| Risk factor | Finding | Evidence | Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sellable | Yes | Transfer simulation | 14 Oct 2026 |
| Buy tax | 1% | Contract | 14 Oct 2026 |
| Sell tax | 0% | Contract | 14 Oct 2026 |
| Admin mint | Not present | Contract | 14 Oct 2026 |
| Transfers pausable | Not present | Contract | 14 Oct 2026 |
| Address blacklist | Not present | Contract | 14 Oct 2026 |
| Upgradeable proxy | No | Contract | 14 Oct 2026 |
| Source verified | Yes | Block explorer | 14 Oct 2026 |
| Top-10 holders | 64.8% | Holder distribution | 14 Oct 2026 |
| Liquidity locked | No | LP holders | 14 Oct 2026 |
| Holders | 480 | Token contract | 14 Oct 2026 |
| Deployed by | 0xaefa15…ff3632 |
| Current owner | None — ownership renounced |
| Holders | 480 |
| Rank | Address | Share |
|---|---|---|
| #1 · burned | 0x000000…00dead | 23.79% |
| #2 · contract | 0x399542…9f71e9 | 22.88% |
| #3 | 0x99ccac…e3b1a7 | 5.33% |
| #4 | 0xec76b7…c99c4a | 3.51% |
| #5 | 0xc207ba…9dfd40 | 2.20% |
This automated check looked at the RB contract's code and current on-chain data on BSC and scored it 13 out of 18. A transfer tax of up to 1% was detected, meaning every buy or sell can move a small percentage of the transaction to a destination set in the contract; the sell tax reads as 0% and a test transfer executed successfully, so selling the token was not blocked at the time of the check. No admin minting function was found, which means there is no detected mechanism in the code for new tokens to be created and the supply diluted. No pause function and no blacklist function were detected, so nothing in the contract currently flags an ability for the owner to freeze transfers or block specific wallets from trading. The contract is also not upgradeable, meaning its logic cannot be swapped out after the fact through a proxy. On the less favourable side, the top 10 holders control 64.8% of the supply, a concentration level that means a small number of wallets could move a large share of the circulating supply at once, and liquidity in the trading pool is not locked, meaning whoever controls that liquidity could withdraw it from the pool at any time. The contract source code is verified on the block explorer, which allows anyone to read the actual code behind the token rather than relying on an unverified black box.
It's worth being clear about what this check does not cover. It reads contract mechanics and on-chain data only — it does not assess who is behind the project, their track record, their intentions, how the token's economics are designed to play out over time, or whether the project has any legal or regulatory standing. A high score here reflects an absence of certain detected technical red flags on the date of the check, not an endorsement of the team or the token's prospects, and findings can change if the contract owner takes new actions or if liquidity or holder positions shift.
Before considering any transaction, it would be reasonable to look at who holds the top wallets and whether any are known exchange or team addresses, to check whether the liquidity pool tokens are held by an individual wallet versus a locking contract, to look into the project's public communications and any team identity that's been disclosed, and to review the trading volume and history on a block explorer or chain analytics tool. Running the same check again closer to the time of any transaction is also sensible, since on-chain conditions such as liquidity locks and holder concentration can change.
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.