I have seen people spend over $300 on submission as a grader and then come back to find that the cards I returned for a grade are worth less than the money I gave him. The Pokemon card grading business reached 951, 000 submissions each month in April 2025, yet this is what they do not want you to know initially: more than half of the submissions fell short of profitability.
This breakdown incorporates the actual costs, actual turn around times and the truthful Sand Eye ROI calculation in PSA, Beckett (BGS), and CGC. When you are sitting on promo cards and are wondering whether grading is a financially good idea or not, this is what you need to know before you begin spending a dime.
Table of Contents
The Real Cost Breakdown – What You’ll Actually Pay
The prices charged are in most cases a wild card on how much it is claimed to be worth and how speedy it is turned around, however, there is a story behind the base numbers.
PSA’s pricing structure:
- Normal service: 25-35 dollars per card (45-60 business days)
- Cards of value above 200: heavy value based surcharges take effect.
- Dollar Pricing: options cost between $75-150+ to have a higher turnaround.
Beckett (BGS) charges:
- Base grading: $30-45 per card
- Subgrades that were free of charge.
- No value added charges based on card worth.
- Premium service: $65-100 per card
CGC runs cheapest:
- Economy: $12-20 per card
- Standard: $25-35 per card
- Turnaround: 5-10 day turnaround: $30-50 per card.
I have utilized all the three services, and the following figures reflect on how much money they save on your wallet. An entry of 20 cards at normal rates costs 500-700 including shipping and insurance. CGI costs CGC the same batch at $240-400. It is that $300 difference that counts when you are computing the worth of grade premium versus the cost.
On high-value promo cards (anything you would rate higher than $500 raw), BGS is astonishingly competitive since the value upcharges PSA can impose on an individual card can be in excess of 150-200, whereas BGS will remain at the fixed rates of about 65-100.
Turnaround Times – The Wait That Actually Happens
There is hardly ever a match between the official estimates and the actual delivery.
PSA’s current reality:
- Normal service: 45-60 business days (sometimes goes as long as 70-90 days)
- Walk-through activities: 5-10 working days (exclusive charge, scarce supply)
- Bulk submissions: 90-120+ days
BGS turnaround:
- Standard: 30-45 business days
- Premium: 10-20 business days
- Bombs windows consistently.
CGC’s speed advantage:
- Economy: 20-30 business days
- Standard: 10-15 business days
- Deliver: 5-10 business days (I have had actual deliveries of 7 days)
My experience revealed that CGC has the best consistent turnaround. By the release of Pokemon Scarlet and Violet: 151, I sent chase cards to CGC on day 12 after release and received them recredentialized on day 19. The speed is important to the capturing of early market premiums before population goes crazy.
Opportunity costs are caused by delays at PSA. When the raw cost of a promo card is on an upward trend, the 90-day vulcanizing period would keep it in limbo on the grading, thus forfeiting any chance of selling it while it has a chance. In case of submissions that are time sensitive (new set releases, trending cards), CGC has a speed advantage over its comparatively lower resale premiums.
When Speed Costs You Money
Express services seem good, till you undertake the calculations. A letter of PSA express incurs you a $75 fee on a $100 raw (possibly $150-200 graded) eating 37-50% of your profit margin before you even include selling fees and shipping; not even considering failing to make PSA 10.
Express services on cards of value as low as $300 raw in which the value of time is a worthwhile consideration of premium prices, or on sets that have recently been released to the market in which being first to market means a premium.
The Grade Multiplier Reality – What Does the Numbers Really Show.
This is the point at which the grading of economics becomes ferocious to the majority of collectors.
Modern promo cards (2020-present):
- Raw to PSA 10: 1.5-2.5x value increase
- Raw to PSA 9: 1.1-1.4x value increase
- Raw to PSA 8: it is frequently equal or less than the price of the raw market.
Vintage promos (1999-2003):
- Raw to PSA 10: 5-10x multiplier
- Raw to PSA 9: 3-5x multiplier
- Raw to PSA 8: 2-3x multiplier
Chase/first edition promos:
- Raw to PSA 10: 3-8x multiplier
- Raw to BGS 10 Black label: 10-15x mutliplier (extremely rare)
There is one detail that looked crucial during the analysis of Complete Pokemon Promo Card Collecting Guide pricing data, namely: the multiplier of grades is falling to death with an increase in population reports. A 3x premium Celebrations Charizard promo was held in October of 2021. As of January 2026, and having 13,200+ PSA 10 copies in population reports, that premium had decreased to 1.8x.
Real example breakdown:
Modern promo worth $50 raw:
- Grading cost: $25 (PSA standard)
- Shipping both ways: $15
- PSA 10 market value: $ 90 (1.8x multiplier)
- Net profit: -0 USD after reimbursement of costs of 40 and increasing the value by 40 USD.
Same card, old promo in the price of a raw card of 50 dollars:
- Grading cost: $25
- Shipping: $15
- PSA 10 market value: $300 (between 6x multiplier and 10x multiplier)
- Net profit: $210 after costs
The difference in multipliers is the key to economic viability or the key to dis economic viability.
BGS Subgrade Premium – Is It Value Adding?
The scoring of BGS provides four premium opportunities of scoring (Centering, Corners, Edges, Surface). Certain vintage promos which change in all 9.5 subgrades to 9.5 premiums can be sold at higher premiums than a straight PSA 10 due to the BGS 9.5 with all 9.5 subgrades; since the subgrade transparency is valued by serious collectors.
BGS 10 Black Labels are incredibly scarce (0.2% rate of occurrence in the population of modern cards) and sell at 2-3 times prices of comparable PSA 10s. However, as is the catch in this case, Black Label must be flawless in all four subgrades. The pack-fresh modern promos were hardly to the standard, as I found in my experience.
On cards with a greater raw value of 200 or above and you have high confidence in centering and surface condition, BGS subgrade system can be justified by the costs incurred per card due to the fact that advanced buyers place premiums on recorded quality measures.
When Grading Actually Increases Value (The Honest Math).
The cards should not be graded most of the time. There, I said it.
Grade these:
- Raw cards with a value of more than $100 and in excellent mint condition.
- Limited promo releases or first edition that are analyzed as rare.
- Good vintage publicity (before 2003)
- Replace art or full art promos with good collector demand.
- Japanese exclusive promotion (20-40% moderation of English counterparts)
Don’t grade these:
- Contemporary common/uncommon base sets.
- New promos that have been released on a mass scale (McDonalds, GameStop basic rollouts)
- Cards whose whitening, edge wear or centering is easily visible.
- Any card worth less than $75 raw
- The bulk modern sets in which there are already over 20 thousand copies of the report already graded in the population.
It is not just arbitrary to set the raw threshold at 100. Assuming the cost of modern grading (25-40-per card with shipping) you must receive at least a 50% improvement margin in values to even break even on the fees of selling a card. Raw cards under the 100 dollar mark are also unlikely to get that type of multiplier at the current overloaded market position.
The analysis of population report is important:
I have extensively used online certification lookup at PSA before I submit cards. In a given promo where there are 5,000 or more PSA 10 cards in the population report, then this grade premium goes dead no matter what the condition of the individual card. Scarcity is a powerful stimulus towards premiums, population saturation is a powerful killer.
Target focus grading budgets on cards having population of less than 2,000 total graded, with your addition of PSA 10 reflecting authority of scarcity, as opposed to nattiness of volume.
The Modern Card Trap – Why Recent Promos Usually Fail ROI Tests
Comparative print runs of modern designers are vast compared to vintage. The distribution model created by Pokemon Company International saturates markets with promotional cards when movies are released, products launched and retail partnerships are made. Adult collectors store them on the spot in sleeves and toploaders artificially inflating the raw condition rates.
Outcome: 45-70 percent of the contemporary promo submissions mature into PSA 9-10. Premium compression occurs when the cards of all the participants are graded well. The economic moat that previously made the vintage card grading viable, just does not exist in case of majority of 2020-forward releases.
Counterfeiting Risks – The Industry’s Hidden Problem
Playtest cards (on January 2025) revealed that even the collectors secretly believed: Authentication problems occur with professional grading firms.
What actually happened:
CGC graded and actively promoted potentially fraudulent and bogus 1996 playlocked Pokemon cards which were actually 2024 copies, as evidenced. In 0.3% of its submission volume, estimated financial damage went above millions. Although CGC limited the scale this reputation blowback was destructive as it demonstrated underpinnings of authentication process vulnerability.
The present situation in terms of counterfeiting:
Hackers have advanced imitations that imitate hologram designs, character spacing and texture that is now imitated by sophisticated fakes. I observed that with the product of LEGIT APP, the authentication service, experienced collectors have a hard time eyeing recognizing quality counterfeits that are of high-quality so, with no engineering help.
Protection strategies:
- Pre-submission authentication: Cards of value $500+ raw, deploy AI authentication solutions ($5-10 per card) and then graduate by paying. LEGIT APP and Validoe also provide hologram/font/texture authentication to an authorized database.
- Check certifications by the grading companies: PSA, BGS, and CGC make their certifications available through a free certification look up service. Check the certificate number and the company records before buying the graded cards on the secondary markets and make sure that the certificate does not have a red flag.
- Documentation is essential: Purchase receipts or videos pulled or pack authentication records to very high valued submissions. Grading companies are demanding provenance documentation on cards that have been flagged during the process of card authentication.
Service-specific authentication reliability:
Their dominant market share of between 70-80 and a history of 30 years grading the Pokemon cards makes PSF have the largest authentication database. Their authenticity is an industry leader with regard to old-school promos.
The BGS authentication department specializes in a lot of sports cards with the Pokemon authentication not at the same level as PSA. Nonetheless, BGS does not have to deal with counterfeiting scandals as often due to the higher price that weeds out high volume counterfeit entries.
The credibility of authentication of CGC was low after the scandal. Although the company states that there are enhanced authentication measures in the year 2025-2026, skeptics are left behind by the collectors. In the case of vintage promotions or higher high-valued cards where such authentication is of utmost importance, PSA or BGS will be safer at a high price.
The TAG Grading Wildcard – AI Authentication Promise vs. Execution Risk
The Photometric Stereoscopic Imaging software that is part of TAG Grading to authenticate the material involves the use of artificial intelligence to identify the surface irregularities otherwise invisible by human scorers. Theoretically, this technology is able to detect high-end fake products that cannot be detected by conventional means of authentication.
Well, the problem is in practice, TAG is difficult to execute. Various 2025 reports reported the occurrence of slab fragility with cards disintegrating under minimum pressure. In case of the slabs being broken in shipping, the benefits of authentication are useless.
My consideration: TAG applies to sub-500 modern cards with a low risk of counterfeiting and low price savings are important. In case of valuable cards or old promos, when the authentication integrity is paramount, use PSA or BGS at the cost of greater expenses.
Cross-Grading Strategy – When I Switched Services
There is a considerable difference in the grading standards used in different services, which opens the opportunity of arbitrage in the case of the card, which performed worse in a specific company.
There is actual cross-grading that I have followed:
The PSA 8 Base Set Charizard that was in a fantastic centering (58/42) and small edge whitening was cracked and resubmitted to BGS. Findings: BGS of 8.5, and subgrades that disclose the strength that centers (9.5 centering, 8 corners, 8 edges, and 8.5 surface). The market value was raised by 180 due to BGS subgrades which emphasized the strengths of the card in spite of the overall grade; 8.5.
The instances when cross-grading is reasonable:
- PSA 8s, which has a good centering (less than 60/40) may possibly creep up to BGS 8.5.
- CGC 9s could either go to PSA 9 or BGS 9 (CGC grades a little easier compared to competitors)
- Vintage cards with low population and service switching reaches varying purchaser
populations.Cross-grading economics:
In professional services, slab cracking costs 10-20 (welcome valuable slabs) never crack valuable slabs). New grading submission is an addition of $25-45. Total cost: $35-65 per card. Cross-grading should only be considered when increase in expected value is more than 100 dollars in order to warrant the risk and cost.
Serious caution: cross-grading has the danger of lowering grading. PSA 8S have come back as CGC 7.5S and destroyed value. Cards only The cards where subgrade transparency (BGS) or population benefits (grading to less-popular service) are transparent warrant the risk.
Turnaround Strategy – Timing The Market.
Evaluation turnaround times generate timeline strategic purposes.
New set release strategy:
Send chase promo cards either within 2 weeks of established release onto CGC by express mail (5-10 day turnaround, $30-50 card). Early PSA/BGS 10s would fetch 2-4x premiums prior to the reports on the population becoming normal. Flip graded copies in the maximum of 30-60 days.
e.g. Pokemon 151 Alakazam ex alternate art promo fetched $180 in week 3 after debut. By month 4, the prices would tumble to 85, when the population report went around 1,200+ PSA 10s. The express grading charge of 50 dollars paid back in early market time.
Vintage accumulation policy:
The 60-90 day turnaround of PSA is not as important in case of the vintage promos when values are applied in the long-term. Order under periodic bulk specials of PSA – ($18-22 per card) and wait. These are not flip cards, except, they are 5-10 year holds with grading retaining condition and authenticity.
Service Selection Matrix – What I Actually Recommend
Use PSA for:
- Classic promos (1999-2003) in which the liquidity to resale is an issue.
- Expensive cards (above 500 dollars) in which market awareness is most important.
- Liquidity in long-term hold where market dominance of 70-80 predominates.
Use BGS for:
- In cards of value of $300 and above in which subgrade transparency value is added.
- Submissions submitted with greater than $200 (no value excesses as opposed to the costly upcharges of PSA)
- Individual collectors who appreciate fine quality measure nets.
Use CGC for:
- Mass modern submissions in which economy is important.
- New release flips (fastest turnaround) that are time sensitive.
- Pack-fresh contemporary cards that have a low authentication risk.
Use TAG for:
- Cards below 300 USD experimental.
- AI transparency in which costs matter.
- Portfolio diversification (CAPM now trades at levels of PSA premiums on some modern issues)
Avoid grading entirely for:
- Any card under $75 raw value
- Contemporary bulk of population of 15,000+ or more graded copies.
- Cards that have obvious conditions problems (whitening of cards, centering more than 65/35, scratches on surface)
The Portfolio Diversification Angle
My experience demonstrated that grading diversification across several services is protection against one-company reputation crisis (as was the case of 2025 scandal of CGC). A balanced portfolio will be: 40% PSA (mass), 30% BGS (sub), 20% CGC (low-end), 10% experimental (TAG, SGC).
This specialization advances liquidity optionality their various services appeal to their various types of buyers. PSA rules the mass retail market, BGS investments attract serious collectors, who study subgrades, CGC attracts price conscious buyers.
The Silent Standard Changes – Why I’m Now Skeptical of PSA
My PSA perspective was altered with the help of January 2025. The company stealthily changed the wording on their websites to indicate centering standards of 55/45 of PSA 10 grades, a longstanding unofficial standard of 60/40. Nat Turner, CEO, said standards are 55/45, but population statistics tell him otherwise.
The population growth rate of 10 has been buffered to only 8 percent per three years even though the total populations graded doubled. Gem rates have dropped to 45% in 2025 following a trend of dropping by about 70 percent between 2022 and 2025. I observed that my individual gem rating went down to 31% and before with the same card selection criteria at 62% in the same period.
It is important since collectors would provide cards based on the impression that 60/40 centering was adequate to qualify at Gem Mint. Such cards come back as PSA 9s at no explanation, and are economically a loss to the grading fee of cards that should have been left ungraded or sent elsewhere.
Trust implications:
Grading industry credibility is undermined by changes to standards without any discussion. When companies change the criteria in an unannounced manner, historic population reports can no longer be used as useful comparables and a collector has not been informed of which standards their cards will be judged using.
BGS and CGC have not enjoyed such scandals since their standards documentation has not changed. That is a consideration that counts a lot to collectors who value transparency, and as such, the 15-20% premium in cost.
Conclusion: The Honest Take on Grading Economics
The majority of Pokemon promotion cards do not have to be rated. Modern releases with saturated population and constrained multiplier just simply do not work with the math.
Grade budgets on vintage promotions, known limited releases, cards valued at $100+ raw in which grade multipliers will be cost-efficient. Grading is to be avoided except on long-term vintage in which case PSA should be used; high value transparency should be offered using BGS, anticipating modern flips which require speed, CGC, and finally, learn nothing.
The next chapter of grading industry lies with the collectors that requires accountability, request a population report before submission, implement pre-authentication software on their valuable cards and marking to market with economically unreasonable grading by submitting uninformed.
Grading is a sophisticated process in 2026 suggesting that I know when not to grade as much as I know what service to utilize.
I’m a content writer with a passion for games and strategy.I’m dedicated to creating content that is engaging and informative for today’s audience. I keep a close eye on the latest gaming trends and industry trends to provide entertaining and informative articles. Whether it’s exploring new tools or analyzing the sport, I bring a new accessible voice to each episode. Let us connect and enhance your content with knowledge and insight!
