Some intrepid readers among you may have noticed we’ve started rolling out ratings for our reviews- this way, readers can get a better perspective on how we rate ICO’s while being more objective than the previous iterations of the system. Here’s what it looks like:
We chose the top 8 factors we look at when reviewing projects deeply and formatted them to have equal weighting. Each aspect can range from 1-5 stars, each contributing ~3 points towards the final score. For example, if a project has earned 5 stars for its concept, it has earned the maximum of 15 points (it’s a little bit less) for its final score in that category. Risk is weighted in the red, as projects want to have as low of a risk as possible – stars are multiplied by 1.4 and subtracted from the total score of the project.
The factors are below:
Concept – Is the project an interesting idea? Does it provide something we feel will be useful in the future? Can you pitch this in 30 seconds to someone and sell them on it?
Community – How large is the Telegram? Other associated social media channels? Has the team been active historically, even before the ICO? Does the team have a dedicated marketing team? Are they outsourcing their community effort, and to whom? What do the users say about the project? Are there diehard fans?
Potential – In what ways can the project help the world? What are the applications of the project? How large is the addressable market? Is the sector growing or shrinking historically?
Hype – How many people are talking about this project over others? Will it have a grand welcoming? How do buyers feel about the project? What are detractors saying (or not saying)?
Uniqueness – How many competitors are there? Does the project provide a solution not otherwise possible without it? Does it bring some new technology or aspect to blockchain?
Cap – How appropriate is the cap? Is it priced high compared to its peers, or too low to achieve a good community effect? Can it reasonably increase in value, and how much would be required to do this?
Team – How much star power is on the team? Are there individuals with past entrepreneurial experience? What connections do the teams have with others in their market? How strong are their advisors?
Risk – How much executional risk is there? Market risk? Existential risk? Time or competitive risk?
Finally, our observations on how to interpret GH Score tiering:
0-60: Pass Tier – not worth considering.
61-70: Middling Tier- not worth considering unless an investor sees a special edge.
71-80: Good Tier- these are worth considering an investment and are solid candidates for further personal research.
81-90: Great Tier- these are generally above average picks that will perform well given all of the bullish indication.
91-100: Amazing Tier- this the cream of the crop, the top projects of their respective industries and must be paid attention to.