PCGS vs. NGC and Crossovers

[James_OldeTowne]

Aren't pop reports telling, particularly for coins near the top?

 

I think Mr. Feld's posts on this topic are correct.

I suspect that pop reports are particularly misleading "near the top", where a single coin can get sent in twenty times in an attempt to achieve a higher grade, thus potentially skewing "population" statistics drastically.

 

For example, it's absurd when "pop reports" show a population for a coin at a certain grade, and that population far exceeds the number of examples of that coin that were ever even minted!

[BillJones]

Yes, check out the POP reports for the 1854-D Three Dollar Gold piece. I think the same high circualted grade coins have submitted multiple times in hopes of getting an MS-61 or 62.

 

If you can turn your AU-58 or 55 into one of those grades CAA-CHING!

[Keigwin]

Agreed. But is this unique to NGC?

Lance.

[BillJones]

Agreed. But is this unique to NGC?

Lance.

 

NO. PCGS pop reports have the same problem.

[MarkFeld]

Aren't pop reports telling, particularly for coins near the top?

 

I think Mr. Feld's posts on this topic are correct.

I suspect that pop reports are particularly misleading "near the top", where a single coin can get sent in twenty times in an attempt to achieve a higher grade, thus potentially skewing "population" statistics drastically.

 

For example, it's absurd when "pop reports" show a population for a coin at a certain grade, and that population far exceeds the number of examples of that coin that were ever even minted!

As Lance pointed out, the distorted figures for the pop reports apply to PCGS as well as NGC.

 

Just for fun (and hopefully, to make my case), I looked up the PCGS and NGC population figures for business strike and Proof Barber quarters graded 66 or higher. And these figures speak for themselves. I also believe that they are probably fairly representative of other classic coin series in higher grades.

 

I apologize for any inaccuracies and/or typos and I believe I omitted a small number of plus grades from the figures listed below. I also included cameo and deep or ultra cameo populations in the Proof popuations.

 

Total business strike Barber Quarters graded at PCGS 21,031

Number graded MS66 (916) 4.3%

Number graded MS67 (144) .068%

Number graded MS68 (8) .0038%

 

Total business strike Barber Quarters graded by NGC 13,871

Number graded MS66 (562) 4.0%

Number graded MS67 (158) 1.1%

Number graded MS68 (28) .02%

 

 

Total Proof Barber Quarters graded at PCGS 5876

Number graded PR66 (709) 12%

Number graded PR67 (412) 7%

Number graded PR (97) 1.6%

 

Total Proof Barber Quarters graded by NGC 5888

Number graded PR66 (1077) 18%

Number graded PR67 (774) 13%

Number graded PR68 (353) 5.9%

NGC has also graded (27) PR69's, compared to one for PCGS.

 

The above numbers reflect what many people already know about the general tendency of NGC to be more liberal than PCGS in awarding higher grades. The only way that one could reasonably try to explain this away is to claim that overall, higher quality coins are more likely to be submitted to NGC than to PCGS.

 

Please note, I have not opined that one company is more accurate than the other. Only that in many cases, one is more likely to be less strict than the other.

[Conder101]

NO. PCGS pop reports have the same problem.

And of course you also have the problem of coins being sent back and forth between the two which means one coin can inflate the number on both pop reports

[mike169]

Please note, I have not opined that one company is more accurate than the other. Only that in many cases, one is more likely to be less strict than the other.

 

Could it be possible that both PCGS and NGC grade just as strictly (and accurately), but NGC uses a more liberal rounding-up scale than does PCGS? For example, a 65.7 may be a 66 at NGC, but a 65 at PCGS?

[MarkFeld]

Please note, I have not opined that one company is more accurate than the other. Only that in many cases, one is more likely to be less strict than the other.

 

Could it be possible that both PCGS and NGC grade just as strictly (and accurately), but NGC uses a more liberal rounding-up scale than does PCGS? For example, a 65.7 may be a 66 at NGC, but a 65 at PCGS?

It doesn't matter how you label it, as the result is the same - NGC appears to award more higher grades than PCGS does.

[Hard Times]

Aren't pop reports telling, particularly for coins near the top?

 

 

 

The above numbers reflect what many people already know about the general tendency of NGC to be more liberal than PCGS in awarding higher grades. The only way that one could reasonably try to explain this away is to claim that overall, higher quality coins are more likely to be submitted to NGC than to PCGS.

 

Please note, I have not opined that one company is more accurate than the other. Only that in many cases, one is more likely to be less strict than the other.

 

 

It could also mean that those that submit to NGC have a more discerning eye to a high grade than those that submit to PCGS when selecting specimens to be TPG graded, confirming your alternative hypothesis.....

 

[physics-fan3.14]

Aren't pop reports telling, particularly for coins near the top?

 

 

 

The above numbers reflect what many people already know about the general tendency of NGC to be more liberal than PCGS in awarding higher grades. The only way that one could reasonably try to explain this away is to claim that overall, higher quality coins are more likely to be submitted to NGC than to PCGS.

 

Please note, I have not opined that one company is more accurate than the other. Only that in many cases, one is more likely to be less strict than the other.

 

 

It could also mean that those that submit to NGC have a more discerning eye to a high grade than those that submit to PCGS when selecting specimens to be TPG graded, confirming your alternative hypothesis.....

 

Or maybe more coins are submitted to NGC than PCGS (I don't know the numbers)

 

Or maybe PCGS uses a quota system to limit the number of high grades it awards, artificially suppressing the supply to increase demand. It is well known they do this. Perhaps NGC grades fairly and awards the grade to a coin which it deserves?

 

I'm sure there are numerous explanations for this besides a blanket "PCGS grades more strictly." Certain series exist for which NGC is far more conservative - and there are series for which PCGS is more conservative. A few randomly selected (or possibly intentionally selected) examples do not prove your point.

[MarkFeld]

Aren't pop reports telling, particularly for coins near the top?

 

 

 

The above numbers reflect what many people already know about the general tendency of NGC to be more liberal than PCGS in awarding higher grades. The only way that one could reasonably try to explain this away is to claim that overall, higher quality coins are more likely to be submitted to NGC than to PCGS.

 

Please note, I have not opined that one company is more accurate than the other. Only that in many cases, one is more likely to be less strict than the other.

 

 

It could also mean that those that submit to NGC have a more discerning eye to a high grade than those that submit to PCGS when selecting specimens to be TPG graded, confirming your alternative hypothesis.....

 

Or maybe more coins are submitted to NGC than PCGS (I don't know the numbers)

 

Or maybe PCGS uses a quota system to limit the number of high grades it awards, artificially suppressing the supply to increase demand. It is well known they do this. Perhaps NGC grades fairly and awards the grade to a coin which it deserves?

 

I'm sure there are numerous explanations for this besides a blanket "PCGS grades more strictly." Certain series exist for which NGC is far more conservative - and there are series for which PCGS is more conservative. A few randomly selected (or possibly intentionally selected) examples do not prove your point.

In my example, I included raw numbers AND percentages, the later being much more relevant.

 

Feel free to check the respective population reports for yourself. I am extremely confident that a large majority of the comparative populations for other series will yield similar results.

 

I don't think that even NGC would disagree with the proposition that, generally speaking, they grade somewhat more liberally than PCGS does. It is up to each individual to form his or her opinion as to whether the more liberal grading is more or less accurate.

[Walkerfan]

Aren't pop reports telling, particularly for coins near the top?

 

 

 

The above numbers reflect what many people already know about the general tendency of NGC to be more liberal than PCGS in awarding higher grades. The only way that one could reasonably try to explain this away is to claim that overall, higher quality coins are more likely to be submitted to NGC than to PCGS.

 

Please note, I have not opined that one company is more accurate than the other. Only that in many cases, one is more likely to be less strict than the other.

 

 

It could also mean that those that submit to NGC have a more discerning eye to a high grade than those that submit to PCGS when selecting specimens to be TPG graded, confirming your alternative hypothesis.....

 

Or maybe more coins are submitted to NGC than PCGS (I don't know the numbers)

 

Or maybe PCGS uses a quota system to limit the number of high grades it awards, artificially suppressing the supply to increase demand. It is well known they do this. Perhaps NGC grades fairly and awards the grade to a coin which it deserves?

 

I'm sure there are numerous explanations for this besides a blanket "PCGS grades more strictly." Certain series exist for which NGC is far more conservative - and there are series for which PCGS is more conservative. A few randomly selected (or possibly intentionally selected) examples do not prove your point.

In my example, I included raw numbers AND percentages, the later being much more relevant.

 

Feel free to check the respective population reports for yourself. I am extremely confident that a large majority of the comparative populations for other series will yield similar results.

 

I don't think that even NGC would disagree with the proposition that, generally speaking, they grade somewhat more liberally than PCGS does. It is up to each individual to form his or her opinion as to whether the more liberal grading is more or less accurate.

 

Mark---Your numbers do make sense to me and the data seems both valid and reliable. In every instance but 1 (11 out of 12) or 91.67 % of the random samples of the population; the NGC % numbers are higher than PCGS. Numbers don't lie.

[MarkFeld]

Aren't pop reports telling, particularly for coins near the top?

 

 

 

The above numbers reflect what many people already know about the general tendency of NGC to be more liberal than PCGS in awarding higher grades. The only way that one could reasonably try to explain this away is to claim that overall, higher quality coins are more likely to be submitted to NGC than to PCGS.

 

Please note, I have not opined that one company is more accurate than the other. Only that in many cases, one is more likely to be less strict than the other.

 

 

It could also mean that those that submit to NGC have a more discerning eye to a high grade than those that submit to PCGS when selecting specimens to be TPG graded, confirming your alternative hypothesis.....

 

Or maybe more coins are submitted to NGC than PCGS (I don't know the numbers)

 

Or maybe PCGS uses a quota system to limit the number of high grades it awards, artificially suppressing the supply to increase demand. It is well known they do this. Perhaps NGC grades fairly and awards the grade to a coin which it deserves?

 

I'm sure there are numerous explanations for this besides a blanket "PCGS grades more strictly." Certain series exist for which NGC is far more conservative - and there are series for which PCGS is more conservative. A few randomly selected (or possibly intentionally selected) examples do not prove your point.

In my example, I included raw numbers AND percentages, the later being much more relevant.

 

Feel free to check the respective population reports for yourself. I am extremely confident that a large majority of the comparative populations for other series will yield similar results.

 

I don't think that even NGC would disagree with the proposition that, generally speaking, they grade somewhat more liberally than PCGS does. It is up to each individual to form his or her opinion as to whether the more liberal grading is more or less accurate.

 

Mark---Your numbers do make sense to me and the data seems both valid and reliable. In every instance but 1 (11 out of 12) or 91.67 % of the random samples of the population; the NGC % numbers are higher than PCGS. Numbers don't lie.

You can probably imagine that that does not surprise me. It's not like I revealed any secrets in noting what I did. It's just a matter of what people want to make out of the general tendency of NGC to award higher grades than PCGS does.

[michael]

the below sums this up extremely well...................................

 

Or maybe more coins are submitted to NGC than PCGS (I don't know the numbers)

 

Or maybe PCGS uses a quota system to limit the number of high grades it awards, artificially suppressing the supply to increase demand. It is well known they do this. Perhaps NGC grades fairly and awards the grade to a coin which it deserves?

 

I'm sure there are numerous explanations for this besides a blanket "PCGS grades more strictly." Certain series exist for which NGC is far more conservative - and there are series for which PCGS is more conservative. A few randomly selected (or possibly intentionally selected) examples do not prove your point.

 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

yes pcgs grades more strictly to the point where for some series they put coins in holders that are conservatively graded to undergraded but also with many coins that are overgraded to ugly to even coins that should never even be in graded holders, and i am sure many have seen these types of coins all the time for sale or in collections

 

inconsistant and also incourages submissions $$$ for a publically traded company that needs to show stockholders quarterly profits

 

and so of course sometimes pcgs holders go for more $$ in the same grades than other services

 

it is all relative

 

also pcgs has quotas again this increases demand and hence market prices

 

same with exclusive registry set status which feeds on EGO AND STATUS FEVER again this increases demand and hence market prices

 

have fun with your coins and always buy the holder not the coin for your registry set

 

 

 

 

[MarkFeld]

the below sums this up extremely well...................................

 

Or maybe more coins are submitted to NGC than PCGS (I don't know the numbers)

 

Or maybe PCGS uses a quota system to limit the number of high grades it awards, artificially suppressing the supply to increase demand. It is well known they do this. Perhaps NGC grades fairly and awards the grade to a coin which it deserves?

 

I'm sure there are numerous explanations for this besides a blanket "PCGS grades more strictly." Certain series exist for which NGC is far more conservative - and there are series for which PCGS is more conservative. A few randomly selected (or possibly intentionally selected) examples do not prove your point.

 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

yes pcgs grades more strictly to the point where for some series they put coins in holders that are conservatively graded to undergraded but also with many coins that are overgraded to ugly to even coins that should never even be in graded holders, and i am sure many have seen these types of coins all the time for sale or in collections

 

inconsistant and also incourages submissions $$$ for a publically traded company that needs to show stockholders quarterly profits

 

and so of course sometimes pcgs holders go for more $$ in the same grades than other services

 

it is all relative

 

also pcgs has quotas again this increases demand and hence market prices

 

same with exclusive registry set status which feeds on EGO AND STATUS FEVER again this increases demand and hence market prices

 

have fun with your coins and always buy the holder not the coin for your registry set

 

 

 

Those theories explain away only a portion of the disparity in grades awarded by NGC and PCGS. However, like it or dislike it, the simple explanation which accounts for most of the difference, is that generally, NGC tends to be more liberal. The numbers, including percentages, make it obvious.

[coinman_23885]

Aren't pop reports telling, particularly for coins near the top?

 

 

 

The above numbers reflect what many people already know about the general tendency of NGC to be more liberal than PCGS in awarding higher grades. The only way that one could reasonably try to explain this away is to claim that overall, higher quality coins are more likely to be submitted to NGC than to PCGS.

 

Please note, I have not opined that one company is more accurate than the other. Only that in many cases, one is more likely to be less strict than the other.

 

 

It could also mean that those that submit to NGC have a more discerning eye to a high grade than those that submit to PCGS when selecting specimens to be TPG graded, confirming your alternative hypothesis.....

 

Or maybe more coins are submitted to NGC than PCGS (I don't know the numbers)

 

Or maybe PCGS uses a quota system to limit the number of high grades it awards, artificially suppressing the supply to increase demand. It is well known they do this. Perhaps NGC grades fairly and awards the grade to a coin which it deserves?

 

I'm sure there are numerous explanations for this besides a blanket "PCGS grades more strictly." Certain series exist for which NGC is far more conservative - and there are series for which PCGS is more conservative. A few randomly selected (or possibly intentionally selected) examples do not prove your point.

 

 

Regarding the price premium, I've seen some series where NGC coins sell for higher prices than PCGS coins and vice versa (at least this was true when I last viewed the Blue Sheet a few months ago). For instance, I know that for some copper series, NGC coins carry a premium and the populations were lower (the last time that I checked). Perhaps each company has strengths and weaknesses varying with each series based on the individual graders or policies (i.e. on Franklin half dollars, NGC has a stricter criterion for the FBL designation when compared to PCGS - I know that this isn't grading per se, but certainly relevant to the discussion).

 

I also think that the individual graders should be listed (or at least a complete least of consultants and experts for each time period/series that advise generally if harassment is an issue) should be made available online. NGC and PCGS coin verification features on their site should include this information. I also think that the companies should reveal the date of certification on their website, as it is generally known that both services have had their ups and downs.

 

While I haven't been tracking the prices on copper coins the last few months, I would like to see the numbers comparing the prices received for PCGS vs. NGC copper coins after PCGS abolished its guarantee for copper color.

 

[Keigwin]

Aren't pop reports telling, particularly for coins near the top?

 

 

 

The above numbers reflect what many people already know about the general tendency of NGC to be more liberal than PCGS in awarding higher grades. The only way that one could reasonably try to explain this away is to claim that overall, higher quality coins are more likely to be submitted to NGC than to PCGS.

 

Please note, I have not opined that one company is more accurate than the other. Only that in many cases, one is more likely to be less strict than the other.

 

 

It could also mean that those that submit to NGC have a more discerning eye to a high grade than those that submit to PCGS when selecting specimens to be TPG graded, confirming your alternative hypothesis.....

 

Or maybe more coins are submitted to NGC than PCGS (I don't know the numbers)

 

Or maybe PCGS uses a quota system to limit the number of high grades it awards, artificially suppressing the supply to increase demand. It is well known they do this. Perhaps NGC grades fairly and awards the grade to a coin which it deserves?

 

I'm sure there are numerous explanations for this besides a blanket "PCGS grades more strictly." Certain series exist for which NGC is far more conservative - and there are series for which PCGS is more conservative. A few randomly selected (or possibly intentionally selected) examples do not prove your point.

 

 

Regarding the price premium, I've seen some series where NGC coins sell for higher prices than PCGS coins and vice versa (at least this was true when I last viewed the Blue Sheet a few months ago). For instance, I know that for some copper series, NGC coins carry a premium and the populations were lower (the last time that I checked). Perhaps each company has strengths and weaknesses varying with each series based on the individual graders or policies (i.e. on Franklin half dollars, NGC has a stricter criterion for the FBL designation when compared to PCGS - I know that this isn't grading per se, but certainly relevant to the discussion).

 

I also think that the individual graders should be listed (or at least a complete least of consultants and experts for each time period/series that advise generally if harassment is an issue) should be made available online. NGC and PCGS coin verification features on their site should include this information. I also think that the companies should reveal the date of certification on their website, as it is generally known that both services have had their ups and downs.

 

While I haven't been tracking the prices on copper coins the last few months, I would like to see the numbers comparing the prices received for PCGS vs. NGC copper coins after PCGS abolished its guarantee for copper color.

Which copper series are you referring to? I collect large cents, IHC's, and wheaties and I haven't seen a premium for NGC-graded copper. Quite the opposite.

 

I too wish the TPG's would date-stamp their holders to show when they were graded. But they don't do this for important reasons, including our perception that there are swings in grading standards. Imagine the effect it would have on the market. The TPG's would prefer collectors to believe they are very consistent.

 

Both NGC and PCGS have limits on their copper color guarantee and it seems to me that there has been very little market adjustment for PCGS-graded copper since they began limiting it to coins owned and graded prior to 2010. (FWIW, I was very unhappy about their guarantee change though I completely understand why it was done.)

Lance.

[coinman_23885]

Aren't pop reports telling, particularly for coins near the top?

 

I think Mr. Feld's posts on this topic are correct.

I suspect that pop reports are particularly misleading "near the top", where a single coin can get sent in twenty times in an attempt to achieve a higher grade, thus potentially skewing "population" statistics drastically.

 

For example, it's absurd when "pop reports" show a population for a coin at a certain grade, and that population far exceeds the number of examples of that coin that were ever even minted!

As Lance pointed out, the distorted figures for the pop reports apply to PCGS as well as NGC.

 

Just for fun (and hopefully, to make my case), I looked up the PCGS and NGC population figures for business strike and Proof Barber quarters graded 66 or higher. And these figures speak for themselves. I also believe that they are probably fairly representative of other classic coin series in higher grades.

 

I apologize for any inaccuracies and/or typos and I believe I omitted a small number of plus grades from the figures listed below. I also included cameo and deep or ultra cameo populations in the Proof popuations.

 

Total business strike Barber Quarters graded at PCGS 21,031

Number graded MS66 (916) 4.3%

Number graded MS67 (144) .068%

Number graded MS68 (8) .0038%

 

Total business strike Barber Quarters graded by NGC 13,871

Number graded MS66 (562) 4.0%

Number graded MS67 (158) 1.1%

Number graded MS68 (28) .02%

 

 

Total Proof Barber Quarters graded at PCGS 5876

Number graded PR66 (709) 12%

Number graded PR67 (412) 7%

Number graded PR (97) 1.6%

 

Total Proof Barber Quarters graded by NGC 5888

Number graded PR66 (1077) 18%

Number graded PR67 (774) 13%

Number graded PR68 (353) 5.9%

NGC has also graded (27) PR69's, compared to one for PCGS.

 

The above numbers reflect what many people already know about the general tendency of NGC to be more liberal than PCGS in awarding higher grades. The only way that one could reasonably try to explain this away is to claim that overall, higher quality coins are more likely to be submitted to NGC than to PCGS.

 

Please note, I have not opined that one company is more accurate than the other. Only that in many cases, one is more likely to be less strict than the other.

 

While I understand your point, look at the ANACS population report (available freely online). I have noticed that both PCGS and NGC have larger populations in high grades than ANACS. This is particularly true for Liberty Head Nickels and a few other series that I collect (see e.g. the 1911 and 1890 Liberty Head Nickels). The populations in ANACS holders are tiny, yet no one would imply that ANACS is more conservative than PCGS or NGC. Perhaps there are other variables such as marketing, etc. that factor into this process. I would guess that many PCGS coins sell for more because PCGS has always advocated sight unseen purchases, creating market makers. NGC has never taken as an aggressive marketing approach. Perhaps this accounts for the disparity in pricing. With regards to the census data, I think that the differences are likely negligible overall. I would love to see someone do a series by series comparison (and indeed a complete comparison of all mainstream U.S. coin series), including a statistical analysis to see if the putatively more liberal grades are statistically significant or just stochastic variation. If anyone ever devises such a broad scale study, I'd love to help out with the data analysis.

 

With regards to ANACS, I'm guessing that the trend with ANACS coins is largely because there isn't as much demand for ANACS coins, and that the top quality pieces are submitted to PCGS/NGC. Nevertheless, this illustrates an important point - correlation does not equate with causation.

[eggbone]

I like both NGC and PCGS. They both offer high quality products and are excellent companies to work with. I just don't believe that one company is necessarily better than the other.

 

I agree, though irt does seem that PCGS is "stricter" in their assessments, IMHO.