| Risk factor | Finding | Evidence | Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sellable | Yes | Transfer simulation | 12 Oct 2026 |
| Buy tax | 3.9% | Contract | 12 Oct 2026 |
| Sell tax | 3.9% | Contract | 12 Oct 2026 |
| Admin mint | Not present | 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 | 100% | Holder distribution | 12 Oct 2026 |
| Liquidity locked | 96.5% until 20 Oct 2026 | LP holders · PinkLock02 | 12 Oct 2026 |
| Holders | 41366 | Token contract | 12 Oct 2026 |
| Deployed by | 0x2fc6a8…84ea36 |
| Current owner | None — ownership renounced |
| Holders | 41,366 |
| Rank | Address | Share |
|---|---|---|
| #1 · burned | 0x000000…00dead | 87.50% |
| #2 · PancakeV2 · contract | 0x8a8b4b…cc11ac | 12.44% |
| #3 | 0x226e04…4f9464 | 0.02% |
| #4 · contract | 0x4f5397…ca041a | 0.01% |
| #5 | 0x5b8a50…71ad36 | 0.01% |
This automated check looked at the contract code for AI (Artificial Inu) on BSC and scored it 11 out of 18. A transfer tax of up to 3.9% was found on both buying and selling, meaning each trade sends a cut to a wallet defined in the contract rather than the full amount reaching the intended party — this is a mechanical fee, not evidence of intent either way. No admin mint function was detected, which means that on the date of this check, nothing in the code appeared to let the contract owner create new tokens out of thin air and dilute holders. Transfers were not found to be pausable and no blacklist function was detected, meaning the owner does not currently appear able to freeze the contract or block specific wallets from trading. The contract is not an upgradeable proxy, so its logic cannot be swapped out later without deploying an entirely new contract. A transfer simulation confirmed the token can currently be sold, which is a basic but important check against honeypot behaviour. Liquidity is 96.5% locked until October 2026, reducing (but not eliminating) the chance of that portion being pulled abruptly. Top-10 wallets hold 100% of supply, which is a significant concentration flag — a small number of addresses control the entire circulating amount, giving them outsized influence over price if they move.
What this check cannot tell you is who is behind the token, what their intentions are, or whether the project has any real product, roadmap, or legal accountability. It does not assess tokenomics design, marketing claims, team identity, or whether the locked liquidity arrangement itself is structured fairly. Verified source code means the code is readable, not that it has been audited or that its logic is sound for long-term holders. None of these findings should be read as a judgement on whether this token is a good or bad investment — they describe mechanical permissions in the contract as it exists today, not future behaviour.
Before putting any money in, it would be worth looking into who holds those top-10 wallets and whether any are exchange or team-labelled addresses, since 100% concentration in ten wallets is unusual and worth understanding in context. Check whether the liquidity lock is verifiable directly on the lock provider's own page rather than taking it at face value. Look for an independent audit report, a public team or company registration, and community activity outside of official channels. Re-run this kind of check periodically, since contract behaviour and holder distribution can change after the initial 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.