| Risk factor | Finding | Evidence | Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sellable | Yes | Transfer simulation | 15 Oct 2026 |
| Buy tax | 0% | Contract | 15 Oct 2026 |
| Sell tax | 0% | Contract | 15 Oct 2026 |
| Admin mint | Enabled | Contract | 15 Oct 2026 |
| Transfers pausable | Not present | Contract | 15 Oct 2026 |
| Address blacklist | Not present | Contract | 15 Oct 2026 |
| Upgradeable proxy | No | Contract | 15 Oct 2026 |
| Source verified | Yes | Block explorer | 15 Oct 2026 |
| Top-10 holders | 99.8% | Holder distribution | 15 Oct 2026 |
| Liquidity locked | No | LP holders | 15 Oct 2026 |
| Holders | 58783 | Token contract | 15 Oct 2026 |
| Deployed by | 0x4a2e44…2844d3 |
| Holders | 58,783 |
| Rank | Address | Share |
|---|---|---|
| #1 · Uniswap v4 pool · contract | 0x498581…652b2b | 91.00% |
| #2 · contract | 0x4a2e44…2844d3 | 8.53% |
| #3 · contract | 0x8356f9…0bc8fe | 0.14% |
| #4 · contract | 0xdf751d…d74743 | 0.06% |
| #5 · contract | 0x158cf9…96ead5 | 0.03% |
This automated check scanned the USWR contract on Base and scored it 10 out of 18. The findings describe what the contract's code allows, not what will happen. The mint function being enabled means the contract owner can create new tokens at will, which can dilute the holdings of everyone else and increase supply beyond what current buyers may expect. Liquidity not being locked means whoever controls the liquidity pool tokens could withdraw the paired assets from the trading pool at any time, which can leave buyers unable to sell at a meaningful price. The top-10 holders controlling 99.8% of supply means a very small number of wallets could sell large amounts at once, which can move the price sharply regardless of demand. On the more reassuring side, the check found no buy or sell tax, no pause function, no blacklist capability, no upgradeable proxy, and a test transfer sold successfully — none of these restrictive mechanisms were detected on the date of this check. The contract source code is also verified on the block explorer, meaning it can be read and audited by anyone, though verification alone does not mean the code is free of the risks listed above.
It is important to understand what this check does not cover. This is an automated read of contract mechanics only — it does not assess who is behind the project, whether the team is anonymous or doxxed, how tokens are allocated or vested, whether there is a working product, any legal or regulatory status, or the intent of the people controlling the contract. A contract can score well on mechanics and still be run by people with no plan to deliver anything, and conversely a contract with some flags can still be part of a project operating in good faith. Mechanics and intent are separate questions, and this tool only answers the first.
Before putting money in, it would be worth looking at who holds the top wallets and whether any are known exchange, team, or burn addresses, since concentration numbers mean different things depending on who holds the tokens. Check whether the liquidity pool tokens are held in a visible wallet, a locking contract, or burned, and look for any public statement from the project about mint authority — whether it has been renounced, is time-locked, or is multisig-controlled. It is also worth searching independently for the team's identity, any audit reports, community discussion, and the project's stated purpose, since none of that is captured by this contract scan.
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.