Bitcoin Forum

Fellows, I would like to ask you to describe your evaluation process of a crypto project:

What do you look at?
In what order?
When looking at some X factor, when do you judge it in a positive or a negative manner?
What a project needs to have for you to invest on it?

Tks

There is lots of things to check at.

My first thing to look is what will they do with unsold tokens, what is the purpose of tokens, is there a deflation model and is there any dividends.

The first thing I evaluated was reading the white paper and the project team and background. After that, begin to see the most important goals (about vision and mission). At least that's what I did in researching the crypto project. Thank you.

Now that there's really spouting a lot of useless token projects in the market, my number one choice always is its total supply.The lesser the supply the better.But of course the teams approach to customers with the ads and medium. Then followed by its team and dev legitimacy and of course the project's dedication.

My order is:
- whitepaper: very important, where the core of the project is explaned. This is where I can see if a project is only a copy of a copy of others or it's original
- checking team: I check team in linkeding, if I don't find them, I would pass.
- telegram channel: I take a look at questions and answers in telegram chat.

I check the team and whitepaper ..is there a good working or demo product in the development stage? This one point is important too.. I check their telegram and see how active the project's team is ..A sample of solid project is the current Gigzi one. This has a good team with an active telegram, plus their ecosystem is promising..

Is it usual to see the devs themselves answering questions on these telegram chats?

The first thing I find out is that their team, at least there must be some experienced people in the blockchain field. Then the problem they solved, the product. Last but not least, their investors, the market like today needs a lot of capital to maintain the project.

Usually it's the community managers that answer first, but if you ask a more technical question they'll ping DEV's to have better answers.
(At least thet's my experience)

The main thing I examined was the Project Team. Must have a clear and experienced team and have a clear record. that is to say, you have to see who the people behind the project are, because the success of a project is also due to its big name. Then examine the long-term goals or road map.
Goodluck for you. :)

I prefer to check whitepaper before deciding to invest. Working product is big + for ICO and this additional advantage can return in other ways to project. Investing to project for strong team is debatable due to professional human factor.

I try to see if the team are who they say they are not edited pics... and I try to look at the number of interested investors... note ... the investors are not the number of people in the telegram chat... You can check out the number of interested investors in the bitcointalk Ann thread

The project idea itself and the people behind it, other than this is all other factors are just BS, you can now buy everything with little cost starting from WP, fake community, fake rating, and the list goes on. The project idea and the people behind this idea are all that matters now and especially the people behind the project is probably the most reliable factor to decide the legalization on a project.

The first thing I do by evaluating crypyo project is that I check their website and White paper to know what the project have to deliver, follow by how Long the project will last, the  total supply, how much per token and lastly the team member.

First of all I try to understand the validity of the project, if I do not have the right skills I look for informations from different sources. Secondly, communications are very important to me.

I agree that the essence of the project is very important, because now there are very few ICO that have an original and necessary idea. It is also worth paying attention to the development team and their plan for the development and scaling of the project.

Well, here is a long list. For a start, I look at the documents of the projects. I fully study what the project is intended for. Looking for information on the team. Reviewing the project site. I watch what other experts say about the project.

Then I do my analysis. If the ideas are too complex or too many tasks do not even look.

I would focus on how active the dev team are, if they get things done according to the dates in a roadmap then you can bet that the team behind the project are actually people interested in the development of the project. They also need to be communicate with the audience, sometimes you find projects where people show interested but the team doesn't provide feedback.

A whitepaper is important, but nowadays, it seems like whitepapers mainly use buzzwords and use a lot of technical terms to make them sound smart to draw attention, and there's also the fact that some projects simply copy-paste a whitepaper from anothe project, so you gotta be careful if you're only look at a whitepaper to evaluate a project.

in one word: innovation.
that is mostly because i am sick and tired of all the copy coins that don't introduce anything new and keep repeating the same ideas that were introduced years ago by their ancestors.
additionally that innovation has to be implemented well enough because sometimes people take a very interesting idea or innovation and ruin it by a terrible implementation.

that is a different question in my opinion.
i only look for shitcoins that are more pumpable. because i want profit when i invest and good altcoin projects don't give as much profit.

What do you look at? - I always check the whitepaper first to find out the usage of the token if it is attainable or realistic.

In what order?

- Check the following procedure

1.  Whitepaper/Roadmap
2.  Background of the team they have, also the owner or developer
3. Budget for the bounty allocation categories
4. the usages of the utility of the token

When looking at some X factor, when do you judge it in a positive or a negative manner?

- of course I will judge it in a positive manner.

What a project needs to have for you to invest on it?

- It has to be transparent to their investors or community up to end of their project.

The idea is the main driver. If it is interesting enough, I'd read the whitepaper. Then I'd then research the team, partners and token metrics (for an ICO).

For example, I am really interested in smart contracts. If I find something innovative happening with them, it immediately piques my interest.

As you can guess from my user name, I am a big fan of Vite which is implementing Smart Contracts on a Block lattice (DAG). Another one to watch out for me is Origo which again has to do with Smart contracts only this time they're privacy focused contracts.

Once I was interested in one project but when I went to their official website and saw a whole bunch of grammatical mistakes there, this project ceased to interest me. Therefore, since then I also look at the information on the site and how it is written. But the first thing, of course, I look at the composition of the team.

I hope you're referring to coins too, not just tokens, anyway, the first thing I check is the market cap - circulating supply, I have no intention of using in my day-to-day no coin or token above of 250M units, so no matter the technology or anything else, I'll be seeing only the speculative side and trying to get more BTC! Then I'll check the product type and/or read WP, I know most things today are only in WP, but with that I can reduce the number of SCAMMERS. Then I do a different analysis if it's Coin PoW or Coin PoS and Tokens! Lately I have little interaction with tokens.

First look at the team that makes this project. Then on the very idea, already on these two criteria it will be clear scam or not. Well, now a little very sensible, you can protect on the fingers.

in fact in terms of this assessment we cannot do it patent because each project certainly has its own strengths and weaknesses, and we judge it flexibly. more often in the case of the team or partnership they rely on is a good thing and does not give too much bonus for the tokensale

looking at the hype, if anybody talks about it, I'm like 80% it will be flop when it hit an exchange. Well hype can be good sometimes, just need some research of course

My order
1- the whitepaper.  I love going through to know exactly what the project has got to offer
2- The team members, will check through for their past achievements and how well grounded they are
3- the tokens- it's use and what benefit it will offers to holders

knowing the concept project from the whitepaper is the thing to do. When feeling the concept there is good enough then look at the team that runs the project to make it more convincing that it's run by the right people. see wallet is there to make sure the token at their disposal as well. though not accurate at least this could help.

First of all, I start looking at the project team (whether it is known or not). Next, see if there is a whitepaper (as it is written there and if there is all the information). Then I see if the project has a product. These are the three main criteria for me. Then I check social networks, ratings and so on.

I study hundreds of projects a month, applying 10 different criteria to them in order to find the most promising and reliable projects for a portfolio, and there are only a few of them.
- project country
- Community team
- White list
- technical documentation
- looking through social. networks and so on
My analysis takes a huge amount of time, but in the end, projects bring profit.

in my opinion the thing to note about choosing the ICO project is the white paper as an illustration and background of why the project was created, whether it has a good future. the road map and the team in it are the people in it credible enough to manage the project. profession and good name will be at stake when they are just trying to trick the investors. there are still many other factors to judge so we are worthy to put some of our money to invest in it

I think when evaluating Cryptocurrency project we need to look at the product and what they have to offer in terms of value to the community.
I think the Whitepaper would help to get the desired details

But don’t trust the white papers always

In fact, in the selection of the project a lot of nuances, but immediately notice that even observing all the rules, there is no guarantee that this project will be successful in this market. First, I carefully study the documentation and the roadmap, also a very important factor is the project team and their experience in the cryptocurrency world. An important factor is the idea itself...the main thing is to understand whether this idea will be in demand among users, you should also pay for soft cap and hard cap.

Personally I heavily focus on evaluating the team.

after joining bounty campaigns for almost 1 year I decided that the most impotnant thing is bounty manager. chose manager with whom you like to work.

First of all, I look at the development team and how the site is designed because it tells us a lot about it

for me personally, the most important indicator is the money raised by the project and for the time they have done it

Real people means a real project, they should have a very active channel and not leaving investors and promoters after they got their money, I notice that scam and those devs that will run away usually do not update their channel anymore, so this is a sign to look for.

When feeling the concept is good enough, look at the team that runs the project to make it more convincing that it is carried out by the right person. look at your wallet to ensure the tokens they have too. although it's not accurate at least this can help.

I prefer investing to an altcoin that is full of potential in terms of partnership and the trading platform they are using. How often they are upgrading their platform and advertise the project to get more investors. It is a plus for me how dedicated the team members are because that is a strong proof that they are serious with the project.

Some of the things I would look into before I invest on any cryptorelated projects are the followings:
1. From the whitepaper, I will try as much as possible to read, and understand the project concepts, the end product of the project or simply put, what problem is the project solving and is it relevant to the need of people.
2. The team, from the project telegram channel, I will deduce how active, passionate is the team members? Do they they really have the interest of investors at heart?
3. What are people (the crypto guys/enthusiasts) saying about the project.
If what I get are OK by me, I proceed to invest.

When I want to join a project, the main thing I see is the manager who manages the project. and I also evaluated the vision, white paper and saw the project team that was professional.

Most times, I start by looking at the telegram group in order to assess the size of the project community, and try to read the different reviews about the project from others. Then I can check out the white paper and others.

In each project, first of all, white paper plays an important role, the team and the task of the token, then you need to delve into the details!

Features. See to it that it will click to a lot if investors specially with young ones. They love investing now but they are picky.

Management. This is where you should be careful about.
Try digging deeper about their profiles and see to it that they are legitimate. It will be your money which is on the line so better take care of it. Avoid scams, do not be tricked at start. Do not just be pulled by the hype.

questions like this are actually often discussed in this forum and the general answer is first to pay attention to the project profile, make sure their profile is real and also their site must be active and interesting, then make sure the price they promise should not be excessive and lots of bonuses are offered because usually projects that give a lot of hope are prone to fraud.

We have different criterias based on our own instinct or experience but I'm happy to share it here and also I'm going to read the others as well about their own criterias and maybe I can improve mine. So here are some of my criterias:

• Roadpaper - All of the informations are written here, the problems and solutions and the approach they're going to use.
• Team - There's a high chance if the team is experienced. Also check the credibility as well as the legitimacy of each of the member of the project.
• Community - This is just optional some legit projects doesn't have small amount of members but all of those users are real serious investors unlike community with a large number and mostly bots and non investors.
• The use of the coin and project - There's a lot of project that has been completed but the project and the coins have no use just listed on exchange.
• Special Features - The uniqueness of the concept of the project, there's a lot of projects in the market that has the same concepts and there's no uniqueness.

You simply have to find out the real product that the ICO is bringing on board. If it is real, then the ICO will likely be good for investment.

First of all, I am checking their website, if everything seems good, I am switching to whitepaper, because it is the most important document. The next step is to check the team members, and the communities stats. You can also check the rating websites if you want to.

There are a lot of pieces to it but definitely first is to understand the whitepaper and if it aligns with the true purpose of crypto. I also like to check out their community and see if the founders are involved in the conversation. Check out crunchbase and make sure they are legit and then also checking security audit updates. I've been a follower of Ampleforth for some time because they hit all these marks and just recently released their second security audit which they detailed on their blog. Pretty cool if you haven't heard of them.

There are two criteria to which I adhere to the first one. I definitely check the team of this project and the second is also an important point, it is necessary to study the partners with whom the company works.

The most banal is to check out the website and white paper. If you like everything, you should also see the chat and the channel in the telegram. No harm will also communicate with the developers, ask them your questions. Then you will be able to fully understand the idea and plans of the project.

I think that you should pay attention to such items as: project developers (which previously did projects, if they were), White paper, what is the essence of the project, their cooperation and also see the telegram channel.

They need to have a good idea and a proper use case and a plan how they will make it happen.
So, I am looking from the idea until the final realization if the projects has all the elements needed. (resources, team, roadmap etc).

When evaluating ensure a clear Foundation. so when finding existing factors could only conclude it will impact positive or negative. each factor of the team concept and its system, all influential. check it all is whether the initial step to be chosen well and not. When one of the steps at first certainly results so on also not so good and the scam already awaits becomes a risk.

I just go for good luck while selecting a project. There is some basic investigation that you can do but even that won't assure you anything. All you have to do is to trust the project and go for it.

When I decide to invest in a project, I research my best to ensure that it has potential to get me X% return on my investment. The very first I consider about the project is its core feature. For which it is different from others coin. What is the utility case. Later, I give a research about the team. That's how I choose a good project.

Part of the things I look at when evaluating a crypto project are:
1. I look at the product or the problem identified that the project is aiming at providing solution to. How cogent is this problem identified? What is the project's lined up strategies in solving this problem?. Is the project's identified problem realizable?.
2. I look at the telegram community. How many people are there? I look at the spreadsheet of the project's bounty campaign to evaluate the ratio of the bounty hunters to those that might be probably willing to invest (investors). In a situation where bounty hunters are so much than the investors, it's a red flag.
3. I look at the team on the website. Any project that is using animated object or teddy to represent the faces of its team mates.
4. Sometimes I read white paper, but not often, and so on

I mainly study the development team, managers in telegram and their work. I pay attention to how well the site is made and the ratio of the number of tokens and the price for them.

Before factoing in other things, I think going through the whitepaper is key. I always wish to confirm if there is a viable product on offer. As much as this is not the end point. It encourages me to look deeper into the project as a whole. While going through the whitepaper, I give more focus to the roadmap and the team members just to see if they have got everything figured out and if there is enough expertise to see the project through. To a lesser extent, I check out how active the project is on social media among other things.

I'd make sure I do research on the teams first and make sure they are not fake photos ,I'd try to contact the dev if possible to hear one or two things direct from him then I will check out the withpaper  ,and the max supply of the coin or token ,the ratio and the per price of the token ,but what matters the most is what the project is all about, the reason behind its creation,problem they are trying to solve

I read the whitepaper first then ask a few question about the project to the team. It's preferred if they already have a working product. They also need to be active in their social media accounts with their developments.

I remember when I started newly, all I used to check was the whitepaper but I have discovered that even crooks can compose a very detailed and convincing whitepaper so I place more focus on the team now and their activities.

          There are many details to consider when choosing an investment project. The most important thing is to find out what role the currency has, that is, what the problem will solve through that project. Then we turn our attention to the project team. Be an experienced team with a lot of knowledge in the proposed field. Other details: project promotion, whitepaper, interest of other investors for this project.

That's correct always checking about the roles of the project and read about their whitepaper so it's better to know all their steps for making it successful.

For every project I analyze and that I choose to either invest in or participate in the bounty, the first thing I consider is the team.
No matter how new you might be in the crypto space, if you can be sure of the genuineness of the team, who must have knowledge on the project they are lunching and on block chain technology.
The team and advisors must have experience in their various fields, as related to block chain technology.

Commonly, I will look at their progress of the selling token. So far, softcap reached becomes the best thing to follow. Besides, I will analyze their team in deep, because they will be sure, real, or fake team. It is also consider to see how the project creates their concept in order to make future investment.

Well i basically consider the team behind the project and dive deeper looking into the suggested solutions and how achievable that is going to be. Also i love to invest into projects that have already developed some products other than those who have nothing to prove to show their dedication to their project. I believe this is necessary because of the numerous scam projects spreading in crypto.

First of all, I look at how well the site is made and study white paper. Also pay attention to how it is composed. Usually, even at these stages, you can understand that the project is not worth further attention. But then you can still read the chats in the telegram, see the team, as well as the social network of the project.