| Risk factor | Finding | Evidence | Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sellable | No — transfers blocked | ChainSift simulation | 5 Nov 2026 |
| Buy tax | 0% | Contract | 5 Nov 2026 |
| Sell tax | No data | Contract | 5 Nov 2026 |
| Admin mint | No data | Contract | 5 Nov 2026 |
| Transfers pausable | No data | Contract | 5 Nov 2026 |
| Address blacklist | No data | Contract | 5 Nov 2026 |
| Upgradeable proxy | No data | Contract | 5 Nov 2026 |
| Source verified | No | Block explorer | 5 Nov 2026 |
| Top-10 holders | 82.9% | Holder distribution | 5 Nov 2026 |
| Liquidity locked | No | LP holders | 5 Nov 2026 |
| Holders | 2190 | Token contract | 5 Nov 2026 |
| Deployed by | 0x2a6c66…783d9f |
| Holders | 2,190 |
| Rank | Address | Share |
|---|---|---|
| #1 | 0x2c0aa7…507c97 | 14.75% |
| #2 · SushiSwapV2 · contract | 0xe7b0f6…c7713a | 14.47% |
| #3 | 0xe54c61…cf3d17 | 10.17% |
| #4 | 0xb38e8c…82891d | 10.00% |
| #5 | 0x0d0707…b492fe | 10.00% |
This automated check gave PSIGT (Polysights) on Arbitrum a score of 0 out of 18, and the reason is the most serious one this system tests for: the simulation found that selling is blocked by the contract. In practice, this means that even though buying the token appears to go through with no buy tax recorded, the contract's logic prevents a sale from completing. This pattern is commonly called a honeypot: funds can go in, but the mechanism that would let a holder convert the token back to ETH or another asset does not function. On top of this, the contract's source code is not verified on the block explorer, meaning the check could only read raw bytecode rather than human-readable logic, which limits how much could be confirmed about functions like minting, pausing transfers, or blacklisting addresses — these all show as "no data" because they could not be assessed, not because they were ruled out. The top 10 holders also control 82.9% of the supply, and no liquidity lock was found, meaning whoever supplied the trading pool could withdraw it without a time-lock preventing them.
It's worth being clear about what this check does not do. It reads contract mechanics only — the code's behaviour at the time of the scan. It says nothing about who the team behind Polysights is, whether their stated plans or roadmap are credible, how the token's supply or incentives are structured long-term, or whether any legal entity stands behind the project. An automated scan cannot assess intent, and it has not been reviewed by a person — it is a mechanical read of what the contract allows and disallows today, on this chain, at this address.
Given that selling is currently blocked, this is not a case where a small test purchase would clarify anything: a token that cannot be sold keeps whatever is put into it, regardless of amount. Rather than testing the market with funds, the practical next steps are to re-run or wait for an updated check to see if the honeypot condition changes, to look for the contract source being verified (which would allow a clearer read of mint, pause, and blacklist functions), to check whether a liquidity lock appears later, and to look independently into the team's public identity, communications, and any audits referenced outside of this tool. None of these steps constitute a recommendation to buy or sell; they are simply the categories of information this check does not and cannot cover.
Contracts change after they are checked. Tell us where to reach you and we will say when this one does. Free for three contracts, no account.
We checked 18 points out of 100.
The other 82 are where money is usually lost: who the team is, where the tokens sit, what the documents actually say, and what the project chose not to put on its front page.
Trading a meme coin? The meme coin check shows how much real money is in the pool and what you lose selling $1,000, who can pull that money out, who holds the supply and how it trades — ready within 3 minutes of payment, day or night.