This is a concept that Jeff Thomas, blogging in International Man, is proposing. It might make some sense.
Writing in the group's "Communique" today, Thomas breaks down the problem with fiat currency and the rise of cryptos out of nothing - not backed by anything other than proof of...well, some of these don't even have proof of "concept," let alone proof of anything that the cryptosphere wants to see ("proof of work," or "proof of stake").
Here's a link to the full article. Quoting Thomas on junk cryptos and investment-grade ones:
What this boils down to is that we’re living in an era in which there are more forms of fiat currency in use than at any other time in history… and more are being formed as we speak. So many cryptos are being created at present that we may soon begin to speak of “junk cryptos” as we once spoke of “junk bonds” to hopefully elevate the more reliable cryptos from their cousins. We may even come to speak of “investment grade cryptos.”
Okay, that's a cool idea, actually: you've got junk cryptos that are thinly traded and floating around on questionable exchanges, and then you've got the ones that are more established, legitimate, and backed by something (even if that something is a large network of users trading it, or a large system of computers and coders building things on top of it).
Where do you draw the line, though: do you say "only the Top 20?" Top 10? Top 100?
Or is Bitcoin really the only Investment-Grade Crypto right now?
Food for thought, and for further discussion.