a project called Ferrum has decided to forego the IEO method and go old school.. my main criteria for evaluating a good ICO is it's team and whitepaper especially the team's activities.

nothing perfect. sometime the project good at some, and the other they have average. they have big reward but low price at the end, or low reward but high price. nothing sure.
maybe someone choose their project from who manager that handle it. good manager will research it project

Wow, this awesome, infact u have just helped anyone that wanna invest in ICO. Because nowadays investing in ICO looks somehow risked, but reading this should help anyone interested in ICO. Bravo