PCGS vs NGC Seated Quarter Grading
Manifest_Destiny
Posts: 6,896 ✭✭✭✭✭
Being a seated quarter specialist, I've known for a long time that NGC grades these a level or two loose compared to PCGS. I seem to get a fair amount of push back about that for some reason. So, I decided to submit some NGC coins in the AU range that I've been accumulating.
All of them were cracked out and submitted raw, which I think was the fairest way to compare grades. All of them were coins I thought would straight grade at PCGS.
Here are the NGC coins.
The 43-o and 62-s were almost certainly lightly dipped at one time. I believe the other four are original.
Here are the PCGS grades.
43-o down 1
58 - even
62-s down 2
72 - down 3
75 down 1
76-cc down 2
Average is down 1.5, exactly what I would have expected. I'll admit though, I'm a little disappointed about the 62-s which I thought would grade AU50. I may crack and resubmit this one at some point.
So, there it is.
Comments
Neet analysis. I agree with your conclusions.
Edited to add: Please don't take offense as you would know better having the coins in-hand, but from the pics, the 43-O and 62-S look both over-graded and cleaned.
Tom
Can you post the reverses. Tough to say based on the pictures. Now if you really want to have fun, crack them again and send to CACG.
I think the 1858 needs to be lowered to AU55. So far as the 1843-O goes, the photo isn't good enough to make a grade call. On the others I agree with PCGS.
Thanks for posting this. Very interesting. I will make a few comments but hope you will bear in mind three things.
1. I have to count on a tragically flawed device for part of this. My memory.
2. I am in no way a Seated Quarter expert.
3. I don't own any NGC AU coins.
Back in the early to mid 2000's there was an actual discussion board just for Seated coins. I rarely contributed, but I remember following a discussion there about this topic. The supposition was that NGC was employing some sort of market grading approach to Seated Quarters (for all I know ALL Seated coins), and that their standards were much looser in AU and up. If, I remember right, they all felt NGC and PCGS were pretty much the same in grades EF and below.
I think all the coins you submitted were AU coins, so I wonder if this same rule applies to lower grade coins.
I myself, will say I rarely agree with the AU grade on Seated Quarters (NGC) when I see them, which may be one reason I don't own any AU NGC coins. Again, would have to count on my memory from making purchases so take with grain of salt.
Anyway, thanks again for the post. I am sure better informed members will have more concise feedback. James
I know that is a joke, mostly, but if you decide to do so, don't get your hopes up and for goodness' sake, don't have them slab the coins if they don't straight-grade as they are impossible to "crack" without a band saw!
Tom
They're going into my PCGS registry set.
Don,
We've mentioned before how loose NGC is on circulated Liberty Seated Quarters. I'm not at all surprised by your results.
I have seven PCGS coins in my set that were previously in a higher graded NGC slab.
My best/worst example of the LSQ grading discrepancies between the two companies is as follows:
I purchased a very nice original 1873 quarter graded PCGS AU53. I sent the coin to CAC and the coin failed to sticker.
Since my goal was to have the entire set PCGS CAC, I cracked out the coin to send raw to PCGS. But while cracking
the coin out, like an idiot I accidently scratched the obverse of the coin. The scratch wasn't horrible, so I decided to
send it to PCGS anyway. When they properly refused to straight grade the coin, I agreed. I was really PO'd that I'd scratched
the coin so I sold it to a local dealer so I wouldn't have it as a reminder of my stupidity. Well, a month or so later the
dealer submitted the coin to NGC, where it earned an AU58 grade!
Doug
Here's the before and after for a coin I purchased in 2020.
PCGS grade - XF40.
People always say that NGC can’t grade but what you see there is a company standards disparity and their graders are (at least historically) as good as any in the business. The biggest difference between PCGS and NGC is their grading standards for classic issues in the XF45-58 ranges Bottom line up front NGC uses an older more classic definition for XF and AU that weights detail loss as the primary attribute where PCGS weights surface preservation predominately.
Surface preservation doesn’t mean originality, it is more loosely evident by luster; what percentage of the surfaces have nearly intact mint frost and metal flow lines as made by the mint. Friction simply rubs away mint surfaces long before high points are affected. The friction changes or eliminates the luster and smooths out the frost.
PCGS Approx.
AU58 needs to have 90% + intact mint surfaces, no detail loss
AU55 needs to have 50-90% mint surfaces, trace to no metal loss
AU53 25-50% mint surfaces and minimal to trace High point loss
AU50 (ugly 53 or a 45 mint surfaces but AU metal loss)
EF45 5-25% mint surfaces in protected areas, most details intact but wear evident
EF40 only the lightest traces of original luster or mint frost apparent, wear even but most details still present if not softening
Of course there is wiggle room for how a coin presents and net grades negs and bumps for positives
NGC on the other hand doesn’t appear to factor in mint surfaces very much until UNC and focuses on metal preservation similar to the old Sheldon scale in the EF- AU range.
While neither is wrong PCGS is more aligned with the market preferences and what people expect out of modern AUs. It also doesn’t mean you can’t find a choice NGC AU graded coin. But you’ll find a lot of NGC 50-55s that end up in PCGS EF holders.
It should also be noted that on avg it causes side by side comparisons for the PCGS coin to appear to be in a higher state of preservation with more eye appeal which I suspect is a large percentage of the market’s preference for PCGS coins. It leaves an impact after handling 1000s of coins in collector grades.
11.5$ Southern Dollars, The little “Big Easy” set
First thing that came to my mind is if you can find these in NGC holders with a cac sticker, you may want to buy it.
Very impressive and costly experiment! The before and after values (according to the PCGS price guide) was $10,035 before and $7,250 after.
Might be worthwhile to send them to CAC
Cool experiment!
Mr_Spud
You can't compare the PCGS prices with the former NGC grades.
You are right, one shouldn't expect to get PCGS values for NGC coins. But even with NGC's lower values, the lower grades generated a loss - $8,100 before and $7,250 after.
Very informative if your assertions are valid. Thank you.
"Got a flaming heart, can't get my fill"
This is just an outstanding thread. Would that more of them could offer as much solid information.
Coinlearner, Ahrensdad, Nolawyer, RG, coinlieutenant, Yorkshireman, lordmarcovan, Soldi, masscrew, JimTyler, Relaxn, jclovescoins
Now listen boy, I'm tryin' to teach you sumthin' . . . . that ain't an optical illusion, it only looks like an optical illusion.
My mind reader refuses to charge me....
@Crepidodera That 64-s definitely has AU details. It was probably dipped in the past and PCGS was attempting to "market" grade it. One thing I've learned about PCGS grading for these is that they seem to assign a lot of relevance to how flat the bust is, which also may be a factor in assigning an XF grade. Either way, 40 is too low I think.
Trueviews still suck in case anyone was wondering.
This is the only one that comes close to the actual coin in hand.
This one is laughable.
My grade for the coin was XF45, AU53 was a ludicrous grade. I don't think it was ever dipped. It was also CAC certified.
Crypto provided one of the most detailed yet simple and accurate descriptions I’ve read.
PCGS, NGC, and CAC all use different grading standards. There is absolutely no doubt that for seated and trade dollars CAC uses the most stringent standards.
Now crack them out again and send them to NGC raw for comparison. I would think that since the grading standards ebb and flow and that right now both have upped their game and become tougher bc of CACG/CAC, you might see a different outcome at NGC this time around. As I showed you in a PM, I had a coin go from P45 to N50 to P53, so this one example you show is not convincing. All it tells me is that P is stricter than N was when they were graded at each TPG. Time to go around to N again for a convincing test.
And also send them into CAC in both holders. This would be very interesting indeed.
Best, SH
BTW, I just looked at my crossing records. I have only crossed 2 N LSQ's to P. One was N45 and crossed to P45, one was N62 and crossed to P62. I don't recall whether I cracked or crossed in the plastic as I did both about equally. Nevertheless, as I have stated multiple times over the years, my experience for almost all pre-1916 series that I have coins in, whether raw, or whether in plastic, on average, things cross between the 2 TPG's at the same grade. Sure, some go up either way, some go down either way, and most stay the same. And that is for over a 100 coins. But mostly the grades stay the same. So your one result needs further testing IMO.
It's hardly one result!
PCGS vs NGC *********** Grading
One can fit any coin series into that question and ask the same thing.
For instance, why has NGC graded more coins MS66 than MS65? With PCGS it's the opposite, they show that they have graded more coins MS65 than MS66.
I've asked this on other forums and someone once said it's because the submitters to NGC are better coin graders than those who send coins to PCGS. Of course, I didn't buy that explanation.....but at least one dude does? lol
I have had better luck cracking the coin than sending in for a cross or higher grade.
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection
Here's another extreme example. For the doubters out there, how many examples would you like?
Before - NGC AU50
After - PCGS VF35
PCGS F15 the first time, which I disagreed with.
PCGS VF20 the second time.
I paid between PCGS 15 and 20 money for it, so it worked out.
Don, your 1872-CC is properly graded as VF20, I'm glad you sent it back a second time.
Doug
Before - NGC XF40
After - PCGS VF30
Thanks for the education and rigorous numismatic discussion on grading standards. I have trouble differentiating between one service being on the lenient side vs. the possibility these are outliers, not representative of the services' grading time after time. If we looked at 100 examples, date after date in the series would we be seeing the same thing?
Yes, for circulated Liberty Seated Quarters, you'd probably see two different grades 80 - 90% of the time. NGC and PCGS grade Liberty Seated Quarters to a different standard.
Before - NGC XF45
After - PCGS VF35
VF30
VF25
What a difference in photography - same coin!
That’s an XF imho
11.5$ Southern Dollars, The little “Big Easy” set
That's an XF imho
I agree.
Before - NGC VF35
After - PCGS VF25
Before - NGC XF40
After - PCGS VF35
Before - NGC AU50
After - PCGS XF45
Anyone, one would think that this sort of disparity would be apparent across all LS denominations, would not be confined to quarters.
I don't have direct experience in the other denominations, but I think it's a bit too much to think it only affects quarters, or only affects seated denominations for that matter. NGC has a reputation for loose grading vs PCGS for a reason. Just like CACG has a reputation for tighter grading. What I don't understand is the push back about it. No one is saying NGC is a worse company. They just have different grading standards. It is what it is.
I've crossed 14 chopmarked trade dollars from NGC holders. Of those 14, one came back the same level (AU to AU). Every other one, rightly, came back a level or two lower (AU ->XF, Unc-> AU, etc).
Chopmarked Trade Dollar Registry Set --- US & World Gold Showcase --- World Chopmark Showcase
Don,
The "push back" that you mention is from people that don't have experience collecting Liberty Seated Quarters, yet
choose to defend other companies without proof. As you said, no one is trashing NGC. But their grading standards for
circulated LSQs are more lax.
Doug
Sadly it was downgraded at PCGS. I remember the Rev. Dr. James Gore King McClure Collection which was part of Heritage's June 8-13, 2016 auction. It was marketed as a pristine, fresh-to-market grouping of more than 3,000 coins collected between the 1860s and the 1930s.
The Rev. Dr. James Gore King McClure was born in Albany, NY in November 1848. After graduating from Yale University, and from Princeton Seminary, in 1873, McClure began his ministry in the vicinity of Albany, NY, soon accepting a position as the pastor of the First Presbyterian Church of Lake Forest, Illinois and died at the age of 83 in Lake Forest, IL in January 1932. He was a member of the Mayflower Society, a direct descendant of Mayflower passenger John Howland. A much-admired community leader, he served variously as the pastor of the First Presbyterian Church and president of Lake Forest College in addition to being a founding president of the McCormick Theological Seminary in Chicago.
"This is a truly remarkable collection," said Greg Rohan, President of Heritage Auctions, "not only because of its size and scope, but also because it has sat, largely untouched, in a safe deposit box in Illinois for decades. Dr. McClure acquired many of these coins at the time of issue, either from circulation or at the bank, and others were gifts from friends."
"Certainly Rev. Dr. McClure's collection ranks among the most important time-capsules of U.S. coins ever offered," said Scott Schechter, Vice President of NGC. "We savored this opportunity to learn so much about numismatics in the late 19th and early 20th Centuries."
Thank you so much for the background history of Rev. McClure, I had no idea!
Doug
It might only be anecdotal evidence, but I have experienced this same thing with crossing many seated halves and some seated dollars. Only a couple crossed at the same grade, the rest went down, and none went up. I learned this from my own experience, but this was also shared with me by another experienced seated half dollar collector who also liked to cross his coins.
My rule of thumb for seated halves was to never expect an NGC AU58 to cross to PCGS AU58. The NGC AU55s and AU53s were usually good candidates to stay at the AU50 level, but in fairness I always crossed in holder and put the minimum grade for the 55s and 53s at AU50 as I would generally prefer to keep an NGC AU55/53 as compared to a PCGS XF45 as far as value was concerned and I wasn't prepared to take that large of a grade hit. The NGC AU50s usually ended up as fairly nice PCGS XF45s, if bought well enough on the front end. My focus was on original surfaces, with the technical grade being the game. I eventually stopped this game once I decided to focus on mostly AU55s and AU58s for my core collection. I still cross from time to time for varieties, and die marriage designations when I want them noted on the holder or TrueViewed, back when they were good photos.
However, now to make nice PCGS AU58s I am usually looking at reasonably priced NGC MS62 coins. That is generally a hard cross to swallow and make, as for a long time the NGC MS62 price didn't justify a gamble for a PCGS AU58, but lately AU58 prices have caught up with their rarity and that type of a gamble has been worth it.
This has been my experience with a lot of seated halves, perhaps other folks have experienced something different, but this trend has been fairly consistent for the last 20 years that I have been experimenting with seated coins and TPGs.
Seated Dollar Collection
Know anybody tried to go the other way - see if they (PCGS) would upgrade at NGC?
Don’t do Seated material but at show saw guy with about a dozen NGC Seated coins in his case then putting a newly purchased Seated PCGS half in his bank bag. Somebody asked to look at it - he said “sorry, no it’s for a client.”
Ask the dealers that submit them
11.5$ Southern Dollars, The little “Big Easy” set
I have never done it myself and have no interest in turning PCGS coins back to NGC coins, but I do own this coin, which had been in a PCGS AU58 OGH that now resides in an NGC MS61 holder, needless to say that I would much rather prefer that old holder back. This is one I have considered crossing back to PCGS AU58 and getting the pedigree reattached. I believe it would reduce the UNC population down to 2 from 3 so that is also a consideration.
Seated Dollar Collection
When selecting your silver denoms for your collections, do you seek those circulated coinages with the best detail in mind with just honest wear? But maybe it's not too big of a deal being silver is softer than nickel. Are there weak strikes in silver, I know the dollars have this problem but for the lower denoms, do you avoid those weak strikes on circulated silver coins?
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection
I’m pretty sure the same applies to moderns judging by the auction records that are historically lower value for the same grade coin.