My strategy is different and it has worked for me so far. I look at the developers and their intentions, or if there are economic incentives that should cause the developers to do the right thing. So from that point of view I see it as an investment in a project that aligns with what I want to see and not so much as a way to make money. And I am a software engineer (for over 20 years) so I look at things from that perspective.

My current top pick is Komodo. And again, the coin has a lot or properties from several other cryptocurrencies, in fact it is a fork of ZCash source, but the developers are working on BarterDEX (there is a beta available), an open source decentralized exchange (DEX) which uses atomic swaps unlike bisq. They are also planning on having fiat pegs as well, which will provide a means by which their DEX can exchange fiat currencies. In particular I like the developer jl777, I've talked with him in the past and he had done some interesting experiments that improved Bitcoin network performance.

Out of the DAG cryptocurrencies, I pick RaiBlocks (though I don't hold any because they are not widely available). It is currently decentralized, while IOTA (with Curators) and ByteBall (with Witnesses) are not really decentralized and it is not clear if they even can be decentralized, even though the developers intend them to be. It may come to pass that the only way they can become decentralized is by integrating blockchains into them, but the developers and their community are constantly attacking blockchain based cryptocurrencies, so it seems to me they are inadvertently limiting themselves. This is also why it is important for developers to focus on making a better cryptocurrency and not focus on talking crap about the technology of competitors. But again, decentralization may not be as important to the rest of the market.

I would also like to add, I don't like developers who troll on twitter all day. Or spend their days trying to manipulate and/or censor communities.

The two that I pick regarding economic incentive are ZCash and Dash. Being paid through the blockchain means they will want their blockchain to be as valuable as it can be. The developers end up with a stake in the game. But in addition to that I pick ZCash because their development team is focused on zero knowledge proofs for privacy. Dash because they have ambition plans in regard to savings accounts, they incentivize people to run nodes which have a number of good features.

There was a point that I liked Litecoin for being different, but today I have not seen anything significant from them and if I want to support the development of the Lightning Network, I will just hold the Bitcoins I currently have. Plus there is now Bitcoin Cash which has a lot more momentum in regard to support, and which I (and a lot of other people) already have a lot of after the fork. Nothing wrong with holding Litecoin but I just don't see reason to trade for it.

I think Vitalik Buterin is great, but I consider him and his colleagues to be more on the computer science side (Academic) and not on the engineering side. And I think it shows in the fact that there has been major bugs in things built on their platform that could have been avoided by having built in security in their VM. I kind of lose faith in them when the narrative is that people who are developing on their platform are simply bad engineers and not that the platform can be improved to make things safer. They may not be bad engineers, they could also just be scammers who intentional put a flaw in their code so that ether could be stolen, in which case the platform itself should make it harder for that to occur, make it easier for third parties to audit.