Do you believe in ICO Ratings?

[lesya-ya]

I do not really trust the rating of sites, but I believe the live rating of the participants more. Good reviews, high attendance and positive reviews about the company. For example, I decided to participate in ISO Arcblock, because this project for a short time approached its goal. This project will definitely bring profit.

[1714110460]

1714110460

[1714110460]

1714110460

[1714110460]

1714110460

[CaterpillarRave]

do not believe in absolute ICO rating pages only rated a small percentage. They rely on the team and the investor. white paper and roadmap. There is no guarantee that the project will scam.

[sniveel]

Yes ofcourse maybe I thinks some investor basically based on which ICO they need to invest to earn a profit and to dont lose their investment

[takngantuk]

back to yourself.
for me, the ico rating is just as a reference, I do not always use that data to have ICO. sometimes we have to analyze our own ICO that we will choose.

if you ask me whether I believe it or not. ?
maybe I choose to believe

[yonghongtang]

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!

Do not trust anyone and any ratings , just trust yourself . Just trust your own research.

[BitandAlt]

There's many ICO Rating websites, and most give unbiased ratings and reviews. You should be able trust their rating score because at the end of the day you can review their rating by adding a post below the ICO they have rated. This way the Rating is real and not fake. If a rating or review has been given and it's inaccurate then that site would not be trusted anymore so most rating sites do their best to keep a rating and review as true as can be.  Sites like icorating.com, icobench.com, icotoinvest.com are good sites to watch for ratings and reviews.

[jaredl]

I only treat ratings websites as a announcement site as the ICO being rated may have sponsored the post or review. However if an ICO is doing such marketing as sponsored posts on ratings sites, it could be worth the time to do some research on it.

I have discovered some good ICOs on such ratings sites. Recently I have discovered ArcBlock as well as Experty.

However it is still very important that you do your own research and due diligence. I cannot stress enough to everyone that is

participating in ICO that we must do our own research and not rely on review sites or rating sites.

With so many ICOs happening monthly, we should tighten our selection criteria so that we only pick the best to invest in.

If you do your own research, you will find that 4.5 out of 5 on some ratings sites can be worth nothing and it is still the best

to rely on your own due diligence and your own gut in selecting where to invest your money.

[kap786]

It Can just give Idea  but  We Should read Whitepaper and Check ICO Twitter Page  and Telegram Group what ICO Admin Doing
How much they are serious about Project in-term of Do they give daily update . Do they care members and Response well
It is Just My opinion
Thanks

[kandholabhavna]

No! Why would you trust and invest your hardearned money on someone else's take? Would you buy a house that someone on the internet says is a damn good one without yourself inspecting it? Do your own rating thing - look at team, concept and other general stuff while making this assessment.

[astridplomp]

let just know not everything the ICO rating site shown to us is completely correct. They are only based on the informations they found and they dont know exactly what will happen to the ICO, they can only evaluate based on their assetments, So we should not put to much hope on the Rating Sites, they are just reference tools for an ICO.

[Trofo]

I use ICO ratings sites only as first step in my research. I don't have enough time to check all upcoming ICOs and therefore use ratings sites as a first filter. After I am left with only few promising projects I try to get as deep as possible into them reading everything available. I give big advantage to ICOs that have working product and/or big developer teams.

[auliahr]

I believe the ico rating site, but by no means entirely a reference to directly invest into a project. We still have to research and discuss, the final results and decisions remain in our hands.

[sukamasoto]

Just make sure that ICO rating are being made by trusted site.
For me personally, I keep try to research myself about ICO that I'm looking for and ICO rating just for my additional judgement so it doesn't too important !
Of course with many ICO occur recently , most people especially new trader are difficult to find the promising one, either expert trader !

[bambazamba]

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!

ICO rating does not give someone a 100% correct prediction about the value of some crypto coin . They just give the "idea" about the weight-age of the coin depending up on its stake holders and the buzz it is creating and its features . They never specify that the profit is guaranteed of you invest in some particular ICO they stated has a good potential .
So do your study before you invest in some coin and do no blindly trust these sites . These sites are just for the references .

[tam31]

I actually don't believe them because they can be easily being promoted by the ICO. When i want to research a ICO i first rate it for my self. How is the team ? What is the project about ?

Always research it by yourself instead of believing others.

[X7]

Most ICO rating websites give you enough material for you to dig through independently, BUT they also have a conflict of interest in that they allow payments to list your ICO - so it is in their best interest to list as many ICO's as possible - that can lead to miss information.

I would suggest you take the popular ICO's and inspect it closely, see if it makes sense - or if it is just another pump and dump.

Also, gather information across various sites as this is a very new space, people are using varying methodologies as indicators for value propositions. Some are intelligent - others are not well thought through.

You don't want the tide to go out and leave you standing on the shore with "TRON" for example.

GL!

[engrlodi]

Many investors or people believes to the ICO ratings, but I think it is only the opinion and based to the survey of the critics the criticize the ICO. Maybe we should not based to the rating of the ICO but it can help us to guide if the ICO is having a good background and platform in the future. Many ICO that has a low rating but in the end it has a good and successful ICO. They are just giving their idea about the ICO if the whitepaper and platform in ICO is interesting. But it can help us to guide to search some new ICOs and have a great platform. In my advice, sometimes I believe to this because it can help us to search a new and interesting platform to invest with.

[G14tz87]

I believe in the ICO rating, because the ICO Rating Team has obtained a primer from the upcoming ICO whitepaper of the Telegram Open Network - a crypto initiative that has been said to break the record in terms of hype and investment attention.

[Hammerman]

I think that the opinion of experts on these sites is very relative. This is not an objective assessment of projects. In addition, I am sure that you can buy a good evaluation. This is also a bounty campaign. To understand the quality of the ICO, one must try to analyze the project independently. The forum has a lot of information about this. It's not difficult, but you need to love crypto.

[Mrrr]

Most ICO rating websites give you enough material for you to dig through independently, BUT they also have a conflict of interest in that they allow payments to list your ICO - so it is in their best interest to list as many ICO's as possible - that can lead to miss information.

I would suggest you take the popular ICO's and inspect it closely, see if it makes sense - or if it is just another pump and dump.

Also, gather information across various sites as this is a very new space, people are using varying methodologies as indicators for value propositions. Some are intelligent - others are not well thought through.

You don't want the tide to go out and leave you standing on the shore with "TRON" for example.

GL!

This precisely. If you skim through the announcements a bit you'll find a lot of sketchy ICOs that still manage to get a favourable rating. If these websites are indeed being paid by the ICOs they're supposed to rate (and there is no reason to assume differently) that is a big big big red flag. So X7's advice is a good one: just use them to find links, websites, forums etc and do your own research.