The only ratings agency that combines the broadest coverage, strictest independence, complete objectivity, high ethics, and a commitment to safety.
Weiss Ratings, which began operations in 1971, is the only financial ratings agency that provides a combination of five critical advantages for users: The broadest coverage, the strictest independence, complete objectivity, high ethics and a commitment to safety.
Weiss Ratings issues grades on 53,000 institutions and investments. These include:
- Technology, adoption and risk/reward ratings on over 100 distributed ledgers (cryptocurrencies), updated weekly. Weiss is the only rating agency that covers this asset class.
- Buy-sell-hold ratings for investors on all U.S. listed stocks, mutual funds and ETFs, updated daily.
- Safety ratings for consumers on virtually all U.S. banks, credit unions and insurance companies, updated quarterly.
Unlike ratings agencies based on the issuer-pay model, such as Moody’s, Standard and Poor’s and Fitch, Weiss Ratings has never received — and will never accept — compensation of any kind from issuers or sponsors. Its sole revenue source is from the sale of its ratings and research to consumers, investors, and other end users. In addition, unlike nearly all other ratings or research organizations, Weiss Ratings accepts no advertising from issuers. Esquire wrote “Weiss is the only [rating agency] with no conflicts of interest.”
All ratings are based on objective computer models driven by complex algorithms with large volumes of data, excluding each analyst’s personal opinion from the process. As a result, the rated entities are always treated with complete objectivity and fairness. Weiss Ratings has been noted for its objectivity and accuracy by Members of Congress, the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) and major news organizations.
All Weiss Ratings employees must abide by the Weiss Personal Securities Transactions (PST) policy, designed to avoid even the appearance of unfair advantage in their own investing or trading. Since operations began in 1971, there has been no known instance of unfair advantage or violation of the Weiss PST policy. Nor has there been any allegation of such by a government agency.
A Commitment to Safety.
The ratings models deployed by Weiss pay close attention to safety and risk avoidance. Unlike issuer-pay rating agencies and most Wall Street research firms, which have often given their top ratings to high-risk companies that then crashed or failed, Weiss Ratings has a long track record of downgrading unsafe companies well ahead of time. The New York Times wrote that Weiss was “the first to warn of the dangers and say so unambiguously,” and Barron’s reported that Weiss is the “leader in identifying vulnerable companies.” With respect to the profit performance of Weiss Stock Ratings during a market decline, The Wall Street Journal reported that Weiss ranked #1, ahead of all major rating agencies and research companies covered, including Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, Merrill Lynch and Standard & Poor’s.
How We Rate Cryptocurrencies
The Weiss Crypto Ratings, updated weekly, are the first by a financial rating agency. They are based on a groundbreaking model that analyses thousands of data points on each coin’s investment risk, investment reward, technology, and adoption in the real world.
The new world of cryptocurrencies has delivered astonishing profits to investors and holds great promise for the future. But the market also suffers from lax standards, murky operators, marketing hype, and periodic market crashes. It desperately needs the clarity that only robust, impartial ratings can provide.
We’re proud to be the first financial rating agency to bring that benefit to investors – to help avoid the hype, while identifying the few solid and promising cryptocurrencies that truly merit their attention.
Despite early growing pains, cryptocurrencies and blockchain technology are emerging as a potentially powerful force that could affect investors and consumers in profound ways. Indeed, the unprecedented speed of the changes is a telltale sign of a global paradigm shift — in e-commerce, banking, communications, social networking, Big Data, the Internet of Things, possibly even essential pillars of government and society.
Depending on how institutions and the public interact, the paradigm shift could be disruptive and revolutionary, fostering greater extremes of boom and bust, aggravating income inequality and creating more political divisiveness. Or, the shift could be constructive and evolutionary — with transparency, full disclosure and objective standards for all stakeholders. This latter aspect is where Weiss Ratings proposes to make a contribution.
Weiss Ratings does not claim to have more knowledge or data than other ratings agencies. Rather, it has achieved this performance accuracy by combining three strengths: (1) robust, intelligent computer models built by our team of analysts and software developers, (2) analysis of vast amounts of data, and (3) above all, independence.
Now, Weiss Ratings is applying these strengths to cryptocurrencies. In addition, to adapt its model-building know-how to cryptocurrencies, Weiss Ratings has built a global team of analysts that specialize in the cryptocurrency ecosystem and blockchain, or more broadly speaking, Distributed Ledger Technology (DLT).
The end result is letter grade for each cryptocurrency that’s ultimately designed for all stakeholders in the cryptocurrency space, beginning with individual investors who are new to cryptocurrencies but willing to take the obvious risks.
For these investors, the Weiss Crypto Ratings provide unbiased guidance free of any conflicts of interest. They are designed to help lead investors to the potentially rich rewards in cryptocurrencies with lower-than-average downside risk, sustainable technology, and solid adoption by users.
Looking ahead, the Weiss Crypto Ratings should also become a vital selection tool for consumers holding cryptocurrencies to buy goods and services, for merchants accepting payment in cryptocurrencies, and for projects seeking to raise money via cryptocurrencies.
Weiss Ratings’ overall goal is to help the public avoid both the hype and the fear – to invest and do business with more confidence and, at the same time, more awareness of the possible dangers.
Of course, the Weiss Crypto Ratings are not the only thing to consider – either when choosing a cryptocurrency or deciding to invest in crypto to begin with. Such decisions are up to each individual investor. Weiss Crypto Ratings are in no way tailored to each person’s individual circumstances and are not investment advice. Although Weiss Ratings has an enviable record of identifying opportunities to pursue or avoid, past performance is no guarantee of future success.
The Weiss Ratings Scale
Investors should interpret the Weiss Cryptocurrency grade scale with these terms:
A = excellent
B = good
C = fair
D = weak
E = very weak
A plus or minus sign indicates the upper third or lower third of a grade range, respectively. In addition, an F grade is assigned to cryptocurrencies that have failed or are subject to credible allegations of fraud.
Before acting on, or reacting to, any single grade, investors should be aware of the following five caveats:
Caveat 1. Do not misunderstand the Weiss Ratings scale. Other rating agencies use a scale from triple A to single C. In that scheme a B grade is “junk” and a C is close to failure. In contrast, Weiss Ratings’ B is “good” and C is “fair.” Based on a study of the Weiss Ratings by the U.S. Government Accountability Office, an institution is not categorized “vulnerable” unless its grade is D+ or lower.
Thus, cryptocurrencies do not have to achieve an A grade to merit interest by investors. A “B” or even “B-” also qualify as the investment rating equivalent to “buy.” At the same time, investors should not be overly alarmed by a “C” rating. It is a passing grade; and for investors, implies the equivalent of “no action” – either “hold” if you own the investment or “avoid” if you don’t.
Caveat 2. No safe cryptocurrencies. At this early stage in their evolution, there is no such thing as a “safe” cryptocurrency. All investors in the sector must be willing to accept wide price volatility, undefined regulatory risk, frequent market irregularities, and the market impacts of deficiencies in platforms, such as currency exchanges.
Caveat 3. Frequent ratings changes. The metrics used to evaluate cryptocurrencies can change more rapidly than those of other investments. Therefore, when using Weiss Crypto Ratings, investors should expect frequent upgrades and downgrades.
Caveat 4. Opinion. Although Weiss Crypto Ratings are based on objective analysis free of conflicts of interest, they should not be interpreted as be-all-end-all evaluations. Every grade issued by any rating agency is ultimately an opinion, to be used by the public in the context of opinions from analysts, developers and users.
Caveat 5. Incomplete. No ratings model, no matter how well designed, can evaluate all factors; and this is especially true in new, unchartered sectors like cryptocurrencies. For example, to fully evaluate the blockchain software programs of each new cryptocurrency, teams of expert blockchain developers would need to audit and thoroughly test the code. Although that effort would be an important step forward, especially for developers and certain institutions, it is beyond the scope of this project. Instead, to help guide investors to cryptocurrencies with the most robust technology, the Weiss Ratings evaluates each blockchain technology by using a series of the proxy metrics described below.
The Weiss Crypto Ratings model is built with five basic layers:
Layer 1. Current data on each currency’s technology, adoption, risk and reward
Layer 2. Proprietary formulas that convert the data into comparable ratios
Layer 3. Proprietary sub-models that aggregate the ratios to measure key factors and features considered critical to the potential success or failure of investments in each cryptocurrency
Layer 4. Two grades: (1) the Tech/Adoption Grade which evaluates the long-term potential of each cryptocurrency and (2) a shorter-term Risk/Reward Grade based on market price patterns
Layer 5. The overall Weiss Crypto Rating, using a complex algorithm to combine the Tech/Adoption Grade and Risk/Reward Grade
Disclosure of Model Components
To be consistent with the transparency that has become the hallmark of the cryptocurrency space, Weiss Ratings’ intent over time is to disclose as much as possible about its model.
However, decades of experience in the financial marketplace indicate that, once armed with the specific formulas or processes of a ratings model, some rated entities seek to game the system: They try to manipulate data they can influence or control with the goal of achieving an unfair advantage. To help avoid this outcome, disclosure must proceed in phases, beginning with a broad description of the four key models in the Weiss Crypto Ratings model. These are:
The Risk Model. A Weiss proprietary model based on a composite of sub-models that measure (a) relative and absolute price fluctuations over multiple time frames, (b) declines from peak to trough in terms of frequency and magnitude, (c) market bias, and other factors.
The Reward Model. The Weiss Crypto Ratings proprietary model based on a composite of sub-models that evaluate (a) returns compared to moving averages, (b) absolute returns compared to a benchmark, (c) smoothed returns compared to a benchmark, and other factors.
The Technology Model. The Weiss Crypto Ratings proprietary model which evaluates each cryptocurrency’s potential to achieve a variety of goals, including high transaction speeds and other scaling solutions, decentralization, energy efficiency, sophistication of monetary policy, governance capabilities, flexibility to upgrade, and others.
The Adoption Model. The Weiss Crypto Ratings proprietary model, which evaluates real-world network security, network capacity, speed, scalability, market penetration, decentralization, developer participation, public acceptance, plus other key factors.
Native Coins vs. Non-Native Tokens
First, some defintions …
Native coins are digital assets uniquely connected to a particular blockchain or distributed ledger technology (DLT). Ether (ETH), for instance, is native to the Ethereum blockchain. Bitcoin (BTC) inhabits the Bitcoin blockchain. NEO lives only on the NEO distributed ledger. As discussed above, to rate them, our Tech/Adoption grade assesses their technology and usage. And our Risk/Reward grade captures how they perform as real-world investments. By contrast …
Non-native tokens are something else entirely. They don’t have their own distributed ledger. Instead, they typically run on top of a another distributed ledger like Ethereum, NEO or EOS. 0x (ZRK), for example, is the non-native token designed to enable peer-to-peer trading of all manner of Ethereum-based digital assets — tokens, digital art, online gaming assets, etc. Power Ledger (POWR) is an Ethereum-based token aimed at enabling peer-to-peer trading of renewable energy. Plus there about 1,000 more that we cover.
On this website, we simplify the terminology as follows:
Coin = native coin
Tokens = non-native token
Coin to token = non-native tokens designed to be native coins. These are listed on our website along with the coins and are rated like native coins.
Important: Ratings and information on non-native tokens are available strictly to platinum members. If you are a platinum member, to view them and use other platinum features be sure to log in with your username and password.
Our Ratings Model for Non-Native Tokens
Unlike our ratings model for native coins, there is no Tech/Adoption grade. Instead, our model for non-native tokens is based on a composite of the following four sub-models:
- Our Availability Model evaluates a variety of factors, including an evaluation of the exchanges where each token is listed. We feel exchange operators are uniquely positioned to observe the ebb and flow of demand from investors.
- Our Liquidity Model uses aggregate daily trading volume and other metrics, providing another window into the perceived quality of the application, its token, and its use case.
- Our Risk Model evaluates the downside risk investors face whenever they buy or hold the token. And …
- Our Reward Model evaluates the upside potential an investor could benefit from.
The risk and reward models are the same for both coins and tokens.
Serious Challenges for Non-Native Tokens
The vast majority of non-native tokens suffer from serious challenges which have yet to be overcome.
Many have been complete failures, due factors such as poor planning, poor execution, lack of concern and transparency for investors, or worse.
Many have been highly experimental or are too early in development to evaluate fully.
Many are very illiquid. They trade infrequently and/or in very low volume. This doesn’t mean they’re bad projects and don’t have a future. But with investors paramount in mind, we cannot give good overall Weiss Crypto Ratings to tokens if they’re difficult to buy or sell.
And worst of all, few non-native tokens provide adequate transparency for investors.
Thus, in order to produce ratings useful to investors, we evaluate them differently, as we describe above. And for now at least, none get better than a C grade. A Weiss Rating of “C” means “fair.” That’s not good. But it’s also not bad. In fact, for now, you can safely regard any non-native token with a rating C- or better to be at least promising enough to merit further study.
For both coins and tokens, each model is appropriately weighted, compared and then evaluated in terms of how it interacts with the other three models systemically. The end result of the analytical process is the overall Weiss Crypto Rating.
In sum, Weiss Crypto Ratings provide a well-rounded, solidly-grounded opinion based on hard facts and steeped in four decades of ratings experience. They can serve as much-needed cryptocurrency GPS for investors.