Jump to content

Weiss Rating


McCull
 Share

Recommended Posts

Well, having read about some prior infractions with SEC (best to google 'martin d weiss' for unbiased opinion), I can say the following:

  • Weiss is set up to sell research and advisory service
  • Research may be potential pump 'n' dump schemes benefiting the inside/earlier investors
  • Rating of C applies to all tokens with small adjustments made to some tokens based on limited high level research and subject matter expert

Since this is the case, I'd expect their focus on some tokens that will be heavily promoted after their upgrade.  Let's hope their upgrade is independent and unconflicting as marketing/advertisements may lead to bias opinion that is often dependent on the dollars spent to cater to the rating agency.  I am not stating that for a fact but had come across a lot of unscrupulous schemes that often hinge on win-win between perpetrators.  In this case based on the no of run-ins with the SEC and law, there's uncertainty and something that should be investigated by the authorities before similar schemes occur.

Edited by bookworm
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well it is official! Weiss dose not have a clue of what they are doing!  There is now way in the world after this lame report that I would subscribe to their service. They may have just lost all their credibility. @Hodor @cmbartley @Hodlezerper Sad that I have more twitter followers than they do! LOL 

Edited by Droopy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As posted, I found this humorous ...

Quote

In a CNBC Squawk Box interview, Martin D. Weiss revealed that the firm looks at a number of factors when evaluating a crypto’s worth including investment risk/reward, technology, and the likelihood of adoption.

“You can have a great technology index — all the pieces are in place for a very nice, strong currency — but unless it’s actually reality-tested in the marketplace, it may not succeed, and that’s what this last, fourth index tests,” he said in the interview.

Now that their metrics are out, can we say that Weiss' research can be trusted and unbiased especially given non-expert subject matters of cryptos ... you be the judge!!!

Note: link on their rating of all coins at the end of this article

https://coincentral.com/weiss-cryptocurrency-ratings-unveiled-complicated-circumstances/

Edited by bookworm
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Droopy said:

Well it is official! Weiss dose not have a clue of what they are doing!  There is now way in the world after this lame report that I would subscribe to their service. They may have just lost all their credibility. @Hodor @cmbartley @Hodlezerper Sad that I have more twitter followers than they do! LOL 

hahahaha

I have to agree on this one. Supposedly they were lauded by some people as being fairly legitimate, and to be honest, I have not done any research into their abilities to analyze a stock or a bond. So, maybe they're useful there. Hell, The Motley Fool comes off pretty scammy and scummy in a lot of their marketing, but their recommendations aren't total trash, so I can give Weiss the benefit of the doubt on that one. 

But when it comes to cryptos, there is no standard. There is no metric. These guys clearly don't have a clue what they're up to (and frankly, nobody else in the crypto world does either, it's just that these guys purported to be experts so as to give some rating. LOL. "computer based model" over "40 years old". 

Dear god. I stand corrected. This was and currently is a joke. 

Until there are actual regulations in place and there are actual metrics for success of a given digital asset, this space will remain a total clustercluck. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

May I suggest that members leave some comments in the feedback field on their site pointing out the inaccuracies of their so called research. I have done so in regards to the control and centralisation comments. Keep it short and to the point sans emotion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Boblemoche said:

It's rigged, it's gonna give grade A to ETH and give a bad grade to XRP for the usual FUD reasons. 

"We would give XRP an A grade if it was not a centralized crypto, if founders didn't own that many coins. And wait, it's not a realy crypto currency". 

Same old BS.

Why doesn’t Ripple get a higher grade? Like Bitcoin, it gets an A for fundamentals, but it scores poorly on our Risk Index due to repeated price crashes. Its Technology Index gets clipped due to heavy centralization and control by its creators.

 

So this is exactly the BS I had predicted! Seriously...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, McCull said:

Seems to be a bit of confusion on the release times of this grading report.... I found this a moment ago, hope it helps to clarify the timing issue..

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/7sl255/dont_lose_your_mind_over_the_weiss_ratings_crypto/

 

just wondering, if they have actually given any rating to Ripple yet ( sorry its 19 pages long post and i m not sure if it has already been asked before here )

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Hodlezerper said:

Until there are actual regulations in place and there are actual metrics for success of a given digital asset, this space will remain a total clustercluck. 

Yep. I wrote this in another thread, but these kind of ratings won’t be useful until the market has been cleansed of joke coins and Ponzi schemes. I was expecting (hoping for) an actual evaluation of metrics of success, not just a snapshot of where coins stand in the speculation free-for-all. 

I suppose I can’t blame them. This is an emerging field and the real world applications are not fully fleshed out (an exception would be xrp, which has a clearly defined and working use case, which is why we thought it would rate highly) and so it is likely beyond Weiss’ will or ability to measure such things. Still, this shows how far we really have to go, and how early it still is. The crypto speculation market is still a joke to many on the outside, and this report won’t have helped that perception at all. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Seoulite said:

Yep. I wrote this in another thread, but these kind of ratings won’t be useful until the market has been cleansed of joke coins and Ponzi schemes. I was expecting (hoping for) an actual evaluation of metrics of success, not just a snapshot of where coins stand in the speculation free-for-all. 

I suppose I can’t blame them. This is an emerging field and the real world applications are not fully fleshed out (an exception would be xrp, which has a clearly defined and working use case, which is why we thought it would rate highly) and so it is likely beyond Weiss’ will or ability to measure such things. Still, this shows how far we really have to go, and how early it still is. The crypto speculation market is still a joke to many on the outside, and this report won’t have helped that perception at all. 

Agreed!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.