Weiss Ratings Defends its Decision to Give Bitcoin Only a C+ Grade

Wall Street is known for being a cut throat place where shrewd business people play as tough as possible in order to make gains or their destroy opponents. However, the crypto ecosystem can be at times far more nasty than any other market. One company that had the audacity to rate everyone’s favorite cryptocurrency somewhat poorly learned this recently, but it still stands by the rankings.

Also Read: NFL Superstars Like to Talk About Bitcoin Just Like the Rest of Us

Crypto+

Weiss Ratings, an independent U.S. rating agency which recently issued letter grades for cryptocurrencies has published a new report to explain its decision to score bitcoin a mere C+ (“fair”).

The company obviously felt it needed to counter attack against critics after its rankings caused it to get hurled insults from many cryptocurrency people and opinion leaders on social media. It even suffered a cyber attack which took down the Weiss site temporarily. The 14-page report is meant to answer the outcry by revealing key factors and data behind the rating.

Where is my A?

“For investors,” explains Weiss Ratings founder Martin D. Weiss, PhD, “an A rated crypto would be one that rarely crashes, and right now, there’s no such thing. But we do understand where developers are coming from. They tell us they don’t care about market fluctuations. They feel our ratings should reflect strictly the quality of their work and its relative success in the real world.”

Aiming to address both investors and developers, the Weiss model combines a number of sub-models: Risk and Reward, adapted from its stock and ETF ratings, plus Fundamentals and Technology, which are unique to cryptocurrencies. Here’s how they determined bitcoin performs on each:

Risk and Reward-“Bitcoin investors have recently made less than altcoin investors, while continuing to experience the risk of extreme volatility.”

Fundamentals-“Due credit is given for adoption and security, but Bitcoin loses points on network congestion with just four transactions per second and high fees of about $10 per transaction. In addition, the top five miners control some 70% of total hashpower, also a negative.”

Technology-“Bitcoin lacks the governance needed for prompt upgrades and is falling behind in a rapidly evolving industry.”

Another criticism that was leveled at the agency is that Weiss overweights price volatility. “Not so,” he says. “Our model accurately reflects an inconvenient truth about the market’s extreme swings. But our ratings are continually updated. If prices stabilize or speed enhancements are rolled out successfully, an upgrade is possible.”

Should cryptocurrency investors even worry about what rankings? Tell us what you think in the comments section below.

Images courtesy of Shutterstock.

Do you like to research and read about Bitcoin technology? Check out Bitcoin.com’s Wiki page for an in-depth look at Bitcoin’s innovative technology and interesting history.