Pokémon cards are undeniably popular, and graded Pokémon cards are even more coveted. There’s a distinct prestige in owning a professionally authenticated and graded Pokémon card, securely encased for preservation. However, when it comes to grading services, are they all created equal? While numerous companies offer card grading, the question remains: which one stands out as the best?
Having personally utilized both Certified Guaranty Company (CGC) and Professional Sports Authenticator (PSA) for grading my cards, I’m eager to share my insights based on direct experience.
This article will delve into a detailed comparison of PSA and CGC, drawing upon my personal experiences and supporting observations with visual evidence and factual points.
It’s important to emphasize that the following is based on my personal opinion. My primary goal is to provide valuable perspectives to consider when you decide to get your cherished cards graded.
First Impressions: The Feel, Shape, Size, and Quality of PSA and CGC Slabs
Describing the nuances can be challenging, and truly appreciating the differences between PSA and CGC slabs often requires firsthand experience.
The most immediately noticeable distinction is the slab casing itself: CGC slabs are crystal clear, while PSA slabs have a frosted appearance.
Alt text: Front comparison of a graded PSA Pokemon card slab with a frosted case next to a graded CGC Pokemon card slab with a clear case.
Aesthetically, both slabs present well.
When stacked together, PSA and CGC slabs appear nearly identical in width and height to the naked eye. While precision instruments might reveal minor discrepancies, their dimensions feel practically the same. However, a difference in depth is perceptible, although not a significant factor.
Alt text: Side-by-side view of stacked PSA and CGC graded Pokemon card slabs showing similar height but different depth, with the thinner PSA slab on the left.
PSA slabs are notably thinner. This isn’t visually striking, but it’s a tactile difference. In the image above, the PSA slab is on the left, and the CGC slab is on the right. While the thinness is a minor detail, it’s something you can feel.
For me, the shape and material of PSA slabs contribute to their superior quality.
Upon handling, PSA slabs feel lighter yet surprisingly more robust than CGC slabs. This might seem contradictory, but it’s a distinct sensory impression.
The shape difference is mainly about the ridges on the slabs. Both PSA and CGC slabs have ridges, but PSA’s are more pronounced. PSA slabs stack and interlock more securely, similar to Lego bricks. They exhibit minimal movement when stacked. CGC slabs, while also ridged and stackable, don’t lock together as firmly and can shift during transit. I’ve unfortunately received damaged CGC slabs due to this lack of secure stacking during shipping.
In my assessment, PSA graded slabs excel in overall quality, shape, and feel compared to CGC slabs. Many of these nuances are best appreciated through personal experience.
Pokémon Card Grading Standards: A Head-to-Head Comparison
Interestingly, I possess two identical Pokémon cards that received the same numerical grade from both CGC and PSA. Specifically, I have an Electabuzz promo card from the first Pokémon movie in 1999, graded an 8.0 by both companies.
Alt text: Back view comparison of PSA and CGC graded Electabuzz Pokemon cards both graded 8.0, showing similar condition and grade from both companies.
Both cards appear to be in excellent condition. Personally, I struggle to distinguish between these cards and those graded a perfect 10.0. While PSA provides a single overall grade, CGC offers more granular insight with subgrades.
Alt text: Front view comparison of PSA and CGC graded Electabuzz Pokemon cards, highlighting the subgrades provided on the CGC label for centering, corners, edges, and surface.
CGC subgrades offer details on centering, corners, edges, and surface quality. Do I always agree with the specific subgrades? Not always, particularly when judging by eye. However, both companies undoubtedly use precision instruments for accurate scoring.
It’s widely believed that CGC grading is stricter than PSA, and my experience aligns with this. Having submitted over 100 cards to CGC, I have yet to receive a single perfect 10.0 grade. In contrast, with a smaller number of submissions to PSA, I’ve received several 10.0 grades.
The long-term impact of CGC’s stricter grading on perceived value remains to be seen. Currently, CGC grades don’t seem to negatively affect resale value on platforms like eBay, but this could evolve in the future. For serious collectors, a stricter grade might even be seen as a mark of higher quality and scrutiny.
Pricing, Submission Process, and Turnaround Time: PSA versus CGC
The market for authenticated and graded collectibles is booming. Consequently, grading services like PSA and CGC are experiencing unprecedented shipment volumes. This surge in demand has led to processing delays and increased prices as these companies expand their operations.
Let’s examine my personal experiences with the submission process and turnaround times for both CGC and PSA.
My PSA Grading Submission Experience
In November 2020, I sent my first submission to PSA using their value service, which required a minimum of 20 cards at $10.00 per card. While my shipment arrived at PSA in November 2020 (the same month I sent it), the cards weren’t officially logged into their system until February 2021. This meant my cards remained in boxes for months before PSA began processing them.
It was not until 2022 that I finally received my graded cards back.
These 20 cards, costing $200.00 plus shipping, took over a year to be returned. While the wait was lengthy, the cards were eventually returned safely.
To understand current PSA turnaround times, you can refer to the complete-through dates on their website.
Alt text: Screenshot of the PSA website showing complete-through dates for different grading tiers, explaining that these dates represent the oldest orders currently being processed.
What do these “complete-through dates” signify?
Based on my understanding, the complete-through date represents the oldest order entry date that PSA is currently processing for each service tier.
Referring back to my example, my submission was entered into the PSA system in February 2021. This entry date is the relevant point of comparison against the complete-through dates. If PSA’s complete-through date was, for instance, January 2021, it would provide a rough estimate of how much longer my order might take to be graded. It’s crucial to remember that the complete-through date is based on the order entry date, not the date the shipment was received by PSA.
My CGC Grading Submission Experience
My experience with CGC turnaround times was slightly more favorable, potentially because CGC was a newer entrant in the trading card grading market and perhaps experiencing lower submission volumes than the established PSA.
For those interested in submitting to CGC, I created a helpful tutorial: How to Submit Pokémon Cards to CGC for Grading.
In December 2020, I sent a bulk submission of 50 cards to CGC at $11.50 per card. I opted for subgrades and, as a member, received a minor discount. It took approximately two weeks for my cards to transition from “received” to “entered” in their system.
Just a few months later, in 2021 (around three or four months), my graded cards were returned.
These 50 cards, costing $575.00 plus shipping, were returned in a significantly shorter timeframe than my PSA submission at that time.
Let’s examine the advertised return times for CGC’s services.
Alt text: Screenshot of the CGC website showing return times for different grading tiers, listing packages being opened and estimated working days for return shipping after order entry.
CGC’s approach differs slightly from PSA. CGC indicates the packages they are currently opening for processing, providing transparency for submitters awaiting order entry. CGC also provides an estimated number of working days for return shipping after the cards are entered into their system. It’s important to note that this estimate begins after system entry, which could be several months after initial receipt of the shipment.
In summary, both PSA and CGC offer comparable pricing for lower-tier services and face similar challenges with turnaround times due to high demand.
While CGC might currently offer slightly faster turnaround times, the difference isn’t substantial enough to definitively favor it over PSA, which remains the leading and most recognized authority in card grading for many collectors.
Conclusion: PSA or CGC for Grading Your Pokémon Cards?
Having experienced multiple submissions with both Certified Guaranty Company (CGC) and Professional Sports Authenticator (PSA), I’ve concluded that PSA graded card slabs are superior in hand. While neither service excels in terms of pricing, processing speed, or turnaround time, my preference, based purely on the slab quality, leans towards PSA.
Does this mean I will exclusively use PSA for grading going forward? Not necessarily. However, for the present, PSA will likely be my primary choice. Grading standards and slab designs can evolve, and I will continue to evaluate both services in the future.
For a more visual comparison of the slabs and grading companies, I recommend watching a video I created and published on YouTube. This video offers various camera angles and perspectives to provide a clearer understanding of the physical differences between PSA and CGC graded slabs. This visual comparison can further aid you in making an informed decision about which grading service best suits your needs as a Pokémon card collector.
