On which basis ICO or tokens get ratings

[Dimanman113]

I stopped trusting these evaluation sites because many projects that were well appreciated, did not give a good result! I think companies pay for ratings.

[Genosx]

I think the best answer in this question that which basis ICO or tokens get ratings, in the way that if they are useful and helpful to the user or investors in this business they give good ratings.

[olsyd]

There are many websites like ICObench, ICOratings that make a list of new coming cryptocurrency and ICO and sorted them out by ratings which they gave to the ICOs. My question is what are the factors that they examine to rate those ICOs. Anyone can help me.
Thank you all. 

These ratings are bought, I don't believe them. It's like an advertisement but for potential investors and no more, beautiful numerals

[rb26]

They usually judge an ICO from many things like: team, goal, development, roadmap planning and so on. But today many ICO websites are wrong in judging a project, sometimes they give a high score for an ICO scam

That's right, and that's the main reason why I really don't rely on any of the ratings. Most probably those who rate ICOs were just paid to give high ratings, though I don't want to generalize. I don't know how they decided to give ratings based on the said factors especially when people can put very promising things in their whitepapers and roadmaps even if they don't mean it and just for the sake of getting people to invest on their project. Maybe there are still some truth in one of them ratings but we can't be so sure. I just feel bad for them legit ones being dragged by scammers.

[Julunguul]

actually I do not know how the website rating system is like that, and whether the ICO has potential. It's better not to look over the rating, but also visit their website or discussion group, there you can understand more and the ins and outs of the ICO's interest.
I usually do more research on ICO website, team, advisor, whitepaper, and roadmap before actually deciding whether ICO is good or not.

[Conte_Forni]

I do not believe in these ratings in general. I think many projects there buy themselves an estimate, ratings do not help from SCAM! I do not understand at all for what they are needed, projects with the best raiting I have failed, and with bad assessments on the contrary brought profit!

[shampapk1988]

Most of such ratings are fake and the ICOs cannot be judged by those ratings. So I always avoid such ratings. Still as much as I know these rating are given based on their projects, team working behind, security issues etc.

[crypt0junkie28]

I never really believed in every ratings. What I looked for before I invested in chozun 途赞 was the team, the roadmap, I read carefully through their whitepaper. It appears to me that it's unique and innovative. Some ratings are actually paid.

[Osakrita]

There are many websites like ICObench, ICOratings that make a list of new coming cryptocurrency and ICO and sorted them out by ratings which they gave to the ICOs. My question is what are the factors that they examine to rate those ICOs. Anyone can help me.
Thank you all. 

I do not believe in those ratings, most of them are bought. ICObench is not good at all, for me the best option  is icodrops to check projects

Well said, we cannot rule out the chances that some of those ratings are bought, they are part of the fraud in the ecosystem. We are projects with good ratings failing while those with poor ratings eventually doing better. One is not to make investment decisions based purely on those ratings

[Plecet Bank]

I think the criteria of assessment of concept, whitepapper, as well as from teams that run it. Perhaps there is also assessment of movement of his token sales. and also judged from how many people's interest in ICO.

[David_mcDavid]

Don't take for granted those rating, at least read more then one and make average, it's a good way to exlude outliers

[3kpk3]

Wow, I advise you not to use icobench.
Most of the time the site's ratings are not objective enough, and many are paid for.

Very true. On that note, I would suggest not trusting any ICO rating site blindly, but these review sites are good for reference purposes though. Among these websites, Icobench seems to be the best. It is better to research the campaign that you wish to participate in through this forum itself(Campaign manager, development team, whitepaper, number of participants etc) and then decide whether to join or not.

[Osakrita]

While I do not totally trust the a lot of these rating sites, here are some factors they use to rate projects, they include the team(their expertise, presence or absence of KYC documents) , Vision (accesssed from the white paper), product, Social media presence and size of community, website etc

[Pa1n]

Ratings are sometimes really virtual. Dont look tokens ratings always. The most important thing is the crew and idea.

[cryptothief]

As most people seem to be saying, ICO rating sites are very subjective, and I would personally never invest solely on the basis of a rating. Saying that, they can be good to pick up new ICOs and then do the research yourself, using the criteria that you specifically consider important. I like to see a working product, or at least MVP, but most new projects now seem to be selling bottled air. Last ICO I invested in was back in January (currently on the exchanges at about an 80% loss), so I tend to wait until they hit the markets now. It's rare that any are reaching the exchanges at above the ICO price, especially with the current market conditions. Tread with care.