Grading Services for the Amateur Collector

You can make a lot of arguments about specific market segments, and we can disagree about the exact dates of when the bull and bear markets started.

However, even when the overall coin market is going in one general direction, various segments might be doing different things (Proof Franklins are hot one month, MS Trimes are hot sometime later, Early Gold is hot some other time). One or two market segments don't prove the status of the overall market.

I'm making the generalization that a decade ago, most would agree we were in a bull market. During the bull market, grades loosened.

Somewhere since then, we were in a bear market. During the bear market, grades tightened. (This has traditionally been how grades go - if you think of TPG's not as "graders" in an absolute sense, but as "valuers" in a relative sense, this is easier to understand).

This isn't an overnight process, and it takes collectors a while to realize it. FUN last week might have been a great show, and might have shown signs of life in the market (and a turnaround, if you're solidly in the bull camp).

It will take some time for that to percolate into the TPG grading. For now, many collectors recognize that things have tightened over the past couple of years.

These things have no hard science or concrete data, they are more like feelings and educated guesses based on evaluation of collector feelings, auction results, and market reports. I can't say anything with certainty, I can only report on my interpretations of what it seems like people are saying.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Thanks @ddddd for the tag. I assure you that I'm an equal opportunity flamer - While I love authentication services - I hate grading services!

physics-fan3.14, posted: "Anacs may be the cheapest, and they're fine for authentication. AVOID ICG. They are worthless."

LOL, This poster must have used ICG in the past five years (??) because he sounds like he is speaking from personal experience. I know most of the long-time graders at all four major services and can tell you that none of the major TPGS are "worthless."

Experienced professional numismatists (this excludes many authors who recycle commonly available knowledge) will tell you that they can find instances of over-graded and under-graded coins in every services slab. I tell folks that the same exact coin is worth more in a PCGS slab, than an NGC slab, than an ICG slab, than an ANACS slab, than a SEGS slab, etc. So Jason and I have a different opinion of the TPGS rankings.

"If there is a chance that you or your heirs will sell them, I'd consider NGC or PCGS. Both are more expensive than ANACS, but both are also more highly regarded. All three will do a fine job of authentication, but the grades are more consistently accurate with NGC and PCGS. The guarantees are also stronger [NOT TRUE] - which means their coins sell for more."


physics-fan3.14, posted: "So, for the past several years, people have been complaining about "gradeflation." For several years, we've also been in a bull (upwards) market. In a bull market, optimism prevails and grades tend to loosen.
However, now that the coin market is in a downward trend, there is a linked tightening of grades. That is completely expected. Values are decreasing, and so market grading (which is really judging the value of coins) is getting tighter. For the past year or so, the market has been in a secular trend, and grading has been getting tighter. Both of these are good things for the collector/buyer. I would argue that this is a natural, healthy, and expected trend in grading. It also follows previous downturns in the market (if there was a way to accurately correlate the date graded to the slab number, you could fairly accurately predict which coins were undergraded. This is one of the true advantages of slab-historians and old-timers in a bull market)."

Well written and explained. But I disagree that what goes on is good for anyone. Please explain to me and the OP why it is a good thing that a coin graded one way today is going to be graded one way (up or down depending on the market) sometime tomorrow. Since that happens by your admission, what is the grading standard and what good is grading? Sounds like a crap-shooting, money-making scheme to me. And don't forget to address the sticker companies who "police" the two Largest, s l o w e s t, and most expen$ive TPGS's that you swear by.

As to these comments: "For example, Insider loves to brag about how long he's been in the hobby. Doug loves to talk about gradeflation. These old timers have seen these cycles, and we can all benefit from their longer perspective (even if they come across as slightly crazy, now and then)."

While I cannot speak for Doug I'll say this: Thank you. At least you must be reading some of my posts.

@pghpanthers2 I suggest you try all the TPGS's as each has pluses.

 

I like ICG to do my hobo's.
ANACS for variety/error research etc. ( I do like there old small white holders)
NGC I don't use, they lied to me.
PCGS I belong to but not sure why.
I do like to self slab.

 

@physics-fan3.14, by what grading standards are you judging ICG and ANACS? If you have but the slightest clue, you're judging them by PCGS and NGC grading standards, and saying, guess what, they don't grade the same. For every one inconsistent ICG or ANACS grade you find, I'll find ten inconsistent PCGS and NGC grades, as that's how much bigger those markets are. And, don't be ridiculous and make me do that, as you know what I'm talking about. Bottom-line, it's just markets, that's all their plastic is, grading that's inconsistent within those markets, and especially when judged against other markets. You and a lot of others here are just conditioned into accepting PCGS and NGC markets as the primier grading markets without crediting that conditioning to their marketing. There's a reason the housewives in the 1960s paid 3X more for Clorox Bleach than ordinary bleach, and, get a clue, it wasn't because Clorox was better. The Clorox label was stronger. The housewives were paying for the plastic bottles in much the same way we're paying for the plastic slabs.

 

I believe they swapped several graders during that time frame as well with ICG graders going to ANACS and ANACS graders going to ICG.

Classic commems should be left out of any market discussion and really need to be discussed on their own since they've been essentially falling for decades.

I'm actually starting to convert more to your ranking at this point. Aside from super cheap grading sometimes I don't really see anything from ANACS that tells me they should be ranked higher than ICG

 

Over the last few years I have noticed the same thing. I think the ONLY thing ANACS really does that sets them apart is variety attribution.

 

I use ANACS, no problems.

 

In defense of NGC & PCGS there is going to be more grading inconsistency with a company that does thousands of coins a day vs hundreds.

baseball21, posted: "I believe they swapped several graders during that time frame as well with ICG graders going to ANACS and ANACS graders going to ICG."

True and ANACS lost a lawsuit to ICG for $$$,$$$. For a while, it looked like ICG was going to just buy them lock, stock, and graders but perhaps that was just wishful thinking by ANACS.

baseball21, continued: "I'm actually starting to convert more to your ranking at this point. Aside from super cheap grading sometimes I don't really see anything from ANACS that tells me they should be ranked higher than ICG."

I'll agree. It all depends on where you live as ICG stopped going to most shows west of the Mississippi. Their slabs rule the southern shows. I was told they didn't need the shows out West (cost) as they were chipping away at NGC's foreign market due to faster turnaround and cost. ANACS & ICG have their loyal customers and will not lose them. Both these services are equal for attribution and IMO do a better job than the top two BY FAR!

So, depending on your needs, one of the TPGS is best for you!

 

On an absolute number of coins, yes - but percentage-wise, ANACS is much higher.

(the numbers below are just an example, and are in no way intended to be construed as fact)

Say a thousand coins are submitted to ANACS and ICG. 10% of them are inaccurate. That means 100 coins are inaccurately graded.

Say 10,000 coins are submitted to PCGS and NGC, and 2% of them are inaccurate. That means 200 of them will be off. It will much easier to find those mistakes, and they will be more visible.

However, you will do much better to submit to the more accurate grader!

 

While I agree that pcgs and ngc have a better reputation in the market...I don’t understand how your made up numbers help this argument. I can make up numbers too to make the opposite point.

 

PCGS and NGC grade significantly more coins than ANACS and ICG. I think we can all agree on that.

An earlier poster had mentioned that he could very easily find numerous inaccurately graded P and N coins.

My point is, even if they are significantly more accurate, because they grade so many more coins there will still be plenty of inaccurately graded coins (maybe even more than A or I, on an absolute number scale).

I just made up the 10% and 2% accuracies in my example above to show how this was easily possible. By tweaking those percentages, sure, you could make it show anything you wanted to. And we could make my example closer to the truth by using actual submission numbers. But that's not really my point.

 

ANACS will be at the Ocala Coin Show in Ocala, Fla on Feb. 01 - 03.
Bring your coins to him.

 

You are correct, PCGS and NGC do grade a lot more coins than the other services. So, one would assume they would have more poorly graded coins using raw numbers simply due to volume. But then again, it all depends on which grading scale we are talking about.

But, the fact is...PCGS, NGC, ANACS, and ICG all have their own in house grading standards and grade based on their standards. PCGS and NGC have a more market accepted grading scale than ANACS and ICG. My personal experience has been that PCGS seems to have the widest variability within their standards.

 

I have to ask, as I haven't read it, does your book teach people, or even touch on the subject of, how to "market" grade? If not, then you have your own personal grading scale that wouldn't necessarily match the rest of the TPG's scales, who by your own admissions are valuing coins correctly.

 

My book is more focused on learning how to evaluate the individual aspects of strike, luster, wear, surface preservation, and eye appeal. I try to explain why the coin looks the way it does, how to evaluate each of these factors, and understand the coin you are holding. Towards the end of the book, I explain how to put all this together to determine the grade of the coin. In essence, I'm trying to teach how to grade rather than impose my own personal standards (although, everyone will recognize that every author has a bias). I base my grading off my interpretation of the ANA grading guide, but I acknowledge that it is subjective and will be altered by each person's interpretation and opinion. (And yes, I do touch on the subject of market grading, although I don't spend too much time on it.)

Although the wording will be different, and the results may be slightly different, the ANA standards are very similar to the PCGS and NGC standards. They all arrive at roughly the same place.

The difference between PCGS, NGC, and other grading companies is in how consistently and accurately they apply their standards. Theoretically, we could write the most amazing set of guidelines, one which every single collector would agree upon - but if we can't consistently apply those standards, it doesn't do anyone any good. And that's the problem that some companies have.

 

I would also add that if needed, you could send the ANACS coins to PCGS for cross-over grading. ANACS has a good batting average for going over to the other side, which tells you something about ANACS.

 

I agree. The biggest problems I find with ANACS is that some of my coins come back with the new holders cracked. Very fine stress fractures. They replace them at no charge, but they shouldn't be sent out that way. The other issue is their TAT. I have never had a submission come back to me at their estimated TAT.

 

Define good batting average. There certainly are coins that will cross over at grade, but the chances of that happening aren’t good if you’re just blindly sending them for cross over. Top pops have a terrible rate as well. Coins under $50 yea most would probably cross, coins a few hundred or more completely different story

 

.500

 

You're thinking their rate is much higher than it really is, unless you're including all the 25 dollar and under coins where basically everyone will cross for every legit service