Several ranking systems are present across several areas and stem from the desire of humans to be the best, and so is the case with scientific research. The goal of scientometrics is to measure the desired performance at multiple levels; those of the journals and the authors. Several such metrics include the journal impact factor (JIF), Scimago journal rank (SJR), CiteScore, Altmetrics, plumX metrics, article influence factor, source normalized impact per article (SNIP), Eigenfactor (EF), h-index, i-10 index, g-index, h5 index, M-index, Q-index, and e-index, amongst many others [[1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10], [11]]. Table 1 lists some common and uncommon scientometrics used to assess the impact of research. Research metrics are heavily relied upon by academia to measure an individual's performance and productivity, promotions, research funding, and recruitment to academic positions. The researchers also consider these metrics while choosing the journals to publish or for collaborations with prospective partners across the globe. The current chapter intends to present an editor's perspectives on these scientometrics and the caveats in using them to assess an individual's productivity.