Do you believe in ICO Ratings?

[honex2]

When you meet someone new you only will give time for friendship and trust. All website rating ICO can only do on their own volution it still doesn't take away risk that this icos can fail. Always be careful yes ICO bench and ICO ratings sites are good but becareful.

[1714582603]

1714582603

[freakslot]

I wouldn't believe all these sites with ratings. you can look at them for some comparison. but the main part you have to explore yourself. to study the project and so on . in General, I collect information from all sources and then looms the overall picture

[Iyanuisaiah]

In my opinion, ratting obtained by ICO is not only based on the project concept is good. The success of a project can be viewed by a team that is involved in it. If the project has a team that is diligent and always compact in finding and providing information about the project. And usually, before I follow ICO, I usually do an investigation first, starting from ICO rankings, ICO communities, and potentials owned by ICO. That's what I need to do so that I can choose ICO properly, not scam, and investment can continue to grow.

[Santoribtc50]

The mentioned case about Lalaworld is true and is already a proof that despite of having a low rating, it still managed to sold their tokens out. And some ICO despite of having a high rating are not able to sell all of their tokens on the crowdsale.

[JeromeL]

I do not believe the ICO ratings as well as any other ratings. I once worked in a vacuum cleaner sales campaign and I know that they hired special people who negotiated with various sites about the ranking in the top stores. Most campaigns do the same. I believe in myself and listen to the opinions of my friends.

[Tahdayi]

Of course I do not believe, especially recently when they published that on icobench you can buy a rating

[Pertor]

I do my own research and rely on the main part of the project, white paper. They must have a working product and a solid team.

[restrax]

Not really. Everyone now is trying to monetize own resource and earn some money from this ICO hype. I think the TOP of ICO trackers is paid and even with % of income. This is really easy scheme to get quick money, especially if ICO is scam.

[foodstamps]

No. I do not trust these resources. Companies can pay them money for a good rating. The resource team may not study the project well. I myself study the project before investing in it.

[Darkdragonzzz]

Some ratings are very useful. I often find there a lot of information about new and interesting projects. But this does not mean that I should completely trust the ratings and not conduct a personal analysis of the project.

[go4crypto]

High ICO rating from multiple sites means the ICO is good. How good requires more research into its team, website and project.  Take a look at   EOT (EON) ICO that stands for Entertainment Open Network Protocol for decentralized games and should be good.

[Alex09012004]

I always take ratings into consideration, but final decisions i always try to make after my own analysis of the project.

[userclix]

ICO rating sites are a vital part of the ecosystem and can play an important role in guiding investors who lack the time to thoroughly research a project themselves. However, not all ICO rating websites are created equal. Currently, some ICO rating sites have very few reviews and ratings and the screening process of "experts" responsible for the reviews still require improvement. This means that a single review from a non-expert can significantly improve and ICOs rating from say 3.5 to 4.5 which may be a true reflection of the project's strength but can also easily skew reality. As with any project/product the more verified reviews by real experts the better. I do believe that in time stricter controls will have a positive effect and we will see the user base of ICO rating websites grow in numbers as well as quality.

[bitlind]

I can use those writing just as and confirmation of my own opinion that I have, I never more than that because it is basically and opinion of somebody else, that can always be not worthy.

[costgranda]

I very much trusted earlier ratings on these websites (ICObench.com, ICOrating.com). For me these ratings were priority information. But over time I have begun to understand that their values very often aren't true. Many examples can be found when the ratings of ICO on these websites were very small, but the project was very good. These ratings shouldn't confuse us!

[gsingh]

Most of them are manipulated or paid ones, but yes,i still trust on them, specially on IcoBench and a few other mores that are top notch too, but it also depends on the project too, those ratings are not always speaking by itself

[Atfirstno]

I don't believe in them, or just maybe a few of them, I think those sites may get paid just for promoting a project, and their promotion consists on putting them on top without even checking their reliabilty, leading to scams spreading even more on the internet.

[lolchina]

You need to understand how the rating is given before trust it or not. Some ratings site just use a check list to see whether certain items like telegram group, whitepaper exist or not. These are far less useful then sites that actually trying to understand what the project and potential is, such as crushcrypto and in some case even some youtuber are better.

[Cryptogladys]

I actually don't believe in this stupid ratings! those agencies don't even know how to evaluate a crypto! they don't even use particular models for this purpose! wht?? putting some numbers is an evaluation?? ahahahah come on! please!!

[bitcoin54321]

Not at all guys, because we don't know if that rating was reliable.
We can't be dependent on what ICO says. Sometimes ICO rating will pull as down.