Bitcoin Forum

ranking of cryptocurrencies becomes outdated in my oppinion, its quite easy to create a currency which has a higher marketcap than bitcoin, but a corrupt sect arround the indexes prevents listening of those.

with the end of national banking cartels a time called "coins of style" will come, in this it will be more about a cryptocurrency and about its management and much less about a pretended selffullfilling ranking.

this could then also help prevent to get the market divided into new marketmovements. that want to free themselves from attention monopolies of established top 10 coins.
etc.

regards

You are totally right that market cap is a horrible metric to "rank" cryptocurrencies, as it can be easily manipulated.

But the flawed rankings are caused partly because the ranking services (Coinmarketcap et al.) compare apples to bananas. Above all, because they compare complete blockchain projects with tokens which are created out of thin air, at almost no cost, on an existing blockchain.

For example, I would very much like a ranking service which compares only coins that have:
- an own blockchain (similar to the "Coin" table on CMC)
- no premine of any sort (this makes manipulation a lot more difficult, although it's still relatively easy to fake a market cap.)
This would make the ranking a whole lot more fairer. (If such a service exists, please post here ;) )

I for myself use even the flawed current ranking services somewhat, because they are basing their rankings, at least, on a kind of hard fact. The things you mention, like "management", can be faked even easier than market cap. The problem is: as everybody can create a cryptocurrency and there are thousands of them, how do you separate useful currencies from hobbyist, get-rich-quick and scam projects? (Well, something like BitConnect was ranked pretty high for some time, and I also don't understand the Tron hype, but I think the CMC top-100 contain most useful currencies).

Ranking by the market cap is coming from traditional markets. I hope we will find another ranking methods to sort crypto currencies.

Rankings are always based on the price in the market but i think that the ranks should be based on its popularity because it is always depending on the investors on how the coin will grow in the market.

Rank is not gonna give the profit it you. Just like that only we see the shit coin ripple in the top 5 rank mate.
I have noticed many potential altcoins in the market mate. I am not sure why those coins are not being top in the market.
Then price wise also we need to list the coins to find the potential in rate wise mate.

From time to time it is some issues with those sites, like payed rating and other. So I will not base my choice only on the rating site.

The ranking system is misleading.It makes people think that higher ranked coins have more authority and more trust.An altcoin like ripple can have higher ranking,but it`s still a shitty altcoin,in my opinion.
But that`s the way all the people think.They love Top 10,Top20 or Top 100 lists.They love competition and ranking.

The ranking system is misleading.It makes people think that higher ranked coins have more authority and more trust.An altcoin like ripple can have higher ranking,but it`s still a shitty altcoin,in my opinion.
But that`s the way all the people think.They love Top 10,Top20 or Top 100 lists.They love competition and ranking.

Indeces with regards to ranking have different use. Price, Market Cap, Circullation etc all can give you different data about the crypto. However, they are all connected with an equation.

I think Market Cap is the best way to rank coins. I know this can be easily manipulated but which is not.

RIpple is indeed a shitcoin and still be in No.5. This shows that is supported even if it is crap, so for an investor it could be a good piee of information.

The e-currency rating I understand it is just stable supply and demand stability. Not all high rankings are good because most of what is well received is worth it. It may not be high rank but it is used by the community, it is worth more attention than the good stuff. It's just over at the high transaction level but the community needs the value of serving them to be the most stable.

Ranking is based on how big is the market cap but it does not mean that a cryptocurrency that belongs to the top 20 really are good potential coins for investment in which case you need to study per currency based on the market price chart on how it performed well in the market. There are good altcoins even belong to the top 500 plus cryptocurrency ranking but it is doing good performance in the crypto market. Thus, ranking is not the basis on how good to invest on such cryptocurrency wherein it is just a guide based on marketcap value.

Quantitative vs. qualitative, right? Market cap doesn't mean anything in terms of crypto, or even stocks for that matter. Certainly, it's good to have a high market cap. But just because one is higher than the other doesn't necessarily make it superior. It might even mean the trade is crowded!

There are more important things that investors should consider, like the security of the system. The transaction ability, the blockchain, the protection. They want to make sure that their money is safe, not that everyone else puts their money in the same place. This kind of ranking is hard to do, however.

I fully agree with you that the sites that show ratings are absolutely far from the real objective assessment of ICO companies. These counters are very often winded, bounty hunters or others. You cannot believe in such ratings. Here we need your experience, for such period and trust the old bounty to the responsible managers.

It's a fairly old ranking method, but it's the most effective one I know of... It would be awesome to find a better method, but I doubt that's gonna happen anytime soon.

We'll have to cope with the current way of ranking. It's not always as handy as we may want it to be, but overall, it offers the highest reliability of all methods I've been presented.

I don't think that ranking is based on the price on the market. What I do know is they are basing the ranking of each coins on the volume of trades done within 24hours. Correct me if I'm wrong but that is what I have understood.

I agree; it comes from the stock market.  In those cases it's relevant, since it gives someone an idea of how much money it would take to buy a company--if you're aware of all the LBOs back in the day, you realize how important that is.  For crypto I don't think it's anywhere near as important.  You might have a coin with an extremely large market cap, but who cares if no one is using it for anything besides speculation (which is the case with most coins).

Personally I don't pay attention to these sorts of rankings.  They're unimportant, not just to me but overall.  There isn't anyone who's going to buy up all the bitcoin in existence, and the same goes for most of the top-ranked coins.

I agree with you that many people could be tricked by the coinmarketcap.com site.   I do like if for a general gauge of what's going on.  Not really sure on how else to rank the coins fairly though that enough people would get behind.  Like Bitcoin the ranking coins by market cap was a first mover and will be hard to dethrone. 

 We have different opinion on the above topic as posted, Ranking make clear presentation on the status of the said coin as posted in the market, it simple putting up a system where it is clear to understand by who ever is willing to make or planning for investment for the said coin. it will be chaotic for the market without the system implemented.

I think your are totally spot on with this observation because it just continues to create some form of competition when there is really no need for any. However, I think the ranking is from the people who attach importance to it because there is no way there won't be some listing on coinmarket cap, blockchain.com market, exchange sites listings and the likes and one must surely come before the other and the generally accepted parameter to achieve that cannot be alphabetical order, neither can it be time of existence but rather the market capitalization. What we should promote is that decisions about which coin is better or not, should not be based on just listings.

You are not going to change traditional investors opinion on things like this and you can see this when they talk about Bitcoin

on public forums. They are so brainwashed by the fiat system and the way those markets work, that they cannot understand

that Bitcoin can be different. Until Crypto currency educational material are included in the schools and universities and these

people are educated, then we will never change their views and opinions.  >:(

and I think people will be more confident in coins that are there first and in trade.
and I think it's also very difficult to compete with the current market if it happens later.

One thing I know. Stop looking at coinmarketcap. That is a hell of fake news for me.
There is not much of a legitimate market of one crypto currency.

I saw a lot of projects which are really good and yet they are ranked at the thousands number. It is disappointing to see more people are relying on that and they are doing some math with the market cap and whatever it is.
Even with the good exchanges listed by them they are still somewhere at the bottom.

Don't blame coinmarketcap for that. Their ranking is quite clear and that is based on the market capitalization. Indeed, sometimes not all exchanges are listed there, but the biggest ones are present. If the project is low, it's because its coin is just trading cheap.

If really, I have not understood your idea completly. Crypto technologies are just technologies and everybody can use them by its own intention that is why there are so much various coins on the market. I do not consider that it is wrong because every coin is a particular technology, a project or a company and this situation is similar to the real life where thare are a lot of various business and companies. Of course there are high ranked coins like successful companies in the real life as well as there are low ranked companies like less successful companies in the real life.

In my opinion the main problem with the ranking of cryptocurrency is that those ranks are usually subjective, I haven't heard that somebody is paying money in order to get higher ranks and ICO bench and whatever else sources.

Regardless of how reliable or unreliable CMC is, they provide a free to use site that has grown out to be one of the highest ranked sites in the world. It's attracting millions and millions of visitors every month, which means that people like it a lot. It's not really fair to blame CMC for being a noob site by how people take market cap ranking seriously -- they provide a site that nurses the demand, that's all. I would do the same in their position. Even if CMC wasn't there, people would still debate on what currency should be at what rank based on its market cap. Just let people do what they think is good for them, it really doesn't bother me.

First time I joined crypto I was surprised some of the coins in the top 50 didn't have a real world use product/service. I asked myself if how they got there in the first place? The rankings don't reflect the true value of the coins in y opinion. Some very good coins may be lingering below 300th position but with a top product.

No, I don't believe the market ranking should be scrapped. It serves as a guide to people to make their investment choices especially the new comers into the market and as such, let the ranking continues, and also the competition between similar Cryptos also continue.

You are totally right! It should not be based on market cap instead it should be based upon the popularity of the cryptocurrency. Just like what you said, it can be tampered and easy to create a currency with huge market cap. However, it will become useless if the people does not want that coin, so it is better to look upon the usage of the coin, price, volume and dominance so that they will sort well.

I agree with you. Market cap shouldn't be the only we look at when we judge the coin. We need change. If we are going to create a society where crypto currency is used everyday for just about everything we need a new way to rank coins. Plus if you are knowledgeable about crypto you wouldn't be ranking coins by the market only.

Rankings should count on community use because a successful coin must have a large user community. Next came new products, and applied to life. Don't trust the evaluation sites, they give the data themselves, no one checked the data. There should be a VoteUp system for everyone

This is not going to change besides you can only deceive the really dumb investors because another very important metric is volume, if a coin supposedly has a bigger market cap than bitcoin but this was created in an artificial way then this will show in the volume with a volume that is very low or almost non existent compared to bitcoin, so while the ranking by market cap is flawed it is the best system we have.

The market price notice is just the algorithm of the website being programmed. The price of each cash flow is due to the market or the owner of the project that updates the situation. All information is just behind them, the reality is very different. Do not spend too much time listening to the market. Be prepared for your plans to achieve certain goals do not be too greedy...

Do you think there's a bit of favoritism going on with some of these sites? Some false promotion in exchange for some coins under the table? It's insider trading like on wall street, except no one will ever know it happened. That's what you've really got to be careful about with crypto.

It's not worth spending much energy crawling through these sites anyway. Learn your own criteria for judging the value of a coin and then invest little by little until you have enough conviction that it is worth that money. And certainly, don't get too greedy or it might all disappear.

It's really easy for new coins to do wash trading and price manipulation to get a higher ranking on coinmarketcap.  I've seen some really useless coins make their way to the top 50 of CMC overnight.  It's very concerning that a ponzi scam (bitconnect) was once a top 10 coin. Coinmarketcap has started to crack down on fraudulent coins but the problem still persists. 

No it was not subjective, the rankings of cryptocurrency is always based on the prices in different market's because in this way you can determine what coin has the highest progress in the industry.

I have long been convinced that all these ratings do not show the real reality. All reviews comments are ordered from freelancers and there is no objective truth about the ICO. Therefore, we have to study all the coins and all the companies ourselves. Their products, websites, white paper, etc. are Time consuming, but it is more productive.

Cryptocurrency rankings are indeed flawed. It comes from a traditional (and obvisously correct) approach that market capitalization means number of shares times price per share. However, rankings distinguish between total supply and available supply and even count in tokens that are made on existing blockchains. It is entirely misleading and it confuses investors.

But in my opinion I think they're also good in some way to rank them. It makes people know where to follow and what to follow. Anyways I think it would also prevent people from manipulating the market though!

I also do not appreciate ICO analysis websites because I think the information about the ICO projects on those webmasters might be a PR rush for ICO projects. Take the research and analysis methodology of ICO projects you want to invest to take responsibility for your decision, mistakes will be the lessons learned in this market.

I think this procedure is automated and depends on various factors like daily trading volume for particular coin and its market cap. You saying that the market cap can be created with high volume but I say no, nothing like that can be done. It is not that easy to make market move in such way otherwise every coin would have done the same to have visibly and go to the Top 10 list. Everything happen naturally and you can observe that the rankings keeps changing all the time for many coins depending upon how the market cap is driving for them.  :)

True, because not all of them can predict it very right. We don’t what will be the next move of market or the next move of bitcoin. Well, replacing bitcoin by other crypto currency is not that easy.

Coin market cap has this option. You just have to select from the dropdown menu whether you want only coins or all crypto according to their market capitalization. I agree with you though since the first ranking to appear on the site is list of top cryptos and not coins with their own blockchain.

Well, the rankings do help some investors make decision as to what and what to go for in deciding the right investments to make for the year; long or short term. I do also like this to some extents as it creates order.

Yep, but the second condition I would like (to list only coins without a pre-mine) isn't available at Coinmarketcap.

Coinmarketcap has at least a "Filter non-mineable" toggle option. This filter takes out currencies where the supply is fixed (most of them based on a pure ICO distribution, like NXT or NEM) and so it filters "the worst offenders" in terms of premine. However, coins like Ethereum, where a big part of the supply has been premined, are still available in this list. In theory, even a coin which has a 99% premine could made "mineable". Another point I don't like is that this list is pretty much hidden.

What I would like is a "Filter premined" option, and the resulting list presented prominently as something like "Decentralized cryptocurrencies." or "cryptocurrencies without premine".

I am also losing my trust in coinmarketcap. I do not know if they are still reliable for the current coin rankings. But one thing for sure if blockchain technology would last in the next 8yrs. We can see all crypto market rise up.

But I think all such information provided on websites isn’t hand made. No one can just assume some price in mind and then put on the board just to show the audience that okay we have this assumption. You need to know that prices are official, and they can’t just be manipulated according to personal benefits. What comes official is official and you can’t just deny it.

Yes that is right I think that we should leave it on community, peoples, like and dislike, which they are already doing. In fact people have already selected bitcoin as number one crypto currency and I think that Etherium is on number two. Though there are so many other crypto currencies which have good potential and their ranks are also expected to increase because of the increasing interest of the people.

Bitcoin may be wiped out for a different currency, but there is no such thing. Bitcoin is still the market leader

It is very likely that something like that is happening behind the scenes, no one likes to think about it because the consequences of such a thing for the market will be terrible but that is why it is not always the best idea to trade your coins, because if you find yourself in the wrong side of a manipulation of the market you could easily lose a substantial amount of your capital and it will not be your fault.

i think its too early to decide to give up on crypto because of the ranking. we have almost 4
4months to the end of the year.

A lot of shitcoins on the top, and i know they are just being manipulated. I’m not trusting much the coinmarketcap, I still depend on the project itself and I believe investors should also focus on the technology of a real project and not just by its marketcap, a lot of good coins out of the top.

Ranking isn't important for making money. If you look the rank chart you'll see Eth is second coins where bitcoin is first but people are still making more money with ETH.

Its depending on its value not ranking. If everyone start thinking like this they'll never able to make money. Doesn't matter which crypto currencies you chose you'll make money until they're volatile. 

Ranking by marketcap at least is very outdated and prone to manipulation

For me, Crypto technologies are just technologies and everybody can use them by its own intention that is why there are so much various coins on the market. I do not consider that it is wrong because every coin is a particular technology, a project or a company and this situation is similar to the real life where thare are a lot of various business and companies. My advice use it wisely, and you'll get many benefits.

Yeah there are many but we are sensible and we know it well that what we should use it and how it use, for me best coin among all is bitcoin and it will never stop growing in market, it has direct effect with our life and it can make our condition good, I am sure not too far but only bitcoin will be here in market and everyone will accept the value and the worth of bitcoin very soon.

We cannot give up cryptocurrency ranking. It is necessary so as to create competition among the cryptos and give everyone a fair idea of the coins performance.

Ranking helps a lot for newbies to start with. Even though they provide misleading information, it is what it is. I think it's a just a baseline that should not be followed to the letter. Maybe they can just put a disclaimer somewhere that this information is just current fact and can be manipulated.

I agree with most posters in this thread saying that cryptocurrency ranking can be manipulated, and that it is indeed manipulated in many cases. But, on the other hand, look at the top 20, or even at the top 40 coins, ranked as such by CoinMarketCap. Aren't most of them really deserve to be called one of the best? Not all of them, but I think 80% of the top ranked coins are really good ones? I mean, although it has its flaws, the ranking system can serve as a guide for those looking for altcoins to invest in (with some exceptions of course).

It's too bad because this is what gives crypto a bad name. The supporters of fiat are quick to mention that there is no regulator to protect against price manipulations and that the wild swings are just used to serve interests of major powers behind the scenes (which could even be them for all we know).

I don't really think altcoins are a good idea for the most part because of how easily they can be manipulated or taken over. They're actually great potential for short term gains, but you've really got to keep an eye on them if you don't want your capital going down the toilet. They need close supervision and firm rules for entry and exit.

I guess we dont have to rank them, they earn their rank automatically over the period of time. Since they depend on the volume that is being generated due to the trading of those coins. This also depends on the project development so that it attracts more and more user base and thus it can grow the volume accordingly as there will be more investment made by these new comers.
Those will receive greater ranks who stays ahead in all of these.  ;)

Cryptocurrency ranking just for helping investor to choose their investment. If ranked, investor more easily to choose coin with big liquidity or big market cap value. Beside that many analysis we can use start from lowest price. I think rangking on coinmarketcap help us to find right investment

The market ranking has made some of us to miss some good coins. By not buying some goo undervalued coins until they moon past our budget. I currently look at some low value coins with future potentials. forget market rankings.

it's true that ranking on crypto is very useful for all with new methods and similar groupings or the like. at the moment I see there is still a special tendency of the rankings on the website today

I see this is the best answer. That's the answer I need.

I don't know it still shows me as a total how one coin reacts to bad/good markets compared to others. I do not like the "ranking" part neither but coinmarketcap has a lot more stuff than just ranking those coins. Even in some sense the rank or order of coins being listed with coinmarketcap has no meaning as they do follow the amount of network by multiplying number of coin circulation with price of one coin whereas many corporate coins like ripple are highly manipulating with number of circulating coins, it makes it not the exact thing we need to consider for ranking or for sorting out.

For example I can open one up right now, see all red and than see just one green and check what coin that is, check why it is green on a blood red market and see something I may like. Or I can do the opposite, check a whole green market and see one red, check why its red and maybe sell if I have any.

Coinmarketcap offers so many stuff than just ranking coins, its wrong to assume ranking is a pissing contest, it is not, it is a way of showing which coins are actually working and which are not.

I think the ranking of the crypto currency will leads to more manipulation in the prices,so it is better to completely take away any ranking system for the cryptos on any sites.Just like the existing fiat money we don't have any ranks to them right so we need to consider cryptos as same like that.

agree with you as the ranking is based on the market cap and that can be easily manipulated and we have seen such instances before like Tron(trx) was in top 10 in no time and many noobs bought it at that price considering its tanking and hype at that moment and it went down from there very quickly too and now holding its position at 12.

In my idea, there has to be some other way of ranking or there should be no ranking at all.

Ranking will be available in the traditional market. I think we will find another ranking of methods of cryptocurrency.

I dont think rangking will leads on more manipulation. Ranking on crypto is just a guide for new investor when the choosing their coin. Its just raw data and i am believe it will not leads to manipulation