Do you believe in crypto ratings?

[smyslov]

After I saw that Bitcoin has a bad rating in their database I concluded that this is paid promotion to hype coins they are supporting, how can you say that Bitcoin is the worst when it has a huge dominance in the market, the coins that they listed as leading cannot even get closer to Bitcoin's dominance in the market.

[1714951945]

1714951945

[1714951945]

1714951945

[1714951945]

1714951945

[DabsPoorVersion]

No, it will be hard to believe in some crypto ratings. Just like what you have shared, there are two different site that have their own rating towards bitcoin which has a different result. One makes bitcoin as the worst and another makes it the best. It only means that they are being manipulated based on their point of view towards crypto.

[Ryushin]

Ratings can't be the same for everybody, some will choose Bitcoin as first and others will choose altcoin as first on their lists, that's why I can't trust any one's rating or any website rating, we are different people with different opinions, some rates for money while others rates are based on their research

[elewton]

After I saw that Bitcoin has a bad rating in their database I concluded that this is paid promotion to hype coins they are supporting, how can you say that Bitcoin is the worst when it has a huge dominance in the market, the coins that they listed as leading cannot even get closer to Bitcoin's dominance in the market.

True! Most of rating sites nowadays work based on their behalf. They are more likely to promote a coin that they are hired to advertise. I don't have the habit of believing rating sites because it's too easy to be manipulated by the creators or administrators. Instead, I choose to believe in users' feedback on crypto forums such as bitcointalk!

[Furryball]

Normal rating systems are good, I'm talking about ICO free rating websites, still you can't depend on someone's rating, you need to do your own research and find reasons why a coin should take the first place on your list.

[aemma]

First, I think they have different views or rather they did their ratings based on different factors, sometimes they might be paid and sometimes they might not, as for me, I do not care what they say because it won't change anything in the crypto space. That is, people already know the crypto they like, the crypto with great value, the crypto that is trustworthy and so on, of which most of the cases, Bitcoin comes out first; thus coming with this rating won't change their mind. In the same way, in the crypto space today, most people believes holding Bitcoin first is the right way to get started owing to its nature of growth. Therefore I wouldn't say I believe them or not, but one thing that is certain is that, I have my own way of researching thus knowing the best to invest in.

[rahmatullah9305]

Normal rating systems are good, I'm talking about ICO free rating websites, still you can't depend on someone's rating, you need to do your own research and find reasons why a coin should take the first place on your list.

Yes, but trusting an ICO free ranking website also does not give someone an advantage, because ICO free ranking website is also built by other people based on the analysis he uses, so it is very feasible if we have to trust ourselves in this matter, meaning we also have to work in terms of analyzing as they do.

[ongkok87]

No, it will be hard to believe in some crypto ratings. Just like what you have shared, there are two different site that have their own rating towards bitcoin which has a different result. One makes bitcoin as the worst and another makes it the best. It only means that they are being manipulated based on their point of view towards crypto.

There is already plenty of evidence that many such sites have been manipulated and in my opinion it is clear that today many people do not really believe in a review given by the ratings. in fact the ratings can be bought by people who are currently very detrimental to investors who are stuck on the wrong project

[kapalmabur]

the rating of the crypto project is honestly very helpful, especially if for a long-term investment,
there are many good projects now still undervalued, you can invest there

[danherbias07]

It will always be biased.
Never believe anything that is posted by a paid service.

It will be better if a forum member will do that for you or just based on the ranking of each veteran you knew.
There will also be a little bias as their part but not as great as those who are being paid to do it.
Specially if it is for the one who paid better.

[bits4books]

Like any ratings-cryptocurrency ratings can be paid. The only question is the integrity of the publication. Also, they have different metrics and people behind it.
It is better to judge the market for yourself, and do not believe any ratings and other "TOP 10 CRYPTOCURRENCIES 2020" ONLY IN OUR ARTICLE " this is all nonsense

[coinsycrip09]

i cannot explain anything about this because each agency has their own assessment standards.
that's why they have different results.

we don't need to worry about this, and if you ask do i believe?
of course i can't trust them right away. i only believe in the analysis that i have made myself.

[crzy]

Due to the bad reputation of some rating site, I don't trust it anymore because I don't want to lose money just because I believe on those ratings and reviews. I started learning analyzing every new token/coins base on my own ways, and Its more effective since I saw a not so good project and yet the reviews on that is 5 Star and it looks like no problem at all which is a big risk for the invetors.

[masterrex]

Hello,

I see big differences between these two big rating agencies CCID (The China Center for Information Industry Development) and WeissRating. According to CCID is Bitcoin one of the worst cryptocurrencies. In WeissRating Bitcoin has achieved the best mark. Also, EOS in WeissRating has a pretty different rating. How can they get so different results?

CCID


WeissRating

Yes, I believe in crypto ratings, but it depends on a purpose, But I think both rating agencies are using a different methodology when in terms of ranking cryptocurrencies. But I'm not sure about it, maybe the Chinese rating agency *CCID has their own requirements and Bitcoin failed to prove it. thats why they rank Bitcoin much lower compare to other coins.  It is also the same on WeissRating But in different methods.

[nelson4lov]

~

My point exactly. Each to their own. Both CCID and WeissRating have criteria for rating cryptocurrencies the way they do. However, none of them are 100% accurate. Rating sites like these are best used as a guide to make our own decisions. Also, It shouldn't be about which token or coin they list at the top of the list.  The rating by CCID serms a little biased in my opinion though. I mean, EOS over Bitcoin is so unreal. Then I remember that EOS is closely related to asian. Again, each to their own.

[hongchao123]

I believe in crypto reviews, white papers, etc. After reading this i can create my own rating. I dont think that public ratings worth anything

[bellaayu]

For me too fast if we believe in the Crypto rankings. These two sites have the criteria they have specified. However, I see that they make a lot of mistakes and like false. Many wrong data from this site. Many people here have experience and of course, they wouldn't be easy to believe with a site like this. I hope everyone is cautious because if it loses money because it believes in sites that only manipulate data, I think we will regret it.

[Natalim]

Here's the reality, if we like the rating we would believe on it but if not, we will not.
We are investors, and we have our own coins, so we are bias as well, and I don't think that those raters are not bias, they could be.

Actually, I'd rather make some research, read the news mores and speculation from different people before I make judgement.
What I learn in the market is don't trust anyone but ourselves as they might be manipulating us.

[Yamifoud]

Should I have to believe this thing? probably not and to see the lies behind their rating and just like many others makes fake rating for a reason ( will that it something how much they pay for it). yeah, it wasn't been proven how they gather that info and rating as we believe that they have also the criteria but as what I see those differences, it appears in my mind to not believe with. 

Anyways, we know the situation already and we saw that Bitcoin takes the lead and no other coin did it. There is no sense to read and watch their ratings for this won't give any help to us.

[Ucy]

Depends on what they are basing their ratings on. I think the most important crypto principles (the principles/foundation Bitcoin Blockchain was based on) have to be captured first in their ratings otherwise it does not matter much.
The principles are decentralization, transparency, immutablity, censorship resistant, security, privacy/anonymity, permissionless/trustless, etc.    A good rating site has to make sure that the foundation/principles are solid and followed by cryptocurrencies in the course of their development.
Few likely started on solid foundation but most of them usually end up deviating.
I believe if you are rating a building, you have to start from how good their foundation are. You don't give an attractive building with lots of "cool" features but poor foundation (or that deviate from its govt approved foundation) a good rating.

Those ^ core principles are what the first Cryptocurrency was founded on. They are what make cryptocurrency unique, valuable and secure. The principles should not be weakened or ignored.. . they have to be growing stronger.