Before you buy: How much real money is in the pool, what do you lose selling $1,000, and who can pull it out?
| Risk factor | Finding | Evidence | Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sellable | Yes | Transfer simulation | 4 Nov 2026 |
| Buy tax | 0% | Contract | 4 Nov 2026 |
| Sell tax | 0% | Contract | 4 Nov 2026 |
| Admin mint | Not present | Contract | 4 Nov 2026 |
| Transfers pausable | Not present | Contract | 4 Nov 2026 |
| Address blacklist | Not present | Contract | 4 Nov 2026 |
| Upgradeable proxy | No | Contract | 4 Nov 2026 |
| Source verified | Yes | Block explorer | 4 Nov 2026 |
| Top-10 holders | 100% | Holder distribution | 4 Nov 2026 |
| Holders | 1 | Token contract | 4 Nov 2026 |
| Deployed by | 0x11c9c9…c48046 |
| Current owner | None — ownership renounced |
| Holders | 1 |
| Rank | Address | Share |
|---|---|---|
| #1 · contract | 0xe2ce6a…5c9de0 | 100.00% |
The automated check on this contract looked at what the code itself allows the owner or deployer to do, not at who runs the project or what they intend. Here, no honeypot behaviour was detected: a simulated transfer showed the token can currently be sold, and buy and sell taxes both read as 0%. The contract also shows no admin mint function, no ability to pause transfers, and no blacklist mechanism, meaning that on the date of this check nothing in the code lets an owner freeze a specific wallet, block it from selling, or create new tokens out of thin air. It is also not an upgradeable proxy, so the logic cannot be silently swapped for different logic later, and the source code is verified on the block explorer, which means the code shown is the code actually running. Taken together, these are the kinds of mechanical controls that let a malicious contract trap or drain holders, and none were found active here. However, the holder data is a serious counterweight: the top 10 holders control 100% of supply, and the contract currently shows only one holder in total. That means there is effectively no real distribution yet, and the one or few wallets holding the supply could sell, dump, or otherwise move the entire float at any time, with no mechanism in the contract itself to stop them.
This check does not tell you anything about the team behind the token, their track record, whether there is a real product, how tokenomics are structured beyond what's on-chain right now, or whether any legal entity stands behind the project. It also cannot assess intent: a clean set of findings describes what the contract code permits today, not what a deployer plans to do with a concentrated supply, nor whether liquidity will ever be added or locked. A score based on contract mechanics is not a judgement on the project as a whole.
Before considering any involvement, it would be worth checking whether this contract address matches the official, verified Tether (USDT) contract on BSC, since the name and symbol here use characters designed to visually resemble "Tether USD" rather than the genuine ticker. It is also worth looking up whether liquidity exists on a decentralised exchange and whether it is locked or burned, checking the holder list directly on the block explorer to see how concentrated and recent the wallets are, and searching for any independent community discussion, audits, or official announcements tied to this specific contract address. None of these steps are covered by this automated check, and none of the findings above should be read as a recommendation to buy, hold, or avoid the token.
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.
Trading a meme coin? The meme coin check shows how much real money is in the pool and what you lose selling $1,000, who can pull that money out, who holds the supply and how it trades — ready within 3 minutes of payment, day or night.