Do you believe in ICO Ratings?

[aji567]

I believe that ICO rating also affects token sales and also I see some ICOs like datareum that have excellent ICO rating.

[1714586624]

1714586624

[1714586624]

1714586624

[biochem123]

A lot of them are manipulated and obviously being paid for, but I think there are still some legit sites that can give you a good idea about the project.


If your project's rating vary a lot between sites then there's probably some manipulation going on

[quaqui]

From such sites you can only get surface information about the project, a more detailed analysis should be carried out by you yourself

[panpine]

I do not believe in ICO ratings because it's a judgment around a project. I will look into the future of that project and see if the ICO will succeed or not to participate

[sergey_vass]

Some months ago, here, I faced a theme about icobench, and an author claimed that all their rates are custom-made. I'm certainly embarrassed by those experts who are doing rates on projects. On the other hand, this is normal things, even if they are custom-made, the platform needs to earn somehow, I hope that all ratings are custom.

[SmellsCinnamon]

I see many Websites that provide ratings for ongoing ICOs or for the future. Examples such as the ICObench.com Website, ICOrating.com and others.

Which is my question whether you believe in the rating provided by the website. Seeing many ICO's do not match what they value. Many ICOs are arguably good ratings but when the token sales of the project only reach softcap. And there are projects that I see have a fairly mediocre rating but their token sales reach hardcap. I took the example of Lalaworld on ICObench.com they get Rating 3.7 but their token is sold out.

So let's discuss ICO Rating!

I don't believe in those sites which rates icos. I think it depends on the project and to the token holders of icos whether they dump it too fast or just hold it for a long time.

[Violettochka]

The accuracy of ratings depends on the website. for example, ICObench always gives false estimates that are not true. The best ratings in icodrops

[Archibaldos123]

I believe that the ratings on most sites can be bought and not be a reality.  It is better to analyze the team and the idea of ​​the project, rather than look at the rating

[FoBoT]

Personally, I do not really believe in icorating because some of them end up being a disappointment because they were wrongly rated. I only take the rating as guide when choosing icos and I take time to do a very good research on the project before I invest in it.

[Biklonicl]

I never believed and do not advise to believe, do not trust your choice to someone else . You must learn to choose good projects yourself

[Dorvei]

Until recently, I could answer yes! I trusted many sites. Now, I do not trust anymore. Recently, I participated in one IcO, which ranked first in many ratings, and it turned out to be a scam ... so, trust only yourself.

[Teal Deer]

I think you should not rely on the opinion of just one source, as it can be simply biased. Always need before you invest the maximum, thoroughly check the particular project inside and out. Therefore, take the initiative and look for, read, analyze and compare various information sources. And then, only after you do it, you will have no doubts whether or not to invest in a particular project. Personally, I do so, and so everyone has their own methods and approaches.

[VayneAurelius]

I see many Websites that provide ratings for ongoing ICOs or for the future. Examples such as the ICObench.com Website, ICOrating.com and others.

Which is my question whether you believe in the rating provided by the website. Seeing many ICO's do not match what they value. Many ICOs are arguably good ratings but when the token sales of the project only reach softcap. And there are projects that I see have a fairly mediocre rating but their token sales reach hardcap. I took the example of Lalaworld on ICObench.com they get Rating 3.7 but their token is sold out.

So let's discuss ICO Rating!

All things considered, there are two sides to each coin (no play on words planned). We,at Kryptos.com, trust the vast majority of the huge ICO rating locales, yet we would dependably make our own particular due determination and we would search for no less than 3 unique surveys by various individuals/associations/destinations. An ICO audit is a decent venturing stone to call attention to the things you should search for while doing your own exploration yet its simply that - a casing to help your further research on an ICO. A portion of the things that you should search for are the team,the competition,the principle thought of the project,if the item tackles a genuine issue and on the off chance that it will be utilized as a part of the following 2,5,10 years. On the off chance that there is an issue with any of those components, at that point the ICO will likely flop misserably, and regardless of whether it doesn't - its not worth taking a chance with your cash. Expectation this aides !

[eveniyk]

When I was a newbie I trusted ICO Rating, but after I started to loss I began to analyze the projects. And I was surprised that most of the ratings are fake.

[maucial]

The accuracy of the ratings depends on the website.

I think we are still at the beginning of ICO's market potential. However, we must pay attention to avoid scams.

There are many interesting projects to check out and others not, so it's important to choose wisely.

Looking at the project as a whole and looking at the team behind it, is very important to make a correct decision.

If I can give you guys my opinion, I discovered an exciting ICO that is very interesting: RAWG.

Check out this new article where RAWG is mentioned as the "IMDB of gaming" on FORBES, one of the leading global media company, focused on business, investing, technology, entrepreneurship, and leadership.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/andrewrossow/2018/07/16/3-reasons-the-video-game-industry-is-bound-for-blockchain/#69da81c87810

The ICO will start in a short period and they are at the moment in pre-ICO phase. This is the ICO site: https://token.rawg.io/. It's a video game discovery platform that converts your skills into goods and services (the site is already working, with more than 57,000 games in the database) and, which is very interesting, they have already reached the soft cap.

Have a look and get some information while doing your own research!

Another interesting point: RAWG has already secured $5m USD, halfway to hard cap of $10m!

[Creedact]

I don't rely on website ratings they are either done by the website bot or incentivized to give good ratings.

[papa-tata]

I may be doubting the rating results from some websites, because I think there are some websites that receive payments to ask for a giving good rating. can be considered not independent judgment. but users are more clever in choosing the ICO that really promises.

[dee767]

Personally, I consider the data "ratings" no more than, a platform for posting information about the ICO.
No practical or objective assessment can be said.

[straimrpl777]

At the beginning of studying the crypto project, I look at the ratings, and then I study the crypt project myself. I look at the development team, investment funds and advisers.

[makerst]

There was also a time when I believed people and did as many say, but then when I lost quite a lot I realized that no one can be trusted and the fact that we are seeing you on the market today seems to me another trick of rich people .