The Aftermath of the Weiss Cryptocurrency Ratings - The Merkle

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

While some individuals were elated to see strong ratings for their individual favorites, many more were infuriated and perplexed by the seemingly unresearched or even random grades given. Ethereum and EOS topped the ratings, each receiving a solid B, while Bitcoin wasgoed assigned an unimpressive C+.

Founded ter 1971, Weiss Ratings has bot a respected provider of investment ratings for decades. However, the reputation of the company seems to have diminished rapidly since its peak ter the 1990s. Following a 2009 SEC settlement, Weiss Ratings has become, ter the eyes of many, a service of questionable merit and legitimacy.

Unluckily, the cryptocurrency ratings provided by the company are being similarly questioned. Many people are furious that Bitcoin received a lower grade than the B- assigned to Cardano, whose value is almost entirely derived from its whitepaper and team. Even more are enraged that established and respected projects like Counterparty, Monero, Stellar, and Lisk received the same solid C grade spil meme coin Dogecoin and vaporware Edge.

Despite the inconsistencies te the report, some investors seem to have placed trades according to the ratings. Steem, which loved a B- rating (and one of just five coins rated above a C+) eyed an instant pump of overheen 30%, rising from US$Four.30 to US$Five.90. The coin has since continued to appreciate, and presently sits just below US$6.30.

No coin received a B+ or higher, and none were pegged with a D- or lower. Of the 74 coins listed, only 20 did not receive a letterteken grade of a C, with Five coins witnessing a B, and 15 ending up with a D. The letterteken grades range from A to E, with each letterteken corresponding to the “strength” of investment, from excellent (A) to very powerless (E).

Perhaps the most unfair rating wasgoed assigned to GameCredits, whose atrocious D+ compares the coin to massive pump-and-dump Einsteinium, which received the same grade. Fortunately for GameCredits volgers, the poor rating did not seem to have any meaningful effect on its price. Te fact, the coin has recently surged, and has even appreciated overheen 20% since the ratings went live.

While it wasgoed insulting that a project like GameCredits, which has four years of active development, a team of overheen 100 members, and heavyweight partnerships with industry leaders like Unity, received such an awful grade, volgers of the project show up largely unfazed.

While thesis ratings did not show up to have a major effect on the majority of coins listed, this event does have larger implications. The role of institutional investors has bot a hot topic since more and more entities have entered the fray. If thesis ratings reflect the capability of institutional traders ter the world of blockchain, then traditional investment practice plays a minute role ter the capability of a cryptocurrency trader.

Related movie: Begin $15 BITCOIN MINING FARM CHEAP ( Hashing24 TUT)