The Aftermath of the Weiss Cryptocurrency Ratings

On January 24, investment ratings company Weiss Ratings released its ratings of 74 cryptocurrencies. While the list is only available for purchase, it was possible to access it for free under a specific subdomain on the company’s site, which allowed many individuals to download, share, and read the list.

While some people were elated to visualize sturdy ratings for his or her personal favorites, more were angry and mazed by the apparently unresearched or maybe random grades given. Ethereum and Greek deity topped the ratings, every receiving a solid B, whereas Bitcoin was allotted associate degree unimposing C+.

Founded in 1971, Weiss Ratings has been a revered supplier of investment ratings for many years. However, the name of the corporate looks to own diminished quickly since its peak within the Nineteen Nineties. Following a 2009 SEC settlement, Weiss Ratings has become, within the eyes of the many, a service of questionable advantage and legitimacy.

Unfortunately, the cryptocurrency ratings provided by the corporate square measure being equally questioned. many of us square measure furious that Bitcoin received a lower grade than the B- allotted to Cardano, whose price is nearly entirely derived from its whitepaper and team. Even a lot of square measure furious that established and revered comes like Counterparty, Monero, Stellar, and Lisk received an equivalent solid C grade as culture coin Dogecoin and vaporware Verge.

Despite the inconsistencies within the report, some investors appear to own placed trades in step with the ratings. Steem, that enjoyed a B- rating (and one among simply 5 coins rated higher than a C+) saw a second pump of over half-hour, rising from US$4.30 to US$5.90. The coin has since continuing to understand, and presently sits slightly below US$6.30.

No coin received a B+ or higher, and none were pegged with a D- or lower. Of the seventy four coins listed, solely twenty didn't receive a letter grade of a C, with five coins seeing a B, and fifteen ending up with a D. The letter grades vary from A to E, with every letter reminiscent of the “strength” of investment, from glorious (A) to terribly weak (E).

Perhaps the foremost unfair rating was allotted to GameCredits, whose atrocious D+ compares the coin to huge pump-and-dump Es, that received an equivalent grade. luckily for GameCredits supporters, the poor rating didn't appear to own any meaning impact on its value. In fact, the coin has recently surged, and has even appreciated over two hundredth since the ratings went live.

While it had been insulting that a project like GameCredits, that has four years of active development, a team of over a hundred members, and heavyweight partnerships with business leaders like Unity, received such associate degree awful grade, supporters of the project seem mostly unfazed.

While these ratings didn't seem to own a significant impact on the bulk of coins listed, this event will have larger implications. The role of institutional investors has been a hot topic since a lot of and a lot of entities have entered the fray. If these ratings mirror the potential of institutional traders within the world of blockchain, then ancient investment expertise plays a moment role within the ability of a cryptocurrency dealer.