Question about Titled player ratings on chess.com

So I'm curious what sort of chess.com ratings would you expect for say rapid category for each of the titles in chess so mainly things like CM, FM, NM, IM and GM? (unprovisional roughly stable ratings of course) I'm just curious what kind of rating would a non titled player be on here to be approximately equivalent in playing strength to a titled player for each title mentioned. 

does anyone know any kind of rating ranges for any of these titles?

Yeah, even 2200 masters range from about 2000 to 2400 in chess.com blitz/bullet.

(Sorry people like Pfren and GOP, you guys have crappy blitz ratings, I'm sure you could get them higher if you cared enough to actually play blitz games regularly)

GMs seem to vary widely too. 2400 to 3000 I'd say.

Okay so the answer is that chess.com ratings are approx. equivalent to actual FIDE ratings then? (for the purpose of this question)

https://www.chess.com/article/view/chesscom-rating-comparisons

People argue about this a lot, but IMO it's pretty simple:

For most players who are active in both real life tournaments and chess.com, then chess.com blitz is about + or - 200 points away from their "real" rating.

Before the nay sayers freak out, I didn't say all, I said most. Most are pretty close, and only if they're active in both.

Tactics ratings are much much higher.
Daily (previously called turn-based) ratings are much higher
Rapid (previously called standard) ratings are higher... to a point (then there's a glass ceiling, frankly due to cheaters)

Nope, they cannot be:

Same rating system, different pools, and different game conditions.

You don't need any special knowledge on statistical data analysis to realize this. They are not "closer" or "further" than FIDE ratings- it is that there cannot be a comparison.

Even when comparing USCF to FIDE ratings, where the pools are largely different, but the game conditions almost identical, is tough reaching at something credible.

And what about non titled players who get incredibly high rating? Are they maybe GMs who want to keep themselves anonymous or actual dark horses? Let´assume they are not cheaters, as their bullet rating is also high, which is the proof their strenght is not helped by an engine (as you can´t use an engine in bullet).

People can use an engine at any time control, including bullet.

Yes, an untitled player with a very high rating is probably a titled player who  just didn't tell chess.com.

Sorry I'm a little confused by this, So I understand that the conditions of play are very different I agree. I understand that there are different players you're put against so the pools of players are different, again I agree. Where you say there can be no comparison I do not understand this. So let me explain what is confusing me, lets say a titled player lets call him Jeff is an IM with FIDE = 2410 for arguments sake. Now Jeff decides to play a lot of games on chess.com and gets really into playing rapid games and plays hundreds of games to the point where his rating is fairly stable he rarely wins or loses more than 2 or 3 games in a row. This should be the chess.com rating equivalent to his skill level based on a player of his FIDE rating should it not? so again for arguments sake I don't actually know a value for this but lets say his chess.com rating was on average 2535. Then I would say that a player of a skill level of approx 2410 FIDE would probably find a stable rapid rating of fairly close to the 2535 mark, notice I chose the rapid category as bullet and blitz fast controls like that, some players are just better than others despite FIDE ratings and rapid is closest to the time controls for FIDE rated games. Now I know this Jeff is only one person so you would like to find other titled players that like Jeff played a lot of games and have found stable ratings and you could maybe find a trend based on their FIDE ratings relative to their stable chess.com ratings so based on that shouldn't you be able to make some sort of comparison? To the point where after enough data points you can say with a reasonable level of confidence that player A with FIDE rating x should slot in fairly close to rating y on chess.com?

Yes, but some people don't like such ideas for whatever reason.

It's true online ratings are more volatile. I suppose the most extreme example is cheating, but you also have people (as GOP said) who don't take it seriously... and others who take it very seriously. For example you can make a separate repertoire for your favorite time control so that a person is playing a certain way in FIDE events and a different way online. Chess.com rapid rating is not a good comparison due to a small pool and cheating. Blitz is a good comparison... IIRC last time I checked 6 of chess.com's top blitz players were also in the FIDE world top 10. There is obviously some correlation going on here... but yes some people become blitz specialists who would be outliers. Some play with distractions (noisy kids, pets, a boss who walks in and they have to hide their game etc). Some people play while drunk or to test new openings etc. Those people would be outliers in the other direction.

But yes, if you had many data points, you could make reasonable predictions. The link I gave you in #8 is not perfect for a number of reasons, but it's usually enough to satisfy the curious forum-goer.

Thanks, I find these different rating systems quite interesting and I was curious about any kind of equivalencies that can be drawn between different systems.