The world of digital assets continues to evolve at a rapid pace, and with it, the need for reliable evaluation frameworks. In 2025, Weiss Ratings remains one of the most prominent independent agencies assessing cryptocurrencies based on performance, technology, and adoption. Their latest mid-year update has stirred fresh discussion—especially after assigning Bitcoin a modest C+ rating, reigniting debates about its long-term dominance and investment potential.
Weiss Ratings, known for applying traditional financial analysis methods to blockchain projects, uses a proprietary algorithm to grade digital currencies from A to F. Unlike sentiment-driven rankings, their system evaluates three core pillars: return potential, risk level, and technology & adoption.
👉 Discover how top crypto projects stack up in 2025’s evolving market landscape.
How Weiss Ratings Works: A Balanced Approach
Weiss doesn’t just look at price surges or hype cycles. Instead, their model emphasizes sustainability and real-world utility.
- Return Potential: Assesses historical price performance and future profit outlook.
- Risk Level: Evaluates volatility, market concentration, and vulnerability to crashes.
- Technology & Adoption: Analyzes code strength, transaction speed, scalability, decentralization, developer activity, security, and user adoption.
This multidimensional framework helps investors cut through the noise—especially important in a space often driven by speculation.
The Biggest Losers: Projects Struggling to Gain Traction
Not all blockchain ventures succeed. Some fail technically; others lose community trust. In this year’s report, several projects received the lowest possible mark: E–.
Expanse (EXP)
Launched in 2015 as an Ethereum-based decentralized platform governed by a DAO (decentralized autonomous organization), Expanse has failed to innovate or grow its ecosystem. With minimal development activity and negligible market presence, it’s now considered nearly obsolete.
Matchpool (GUP)
A decentralized dating app rewarding matchmakers with tokens, Matchpool aimed to disrupt social networking but never gained mainstream traction. Low user engagement and outdated infrastructure contributed to its poor score.
Quark & SaluS
Both projects suffer from weak technological foundations and lack of real-world use cases. Quark’s decentralized currency system lacks scalability, while SaluS—with over a million coins in circulation—has shown little innovation or community growth.
These E– ratings signal high risk and minimal return potential—critical insights for cautious investors.
The Middle Ground: C+ Performers Holding Steady
Several major cryptocurrencies land in the average range, including Bitcoin (BTC), which retains its C+ grade despite its market dominance.
Why Is Bitcoin Still Only C+?
While Bitcoin remains the most recognized digital asset, Weiss cites key limitations:
- Slow transaction speeds
- High fees during peak times
- Limited functionality beyond store-of-value
- Environmental concerns over proof-of-work mining
These factors drag down its technology and adoption scores, even as its return potential remains strong during bull cycles.
Other C+ Coins
- NEM (XEM): Despite past exchange breaches linked to its name, NEM shows solid technical design and enterprise interest.
- Ontology (ONT): A blockchain focused on identity verification and data security, recently gaining attention through airdrops to NEO holders.
- Ripple (XRP): Facing ongoing regulatory challenges, Ripple’s score reflects legal uncertainty despite active use in cross-border payments.
- STEEM & Stellar Lumens (XLM): Both offer niche applications—content creation and fast remittances—but haven’t broken into broader adoption.
- Tron (TRX): Earned C+ after launching its mainnet and securing integration with platforms like PornHub for payments—a move that boosted visibility but not necessarily long-term credibility.
These projects are neither failing nor leading—they’re holding ground in a competitive field.
👉 See which mid-tier cryptos are quietly building real utility.
The Top Tier: B+ Leaders Setting the Pace
No cryptocurrency achieved an A rating—highlighting the industry’s immaturity. But three projects earned the highest mark: B+.
Cardano (ADA)
Cardano stands out for its research-driven development approach. Built using peer-reviewed academic papers, it emphasizes security, scalability, and sustainability. Since launching its testnet earlier in the year and listing on major platforms like eToro, ADA has seen significant price appreciation and growing investor confidence.
EOS (EOS)
EOS transitioned fully to its official blockchain in June and offers high-speed transactions with low latency—ideal for decentralized applications (dApps). However, governance issues persist, including concerns over centralized node control and RAM shortages that hinder developer access.
NEO (NEO)
Dubbed “China’s Ethereum,” NEO entered a new era with its first independent decentralized node launch. It also completed its first decentralized exchange listing in April 2025, marking progress toward true decentralization. Strong developer support and enterprise partnerships keep it competitive.
Despite their high scores, even these leaders face challenges in governance, decentralization, and regulatory compliance.
Ethereum: A Cautionary Tale of Promise vs. Problems
Ethereum (ETH) received a B in the January report and has maintained that position despite mixed signals.
On one hand:
- The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) confirmed Ethereum is not a security—offering regulatory clarity.
- Google co-founder Sergey Brin publicly expressed interest in Ethereum-based innovations.
- New token standards continue to emerge on its network.
On the other hand:
- A major breach earlier this year saw hackers steal $20 million from vulnerable nodes.
- Network congestion and high gas fees remain unresolved pain points.
- Delays in full Ethereum 2.0 rollout affect investor confidence.
While still a foundational platform for DeFi and NFTs, Ethereum must overcome technical hurdles to reclaim top-tier status.
FAQs: Addressing Key Investor Questions
Q: Why isn’t Bitcoin rated higher given its market dominance?
A: Market cap doesn’t equal technological superiority. Weiss evaluates functionality, efficiency, and innovation—not just price or popularity. Bitcoin excels as digital gold but lags in scalability and versatility.
Q: Can a cryptocurrency go from E– to A?
A: Yes—but it requires major upgrades in code quality, security, adoption, and team execution. Most E– projects lack the resources or vision to make such a leap.
Q: Does Weiss include regulatory risk in its ratings?
A: Indirectly. While not a direct metric, legal challenges impact risk and adoption scores. For example, Ripple’s ongoing lawsuit affects its overall grade.
Q: Are these ratings reliable for investment decisions?
A: They should be one tool among many. Always combine third-party analysis with your own research before investing.
Q: Why is there no A-rated cryptocurrency?
A: According to Weiss, no project yet balances high returns, low risk, and cutting-edge technology well enough to earn an A. The ecosystem is still maturing.
Q: How often are these ratings updated?
A: Weiss issues quarterly updates with comprehensive reviews every six months—mid-year and year-end reports provide the most detailed insights.
Final Thoughts: What the Ratings Reveal
The 2025 mid-year Weiss Ratings paint a clear picture: the crypto market is still in development. Even the best projects face technical, governance, or scalability issues. Meanwhile, many lesser-known tokens struggle to survive.
For investors, this means due diligence is more important than ever. High ratings don’t guarantee success—but they do highlight projects with stronger fundamentals.
As innovation accelerates and institutional interest grows, we may soon see the first A-rated cryptocurrency emerge. Until then, the race continues between visionaries building the future and those clinging to fading relevance.
👉 Stay ahead of the curve—explore where the next breakthrough could come from.