| Risk factor | Finding | Evidence | Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sellable | Yes | Transfer simulation | 12 Oct 2026 |
| Buy tax | 0% | Contract | 12 Oct 2026 |
| Sell tax | 5% | Contract | 12 Oct 2026 |
| Admin mint | Enabled | Contract | 12 Oct 2026 |
| Transfers pausable | Not present | Contract | 12 Oct 2026 |
| Address blacklist | Not present | Contract | 12 Oct 2026 |
| Upgradeable proxy | No | Contract | 12 Oct 2026 |
| Source verified | Yes | Block explorer | 12 Oct 2026 |
| Top-10 holders | 99.8% | Holder distribution | 12 Oct 2026 |
| Liquidity locked | 100% burned | LP holders | 12 Oct 2026 |
| Holders | 1618 | Token contract | 12 Oct 2026 |
| Deployed by | 0xf59288…ce550c |
| Current owner | None — ownership renounced |
| Holders | 1,618 |
| Rank | Address | Share |
|---|---|---|
| #1 · contract | 0x9d05a3…8f111d | 84.06% |
| #2 · PancakeV2 · contract | 0x6a8f76…d61ae0 | 13.43% |
| #3 · contract | 0x78008b…3a6a56 | 0.55% |
| #4 | 0x54d22b…857b59 | 0.34% |
| #5 | 0x12b84e…1e142a | 0.34% |
This automated check scored MNTM 9 out of 18 on the date it was run, and a few of the findings are worth translating into plain terms. A transfer tax of up to 5% means the contract can take a cut of tokens every time they move, which reduces what a seller actually receives compared with what a buyer paid. Admin mint being enabled means the contract owner retains the ability to create new tokens at will, which can dilute the value of tokens already held by others. Top-10 wallets holding 99.8% of supply means the vast majority of tokens sit with a very small number of addresses, so decisions by just a few holders to sell could move the market significantly. On the positive side, no transfer-pausing or blacklist function was detected, meaning the contract does not currently appear able to freeze transfers or block specific addresses from trading, the source code is verified on the block explorer so its logic is publicly readable, and the liquidity pool shows as 100% burned, meaning that liquidity cannot be withdrawn by whoever added it.
It's important to be clear about what this check does not cover. This is an automated read of the contract's code and on-chain data only — it looks at functions like minting, pausing, blacklisting, and tax settings, plus holder and liquidity distribution. It says nothing about who is behind the project, whether the team has a track record, how tokens were allocated or vested, whether there are legal or regulatory obligations attached, or what the project's actual intentions are. No human has reviewed this token, and a clean reading of contract mechanics does not mean the people controlling it will act in holders' interests.
Before putting money in, it's worth looking beyond this report. Check who holds the top wallets and whether any are known exchange, team, or liquidity-lock addresses rather than independent holders. Look into whether the mint function has been used historically and whether there are any public statements from the team about renouncing it. Research the team's identity and background, read any available whitepaper or roadmap critically, and check community channels for signs of active development versus inactivity. Consider cross-referencing the contract address against scam databases and checking whether the token is listed on any exchanges with their own due-diligence standards.
Finally, remember that a higher or lower score here reflects detected contract mechanics on a single date, not a prediction of future performance, and nothing in this report should be read as advice to buy, sell, or hold.
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.