How Do You Feel About Coin Certification?

How do you feel about coin certification by the big three (ANACS, NGC, PCGS)? Are you for it or against it? Have you had any negative experiences with a major certification service? How about CAC? These were opening questions on a CoinTalk thread I followed recently. Not surprisingly, the responses were all over the place, but there were some commonalities and consistent complaints.

The biggest complaints were that the major services, particularly NGC and PCGS, are expensive and have really slow turnaround times. The first responder said a number of things that most responders would agree with. “My two cents: PCGS currently brings most return on investments at sale time. NGC second, except on ancients where they are the leader. Neither is especially easy to submit to or affordable for the average collector.”

“ANACS is extremely affordable and has faster turnaround times. Excellent for less expensive coins and things you just want authenticated. There are some coins that they grade stricter than the other two.”

As for whether he believes in coin certification: “Let’s just say that although slabs can be counterfeited too, if there is an expensive coin that isn’t certified I won’t buy it.”

In addition to being the leader on ancients, NGC was also mentioned in connection with mint error attribution and grading. The person who mentioned the attribution of mint errors also noted the slow turnaround at NGC and that there was some sloppiness “. . .in the positioning of some of the coins. Maybe it’s just me, but my OCD [obsessive compulsive disorder] kicks in and it bugs me a bit.” The poster also noted that NGC may be the go-to service for world coins.

Agreeing with the NGC-world coins comment, another poster wrote, “Most of my better stuff is in NGC holders because they are still the leader in world coins (imo) and that is what I mostly collect. I also like the uniformity of having them all in the same holder.” This responder uses ANACS for common coins and items that need to be attributed.

A long-time collector ranked the services as follows: (1) NGC because of a faster turnaround time; (2) PCGS, which would have been #1 except for their tardiness in returning coins; (3) ANACS but “only for 20th century and less expensive coins”; (4) ICG “don’t know how they are doing currently”; and (5) CAC “do we really need another TPG [third-party grading service].” He closed with, “I depend on the TPGs mostly because my primary collection is a type set. I don’t have the time to learn the ins and outs of each issue.”

Displaying an interesting ambivalence about TPGs, one responder wrote: “I think the TPGs played a big part in turning an enjoyable hobby into a stressful experience in marketing.” Having said that, he added, “I will not purchase anything of value that is not entombed in plastic.”

Another ambivalent collector of TPG coins began by noting, “I only buy coins that have been slabbed. I am just a hobby guy and wouldn’t want to even TRY to be my own authenticator.”

After this opening statement, he continued: “I don’t trust the grades on any slab I see. In my opinion I have seen overgraded/undergraded, cleaned yet slabbed straight, perfectly original slabbed details, etc. It is a buyer beware market, and you have to use your own judgment on each coin you consider.” To this comment, I say, Amen!

Another responder with an ambivalent TPG relationship wrote, “I’ve never used any of them and always went by [the motto]: If you like it, buy it. The caveat, of course, is that those items so frequently faked [need to be slabbed]. I wouldn’t buy a Trade dollar that wasn’t slabbed by one of the top three.”

As I noted earlier, the cost for certification and the turnaround time are often considered problems by collectors. One collector, for example, mentioned submitting three coins worth about $1,100 at the FUN (Florida United Numismatists) show in early January 2023. He expected to get them back around the middle of March, which indicates roughly a two-month turnaround time.

About the cost for the service, he wrote, “I thought that $147 to get three items that are worth $1,100 [certified] is expensive. That’s more than 10 percent for a holder and an opinion. That opinion might be worth a lot in the market, but you have got to have a 10 percent increase in the market to get your money back.”

Several respondents cited PCGS as their preferred TPG service. Wrote one: “If I were selling today, I would want most coins in PCGS plastic.” Another noted, “I have to admit that I generally prefer PCGS. I think their holder displays the coin more nicely, and their grading is a little more conservative.” A third poster wrote, “I prefer PCGS in terms of grading, but their customer service is a joke.”

At least one respondent to the questions had good things to say about ICG. When transferring his ungraded Standing Liberty quarter (SLQs) collection to slabs, “I used ICG because it was simple, I like their process (. . . multiple graders reviewing), they don’t buy or sell coins, and they do guarantee authenticity. . . What I have found on the 70 coins/tokens I’ve submitted to ICG is that they are really terrific at attribution of variety for early American coinage (at $5 extra per coin for the service). Their grading on SLQs has been tough but fair IMO. On Medieval hammered silver coins, I think they are sometimes overly tough. I’ve got NGC slabs with equally nice coins graded better/straight graded.” The respondent also said he plans to submit “. . . some SLQs and some early U.S. copper to [ANACS] just to see how they compare to ICG.” He ends his comments with, “If I was a seller/dealer I’d use PCGS for most coins and NGC for world coins as those slabs tend to carry a premium.” He likes this premium on PCGS and NGC coins as a collector, because it means he’s more likely to get a good deal on coins certified by PCGS or ICG.

As a general comment about the major certification services, one poster wrote: “I am for them. I wish they were a little more user friendly for the average person to use their services, especially PCGS.” To this, one poster added, “I am sure they are [more user friendly] for the average millionaire at least.”

I’ll close with two final responder comments. One poster wrote, “I’ve always been of the mind: You want it graded? Buy it graded.” He then added, “I’ve never used any of the TPG services.” This was echoed by a long-time collector: “In 75 years of collecting, I have never used any of them.”

As I said at the outset of this column, responses were all over the place. Obviously, many collectors value the certification services, with PCGS and NGC getting the edge when it comes to coin values. The biggest complaint, of which I’m sure the big two are aware, is the turnaround time, which is a function of the success of PCGS and NGC. This is closely followed by excessive costs and submission difficulties.

ANACS and ICG have their adherents, and if you have some less expensive material you would like to have certified, then they might be the way to go. There were few mentions of CAC, but the reason for that may be as one poster put it, “CAC. . . lots of threads already about that.”