CAC has pulled back the curtain a bit with its online database that allows one to search every coin they grade and/or sticker and will output columns of data including stickered population and price guides. This is great data to be able to look at and got me to thinking...
18 December 2024
18 December 2024
Historical CAC Gold & Green Sticker Rates Across All Series
This isn't an article about a particular submission to CAC for a group of coins. Rather, this is about what each of us surmises might be the easiest or toughest series to obtain a gold or green CAC sticker when submitting coins to their service.
CAC offers a searchable database that allows anyone to find the raw numbers of stickered coins for individual coin issues or even entire series. The stickered coins can also be broken down into those receiving green or gold stickers. This is fabulous raw data to be able to have and study. Additionally, CAC has listed on their website the percentage of coins submitted that have passed CAC evaluation (received a sticker) and using these bits of data we can get a rough estimate as to the numbers of coins submitted to the service over the years.
The most recent data for sticker rate on the CAC website shows that "CAC has stickered approximately 43% of the coins received". [1] It would make sense if this "approximately 43%" represented the sum of both gold and green stickers awarded. Recently, I downloaded the data for each series that CAC examines for a sticker and added up the totals for green and gold stickers.[2] The total number of coins CAC stickered is approximately 620,000 and this represents about 98.5% green stickers and 1.5% gold stickers. If the 620,000 stickered coins represent ~43% of the submissions then CAC has received and evaluated around 1,442,000 coins since it opened its doors.
CAC offers a searchable database that allows anyone to find the raw numbers of stickered coins for individual coin issues or even entire series. The stickered coins can also be broken down into those receiving green or gold stickers. This is fabulous raw data to be able to have and study. Additionally, CAC has listed on their website the percentage of coins submitted that have passed CAC evaluation (received a sticker) and using these bits of data we can get a rough estimate as to the numbers of coins submitted to the service over the years.
The most recent data for sticker rate on the CAC website shows that "CAC has stickered approximately 43% of the coins received". [1] It would make sense if this "approximately 43%" represented the sum of both gold and green stickers awarded. Recently, I downloaded the data for each series that CAC examines for a sticker and added up the totals for green and gold stickers.[2] The total number of coins CAC stickered is approximately 620,000 and this represents about 98.5% green stickers and 1.5% gold stickers. If the 620,000 stickered coins represent ~43% of the submissions then CAC has received and evaluated around 1,442,000 coins since it opened its doors.
Looking for the only pre-1934 WLH to earn a gold CAC sticker in gem (MS65) or better? Here it is.
Some of the data from CAC reinforces what I have witnessed in my own submissions while other parts were a surprise. In my experience the following observations have held true-
1) The low hanging fruit for gold stickers has always been proof Franklin halves as well as gem, late date Mercs and Buffalos (especially the 1938-D Buff). I have written for years (literally, years) that if you want to earn a gold CAC sticker then the best way might be to submit a mass of these pieces. The CAC data are consistent with this.
Both gradeflation and a lack of scrutiny (in other words, a less thorough vetting process in the grading room) may be the main drivers of gold stickers for this group. Of course we don't know how much each of these affects the data. My opinion is that proof Franklin halves and gem, late date Mercs and Buffalos had a perfect storm going for them with respect to gold CAC stickers. That is, back in the early years of the TPGs (around 1986-1993 or so) these were popular coins to collect and submit for certification and they had tremendous price compression between certain grades. Things like PR66 to PR67 Franklins or MS65 to MS66 late date Mercs and Buffalos had significant price compression, which meant that these PR66 or MS65 coins weren't attractive candidates for the three decades of grading arbitrage we have seen and, thus, they stayed in their original holders and graded at 1986-1993 standards instead of being broken out and regraded to more modern standards.
Another reason, again in my opinion, for the high rates of gold stickers for these series has to do with CAC policy for its first fifteen or so years in existence. During that time CAC charged pretty darn little per coin (around $10), had an exceptionally quick turnaround and did not charge the collector if the coin failed to sticker. This lessened the potential financial burden on collectors and likely spurred many otherwise low value coins to be included on submission invoices. Of course, many of the really nice coins that might have been submitted to CAC have already been submitted to CAC, which makes me believe that over time we might very well see the gold CAC sticker rate fall.
2) Silver commems always seemed to have a relatively high percentage of gold stickers, as well.
Everything written above about proof Franklin halves and gem, late date Mercs and Buffalos largely holds true for the silver commem series. They were popular when the TPGs were new and then went into a near baseline coma state for several decades afterward. This hammered their values and might have created the greatest price compression we see within the MS grades of any classic series. There was simply little incentive to engage in arbitrage. The only exception to this would be for those wildly toned coins that have received grading bumps and large price increases over the years.
3) I have read many times that receiving any CAC sticker on gold coinage is more difficult than other series, though this has not been the case for the pieces I have submitted. I can't comment on the overall success rate for gold coinage, but the CAC data shows that gold CAC stickers are awarded at a lower overall rate than the rate for all coins combined.
Whereas dipped silver is completely acceptable to many (most?) collectors, dealers, TPGs and CAC there is not that same level of acceptance for dipped gold. In fact, many (again, most?) folks don't even mention gold as being dipped, but rather as "processed". Processed gold has a look that I avoid like the plague and is also a look that the TPGs turned a blind eye to for decades. Therefore, many older holder gold coins are obviously processed and their details grades might be conservative, but their surfaces are destroyed. CAC falls in line much more closely with how I view gold in that they appear to reward and are looking for original surfaces on gold, which dooms an entire swath of certified gold coinage with respect to a green or gold CAC sticker.
4) John Albanese told me directly at one point that early Federal silver likely had the lowest rate of stickers. This would include all silver series prior to the advent of Capped Bust halves. So, essentially, 1807 and earlier.[3] JA mentioned the low sticker rate of early Federal silver to me because virtually all the pieces I have submitted have received a green CAC sticker and we were lamenting the lack of such material in any meaningful quantity within today's market.
5) I always assumed that Lincoln cents (specifically Wheat cents) and Morgan dollars would have the highest rates of sticker success and the lowest rates of gold stickers since they are both widely collected series and have been popular for decades. Therefore, the grading standards for those series are more likely to be something akin to "nearly universal", which would make grading outliers less likely. Unfortunately, the CAC data is not complete enough to determine their overall success rate, but the gold sticker rate for each series is low with the Lincoln cent (Wheat cents) being shockingly low for gold stickers.
A change in color designation might eliminate the chance of a gold, or even green sticker, for copper coins and this would be most prevalent with Lincoln Wheat cents. A quick look at the CAC numbers as of today shows that the gold sticker rate for BN Lincoln Wheat cents is more than twice the rate as for RB coins and that the rate for RB coins is greater than that for RD coins. This might support the idea of coins turning over the years in their holders and limiting gold sticker candidates.
6) My experience is that CAC is relatively more liberal (or PCGS and NGC relatively more conservative) in grading proof mid-century coinage and the data show a relatively high rate of gold CAC stickers for this niche. This is consistent with my observations.
As mentioned previously, the total gold CAC sticker rate is approximately 1.5% of those coins that received a CAC sticker. If we look at the gold CAC sticker rate for proof Jefferson nickels, Mercury dimes, Washington quarters and Franklin halves combined then the data reveal a gold sticker rate of ~4.7% vs. the global gold sticker rate of ~1.5% of submitted coins. This is a three-fold increase in the rate of gold stickers handed out and many of the reasons for this are no doubt listed already in point one of this article.
1) The low hanging fruit for gold stickers has always been proof Franklin halves as well as gem, late date Mercs and Buffalos (especially the 1938-D Buff). I have written for years (literally, years) that if you want to earn a gold CAC sticker then the best way might be to submit a mass of these pieces. The CAC data are consistent with this.
Both gradeflation and a lack of scrutiny (in other words, a less thorough vetting process in the grading room) may be the main drivers of gold stickers for this group. Of course we don't know how much each of these affects the data. My opinion is that proof Franklin halves and gem, late date Mercs and Buffalos had a perfect storm going for them with respect to gold CAC stickers. That is, back in the early years of the TPGs (around 1986-1993 or so) these were popular coins to collect and submit for certification and they had tremendous price compression between certain grades. Things like PR66 to PR67 Franklins or MS65 to MS66 late date Mercs and Buffalos had significant price compression, which meant that these PR66 or MS65 coins weren't attractive candidates for the three decades of grading arbitrage we have seen and, thus, they stayed in their original holders and graded at 1986-1993 standards instead of being broken out and regraded to more modern standards.
Another reason, again in my opinion, for the high rates of gold stickers for these series has to do with CAC policy for its first fifteen or so years in existence. During that time CAC charged pretty darn little per coin (around $10), had an exceptionally quick turnaround and did not charge the collector if the coin failed to sticker. This lessened the potential financial burden on collectors and likely spurred many otherwise low value coins to be included on submission invoices. Of course, many of the really nice coins that might have been submitted to CAC have already been submitted to CAC, which makes me believe that over time we might very well see the gold CAC sticker rate fall.
2) Silver commems always seemed to have a relatively high percentage of gold stickers, as well.
Everything written above about proof Franklin halves and gem, late date Mercs and Buffalos largely holds true for the silver commem series. They were popular when the TPGs were new and then went into a near baseline coma state for several decades afterward. This hammered their values and might have created the greatest price compression we see within the MS grades of any classic series. There was simply little incentive to engage in arbitrage. The only exception to this would be for those wildly toned coins that have received grading bumps and large price increases over the years.
3) I have read many times that receiving any CAC sticker on gold coinage is more difficult than other series, though this has not been the case for the pieces I have submitted. I can't comment on the overall success rate for gold coinage, but the CAC data shows that gold CAC stickers are awarded at a lower overall rate than the rate for all coins combined.
Whereas dipped silver is completely acceptable to many (most?) collectors, dealers, TPGs and CAC there is not that same level of acceptance for dipped gold. In fact, many (again, most?) folks don't even mention gold as being dipped, but rather as "processed". Processed gold has a look that I avoid like the plague and is also a look that the TPGs turned a blind eye to for decades. Therefore, many older holder gold coins are obviously processed and their details grades might be conservative, but their surfaces are destroyed. CAC falls in line much more closely with how I view gold in that they appear to reward and are looking for original surfaces on gold, which dooms an entire swath of certified gold coinage with respect to a green or gold CAC sticker.
4) John Albanese told me directly at one point that early Federal silver likely had the lowest rate of stickers. This would include all silver series prior to the advent of Capped Bust halves. So, essentially, 1807 and earlier.[3] JA mentioned the low sticker rate of early Federal silver to me because virtually all the pieces I have submitted have received a green CAC sticker and we were lamenting the lack of such material in any meaningful quantity within today's market.
5) I always assumed that Lincoln cents (specifically Wheat cents) and Morgan dollars would have the highest rates of sticker success and the lowest rates of gold stickers since they are both widely collected series and have been popular for decades. Therefore, the grading standards for those series are more likely to be something akin to "nearly universal", which would make grading outliers less likely. Unfortunately, the CAC data is not complete enough to determine their overall success rate, but the gold sticker rate for each series is low with the Lincoln cent (Wheat cents) being shockingly low for gold stickers.
A change in color designation might eliminate the chance of a gold, or even green sticker, for copper coins and this would be most prevalent with Lincoln Wheat cents. A quick look at the CAC numbers as of today shows that the gold sticker rate for BN Lincoln Wheat cents is more than twice the rate as for RB coins and that the rate for RB coins is greater than that for RD coins. This might support the idea of coins turning over the years in their holders and limiting gold sticker candidates.
6) My experience is that CAC is relatively more liberal (or PCGS and NGC relatively more conservative) in grading proof mid-century coinage and the data show a relatively high rate of gold CAC stickers for this niche. This is consistent with my observations.
As mentioned previously, the total gold CAC sticker rate is approximately 1.5% of those coins that received a CAC sticker. If we look at the gold CAC sticker rate for proof Jefferson nickels, Mercury dimes, Washington quarters and Franklin halves combined then the data reveal a gold sticker rate of ~4.7% vs. the global gold sticker rate of ~1.5% of submitted coins. This is a three-fold increase in the rate of gold stickers handed out and many of the reasons for this are no doubt listed already in point one of this article.
Still looking for a gold CAC sticker 1921 WLH? If this coin, which is in a PCGS VF25 OGH didn't receive a gold CAC sticker (it didn't; it received a green CAC sticker) then I think the wait might be a long one.
I think it might be interesting to revisit this topic in the future and see how the percentages shake out as we get farther along down the road of CACG being the main driver for the company and CAC perhaps being moved to the background.
[1] CAC FAQs page last updated 10 December 2024 www.cacgrading.com/doc/stickering-frequently-asked-questions/
[2] CAC Population Report and Price Guide www.cacgrading.com/pop-report
[3] Conversation with John Albanese at CAC headquarters.
[2] CAC Population Report and Price Guide www.cacgrading.com/pop-report
[3] Conversation with John Albanese at CAC headquarters.
