I always look at my percentile rather than my rating. Rating levels are arbitrary as they are dependent on the initial rating assigned to provisional players ( this is 1500 at lichess ).
The percentile gives you a clear picture where you are within the pool of players. If I only looked at my ratings I could falsely think that I'm a reasonable bullet player. However I know, that bullet is my weakness, and if I look at the percentile, it tells a different story than the rating: it is much worse, than my percentile with nearly equal rating in blitz and even much worse than in standard.
Also percentiles are more comparable across pools. I know for example that despite completely different ratings my percentiles here are almost identical to those reached back at chess.com.
Now, that the site was down a few times I played a few games at chess.com. It turns out that chess.com now allows provisional players to choose their initial rating, which introduced a big inflation to ratings. When I finished a year ago playing there, I had to fight for an above 1700 standard rating on my heels. In the recently played seven or so games I rose more than 100 points. This is not because I become a stronger player, but because of rating inflation. Even this more than 100 points rise was bearly enough to get back my percentile where it was a year ago.
All in all don't care about the rating, but look closely at the percentile.
The percentile gives you a clear picture where you are within the pool of players. If I only looked at my ratings I could falsely think that I'm a reasonable bullet player. However I know, that bullet is my weakness, and if I look at the percentile, it tells a different story than the rating: it is much worse, than my percentile with nearly equal rating in blitz and even much worse than in standard.
Also percentiles are more comparable across pools. I know for example that despite completely different ratings my percentiles here are almost identical to those reached back at chess.com.
Now, that the site was down a few times I played a few games at chess.com. It turns out that chess.com now allows provisional players to choose their initial rating, which introduced a big inflation to ratings. When I finished a year ago playing there, I had to fight for an above 1700 standard rating on my heels. In the recently played seven or so games I rose more than 100 points. This is not because I become a stronger player, but because of rating inflation. Even this more than 100 points rise was bearly enough to get back my percentile where it was a year ago.
All in all don't care about the rating, but look closely at the percentile.