| Risk factor | Finding | Evidence | Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sellable | Yes | Transfer simulation | 26 Oct 2026 |
| Buy tax | 0.1% | Contract | 26 Oct 2026 |
| Sell tax | 0.1% | Contract | 26 Oct 2026 |
| Admin mint | Not present | Contract | 26 Oct 2026 |
| Transfers pausable | Enabled | Contract | 26 Oct 2026 |
| Address blacklist | Enabled | Contract | 26 Oct 2026 |
| Upgradeable proxy | No | Contract | 26 Oct 2026 |
| Source verified | Yes | Block explorer | 26 Oct 2026 |
| Top-10 holders | 86.9% | Holder distribution | 26 Oct 2026 |
| Liquidity locked | No | LP holders | 26 Oct 2026 |
| Holders | 65429 | Token contract | 26 Oct 2026 |
| Deployed by | 0x0e1ecb…0e9ffb |
| Current owner | 0x0e1ecb…0e9ffb |
| Holders | 65,429 |
| Rank | Address | Share |
|---|---|---|
| #1 · PancakeV1 · contract | 0x349a11…d920e5 | 79.06% |
| #2 | 0x0d13ee…ac9b5e | 1.79% |
| #3 | 0xd11616…e67d07 | 1.26% |
| #4 · burned | 0x000000…00dead | 1.21% |
| #5 | 0xee2bb7…f51961 | 0.90% |
This automated check scanned 100xCoin's contract code on BSC and found a score of 10 out of 18, which reflects the number of risk indicators detected on the date of the check, not a guarantee of future behaviour. A few findings are worth translating into plain terms. The transfer tax of up to 0.1% means a small percentage is taken from buys and sells, which on its own is a minor cost rather than a major red flag. More significant is that transfers can be paused by the owner: this means the contract owner retains the ability to freeze all token movement for every holder, at will. The contract also supports blacklisting, meaning the owner can block specific wallet addresses from transferring or selling their tokens entirely. Separately, top-10 wallets hold 86.9% of the supply, a concentration level that means a small number of holders could move a large share of tokens at once, which can affect price significantly if they choose to sell. Liquidity is not locked, which means whoever controls the liquidity pool could withdraw it, reducing or removing the ability to sell the token on that pool. On the more reassuring side, no honeypot behaviour was detected in the sell simulation, no admin minting function was found, and the contract source is verified on the block explorer, meaning the published code can be independently read and audited by anyone.
It's important to be clear about what this check does not cover. It reads contract mechanics only: the code's functions, permissions and simulated behaviour at the time of the scan. It says nothing about who is behind the project, their track record, the token's economic design, whether there is a real product or roadmap, legal structure, or the intentions of the people controlling the owner wallet. A contract can look technically unremarkable while still being tied to a project with weak fundamentals or an anonymous team, and conversely some flagged permissions exist for legitimate operational reasons. This tool cannot distinguish between the two.
Before deciding anything, it would be worth looking into who holds the owner/admin wallet and whether those permissions (pausing, blacklisting) are behind a timelock or multisig rather than a single private key. Checking the liquidity pool directly on a BSC explorer to see who controls it, researching the team's public identity and history, reading any available audit reports, and reviewing community discussion for prior complaints about frozen transfers or blocked wallets would all add useful context this automated check cannot provide.
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.