Do you believe in ICO Ratings?

[No Pain No blood]

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!

[1714323844]

1714323844

[1714323844]

1714323844

[1714323844]

1714323844

[1714323844]

1714323844

[1714323844]

1714323844

[dhemasm]

I think a website like ICObench, ICOrating only as one of the reference factors when we will invest on a project. But we also should not be too trust in these websites. The best result is when we do our own research on the project that we will invest.

So  the ico rating website is just one of our references when we going to do deeper research on a project. That's my opinion. Btw sorry for my bad english and thanks!

[ehrz22]

Most of people are checking ico ratings as one of their reference on where they will choose to invest, but for me ico ratings is just a guide and I am not really believing on how they rate some icos. But is still depends with the investors how they will believe this ratings.

[GREATLOVE]

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!

Some of their ratings is not exactly be done since they are using prediction too but yes I believe in ICO ratings since some of them  are really helpful to us to join or where to join ICOs.

[mrsamuelmills83]

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 use the ico ratings as a reference to what to look at. Then when I find something interesting I always do my own research to not get burned. Too many ico get a score above 4.

[srmecdes]

it is a good criteria but not enough as a only this. Team and team backround, ann thread, bounty budget, web and social media pages.. this is a combination!

[mrsamuelmills83]

Forgot to mention it, but remember that a lot of ico ratings are either sponsored or made by people participating in the bounty. DYOR everytime!

[IrenNTA]

Usually I don't trust such websites with ICO rating, because in most cases they are get paid for this. But there's one recourse icodrops.com which proved to be very reliable. And most of there rating are based on there own investigations. I think this is the best ICO recourse now.

[dumbfounded22]

I think these ratings can be trusted, at least in general terms. If you have all your opinion and a lot of free time, you can study each project independently by your criteria.

[liangweicha]

In general, an ICO rating is just one part of the browser.
ICO high score does not mean can immediately hit hard top, because many of the ICO project gave them money, so the score will be high, generally I will observe the telegram grond, this is also a very important reference standard.

[fellyciani]

Many ico rating are credible and trustworthy.
such as ICObench, this site scrutinizes the existing team and reads the Whitepaper with an almost exact analysis.

it's better to accept third party reference help but still with full analysis from us.

[nik9990]

not always, there are twisted, but mostly they are talking about

[acsalles]

Dont believe anything on internet. Just believe your self and I think check ICO by yourself is better

[Vadik89]

It would seem that the ratings should help people choose projects, but none of us really knows what the project's creators really are, they pay to make us to get good ratings. Therefore, I believe that no one believes in them

[Julunguul]

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!

for me itself, ico rating is just as a refferer for short detail info about that ICO, high rating ICO at first time is not always a good one, you might found one ICO at first week it got at first page of icobench with a good rating, but eventually if the tokensale are good or even soldout, it rating will keep or even more great than before, but if not its rating will decrease.

instead of just see on ico rating website, i prefer to ask some friend about the ICO

[timet678]

Depends on the source I guess. Most of the time I just use those sites for basic information like Marketcap, percent of coins being sold, etc.

I do like a site called Crush Crypto for ICO reviews though. They've been at it for awhile and have proven to be trustworthy.

[summonerrk]

Recently I invested in some projects that advised the most famous sites with a rating After that I received a drawdown in the market in 50%

[liangweicha]

Dont believe anything on internet. Just believe your self and I think check ICO by yourself is better

But most of the time, it's hard for us to judge whether an ICO project is good or bad, and  the iCO evaluation website may be have some news that we don't know about. Isn't it?

[Murloc]

There is a well known method for ICO investing: do your own research. In the previous year once I've been asked to help one ICO to send some e-mails to different ICO related websites (including listings) and I've discovered that a pretty big part of the ICO ratings are require payments to get your project listed on their website. That comes especialy about the local websites. The mail nesson was that ICO ratings can never be 100% trusted. Ofcourse they may show the grneral hype around the coin but you should always make your own research.

[Igorpap2]

I never trusted rating agencies. All their estimates can be only indicative and often do not come true. If you choose from all rating agencies, then it's best to pay attention to digrate.com. Recently, they make me happy with their forecasts.