Weiss Rates Bitcoin and Other 73 cryptocurrencies. Bitcoin scores C+.

[Sukut]

So this financial agency Weiss released a cryptocurrency review. While there was no coin scored any A's, the highest scoring coins were EOS and Ethereum, scoring B. Bitcoin scored C+, falling behind Steem who scored B-  

Here's the whole list:



Based on Weiss' article, A-B means "buy", C+/C/C- means "hold" (HODL!) and the lesser scores means "sell".

I'd like to hear what you guys think!


Disclaimer: I don't know how legit this Weiss agency is.

[pinkflower]

What is the Weiss rates, and what makes them the authority in rating cryptocurrencies? Are they cryptographers and/or computer scientists? If they are not, then those ratings are wrong. BTC should be A++ if you ask me.

The list is incomplete. Wheres the rest?

[Sukut]

What is the Weiss rates, and what makes them the authority in rating cryptocurrencies? Are they cryptographers and/or computer scientists? If they are not, then those ratings are wrong. BTC should be A++ if you ask me.

Well, they're one of the biggest 100% independent rating agency in the North America. Not a random agency to be ignored tbh. And this is economics, they're evaluating the market and the investments, potential investments whatever. Your post suggests that only cryptographers and/or computer scientists can generate correct ratings, and that is just a horrible joke.

[imteaz]

I am pretty sure, those people who evaluated Crypto in Weiss, has no idea about how crypto works or what details they were looking into. They rated bitcoin C+, but Steem got B? LOL they rated Cardano B but Stellar & Ripple got C. This show how biased this rating is.

[jseverson]

These ratings are subjective, much like stock ratings. I wouldn't take it seriously.

You may also want to consider the fact that Weiss has already been prosecuted for "production and and distribution of materially false and misleading marketing materials" (false ratings for pump and dump basically lol) before:

https://www.sec.gov/litigation/admin/2009/34-60125.pdf

Don't give them the power to influence prices. Ignoring their ratings would be best lol.

[Sukut]

These ratings are subjective, much like stock ratings. I wouldn't take it seriously.

You may also want to consider the fact that Weiss has already been prosecuted for "production and and distribution of materially false and misleading marketing materials" (false ratings for pump and dump basically lol) before:

https://www.sec.gov/litigation/admin/2009/34-60125.pdf

Don't give them the power to influence prices. Ignoring their ratings would be best lol.

Wow that's some legit document.

BTW, I've read the article on news.bitcoin.com. It was not on a random manipulative webiste or so..

[jseverson]

These ratings are subjective, much like stock ratings. I wouldn't take it seriously.

You may also want to consider the fact that Weiss has already been prosecuted for "production and and distribution of materially false and misleading marketing materials" (false ratings for pump and dump basically lol) before:

https://www.sec.gov/litigation/admin/2009/34-60125.pdf

Don't give them the power to influence prices. Ignoring their ratings would be best lol.

Wow that's some legit document.

BTW, I've read the article on news.bitcoin.com. It was not on a random manipulative webiste or so..

Well I hate to break it to you, but bitcoin.com is not, in any way, affiliated with Bitcoin. It's run by Roger Ver, who is a Bitcoin Cash shill. Satoshi himself disowned it; granted, the site was nothing like it currently is at the time:

It's unrelated.  There wasn't anything there when I started.

The price of .com registrations is lower than it should be, therefore any good name you might think of is always already taken by some domain name speculator.  Fortunately, it's standard for open source projects to be .org.

I would argue that bitcoin.com is at least a little bit manipulative lol.

Either way, it's not like the rating is fake news or anything. I'm just pointing out that Weiss isn't as legitimate as some people probably believe.

[pooya87]

everyone is trying to understand that cryptocurrency market is easy to manipulate, specially when it comes to altcoins. Weiss, a financial firm that is known for manipulating the market is obviously going to try their hands in altcoin pump and dumps.

anyone who has been involved with cryptocurrencies knows that the main rating attribute is security of such investment. for example when you invest in bitcoin (their C+) you know there is less chance of losing money than when you invest in Cardano (their B+). not to mention the pump and dumps which means Cardano is already in a bubble after a pump and the table posted above only proves that when you see a big rise followed by the slow drop.

[ruletheworld]

In 2006, the SEC charged Weiss Ratings of misleading investors and violating securities laws, and slapped the investment advisor and his company with a combined $2.1 million fine.

They're a joke, and don't seem to understand the first thing about cryptocurrencies. Vaporware like EOS and Cardano are ranked higher than Bitcoin. It is a very high likelihood that they are directly or indirectly invested in Cardano and EOS.

[andrei56]

In 2006, the SEC charged Weiss Ratings of misleading investors and violating securities laws, and slapped the investment advisor and his company with a combined $2.1 million fine.

They're a joke, and don't seem to understand the first thing about cryptocurrencies. Vaporware like EOS and Cardano are ranked higher than Bitcoin. It is a very high likelihood that they are directly or indirectly invested in Cardano and EOS.

That is because they do not care about the technology, they only care about the profits they can make by selling that information and by doing insider trading, it is obvious to me that they bought huge amounts of all the coins they were going to rank as the best coins, and the worst thing is that is probably not illegal, insider trading is illegal in regulated markets like stocks but in the world of bitcoin this is probably still unregulated.

[pinkflower]

What is the Weiss rates, and what makes them the authority in rating cryptocurrencies? Are they cryptographers and/or computer scientists? If they are not, then those ratings are wrong. BTC should be A++ if you ask me.

Well, they're one of the biggest 100% independent rating agency in the North America. Not a random agency to be ignored tbh. And this is economics, they're evaluating the market and the investments, potential investments whatever. Your post suggests that only cryptographers and/or computer scientists can generate correct ratings, and that is just a horrible joke.

You clearly need to read more. Your ignorance is no longer astonishing anymore because there are lots of people like you in the forum. All mindless drones.

Having that said, rating agencies are corrupt, as shown during the housing bubble. Google it and learn something new. You clearly need to read more. <-- Yeah I said it again lol.

[Janademir4]

Is it true? then what coins have a rating of A?
What about ethereum? is it better than Bitcoin?

[glaciercapital]

Is it true? then what coins have a rating of A?
What about ethereum? is it better than Bitcoin?

These scores are just hilarious, it's good that these types of parties are actually trying to acknowledge and understand cryptocurrencies now tho. More people watching and learning about the space is positive

[metenjean]

There are lots of rating agency around the world and mostly they were used as common source for common people who doesn't really understand the flow of cryptocurrency. I agreed to most of the opinion that cryptocurrencies market are easily to manipulate and not to mention there are thousands of coins registered, it makes people starts to look for any advices about which currency is good to buy and overlook the long term projects of that coin itself which lead to early shorterm pump and big dump at the end 

[pinkflower]

There are lots of rating agency around the world and mostly they were used as common source for common people who doesn't really understand the flow of cryptocurrency. I agreed to most of the opinion that cryptocurrencies market are easily to manipulate and not to mention there are thousands of coins registered, it makes people starts to look for any advices about which currency is good to buy and overlook the long term projects of that coin itself which lead to early shorterm pump and big dump at the end  

You confuse me. Can you explain that again? I cant decide if your post is good or bad because I cant quite understand your point. Its like you are typing without thinking like you have ADHD or something.

[tententen]

So this financial agency Weiss released a cryptocurrency review. While there was no coin scored any A's, the highest scoring coins were EOS and Ethereum, scoring B. Bitcoin scored C+, falling behind Steem who scored B-  

Here's the whole list:
https://news.bitcoin.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/weiss-1-696x909.jpg


Based on Weiss' article, A-B means "buy", C+/C/C- means "hold" (HODL!) and the lesser scores means "sell".

I'd like to hear what you guys think!


Disclaimer: I don't know how legit this Weiss agency is.

Its all idiotic.  If you use a 30 day moving avg to calculate value this makes a lot of sense, but if you use normal common sense, it doesnt.

[aeternus]

What is the Weiss rates, and what makes them the authority in rating cryptocurrencies? Are they cryptographers and/or computer scientists? If they are not, then those ratings are wrong. BTC should be A++ if you ask me.

The list is incomplete. Wheres the rest?

Maybe I'm mistaken but the rankings are only a measure of how do they think a coin is going to perform, it is not a judgment on the technology behind the coin, that is why some coins that should have the highest rating, like bitcoin in terms of innovation is only a C+, they think it is a bad idea to sell since the price is low and it is not a good idea to buy since the market is not moving that much.

[Nerman]

What is the Weiss rates, and what makes them the authority in rating cryptocurrencies? Are they cryptographers and/or computer scientists? If they are not, then those ratings are wrong. BTC should be A++ if you ask me.

The list is incomplete. Wheres the rest?

Maybe I'm mistaken but the rankings are only a measure of how do they think a coin is going to perform, it is not a judgment on the technology behind the coin, that is why some coins that should have the highest rating, like bitcoin in terms of innovation is only a C+, they think it is a bad idea to sell since the price is low and it is not a good idea to buy since the market is not moving that much.

First I do not know how credible this financial agency is and I do not know their basis for ranking the coins but I think for me it is the other way around, I think they measured it on the technology, probably they are thinking the more technologically advance the better chance it will survive the future. I am no way on bashing bitcoin but Ethereum is technologically better than Bitcoin. This is the only sensible reason why they rank ETH better than BTC.

[Miner2525]

These ratings are subjective, much like stock ratings. I wouldn't take it seriously.

I would wager they're quantitative-based which is why they're currently useless.  The data they have to feed into the model has to be uniform and widely available for each coin.  They're obviously not measuring the same things that we do as potential investors.  And at least half of the score is momentum based, which is why the ratings will change as quick as week-to-week.

Weiss Research and Weiss Ratings is not the same company, though both are related to Weiss.  Martin Weiss is a long-time doom porn huckster that publishes newsletters and trading advisory services.

Weiss Ratings is also not a nationally recognized credit ratings agency.  They may be more accurate in pre-identifying insurance ratings failures than the Big Three, but that doesn't mean squat for crypto.

[Miner2525]

P.S. The best thing about Weiss Ratings is they gave BTG a D+ which is exactly what it deserves.