| Risk factor | Finding | Evidence | Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sellable | Yes | Transfer simulation | 26 Oct 2026 |
| Buy tax | 0% | Contract | 26 Oct 2026 |
| Sell tax | 0% | Contract | 26 Oct 2026 |
| Admin mint | Owner renounced — no one can call it | ChainSift simulation | 26 Oct 2026 |
| Transfers pausable | Not present | Contract | 26 Oct 2026 |
| Address blacklist | Not present | Contract | 26 Oct 2026 |
| Upgradeable proxy | No | Contract | 26 Oct 2026 |
| Source verified | Yes | Block explorer | 26 Oct 2026 |
| Top-10 holders | 81.5% | Holder distribution | 26 Oct 2026 |
| Liquidity locked | No | LP holders | 26 Oct 2026 |
| Holders | 25577 | Token contract | 26 Oct 2026 |
| Deployed by | 0xb8b370…f03426 |
| Current owner | None — ownership renounced |
| Holders | 25,577 |
| Rank | Address | Share |
|---|---|---|
| #1 · contract | 0xf6d64b…f88b8b | 18.55% |
| #2 | 0x46a960…0c7c3a | 16.67% |
| #3 · contract | 0x73d8bd…4946db | 12.16% |
| #4 · contract | 0x448d9e…2c3596 | 7.35% |
| #5 · contract | 0xe4e5f9…a9aa22 | 6.85% |
This automated check scanned EVAA's contract on BNB Chain and found an on-chain score of 13 out of 18. In practical terms, the mint function exists in the code, but ownership has been renounced, meaning that as of the date of this check, no address — including the original deployer — retains the ability to call it and create new tokens. No transfer-pausing mechanism or address blacklist was detected, so based on this check the contract owner cannot freeze a specific wallet or halt trading network-wide. Buy and sell tax were both read as 0%, and a transfer simulation indicated the token is currently sellable, meaning no honeypot behaviour was detected at the time of testing. The contract is not upgradeable, so its logic cannot be swapped out later. The main point of concern is that liquidity is not locked: whoever controls the liquidity pool could, in principle, withdraw it at any time, which would make the token difficult or impossible to sell on that pool regardless of what the token contract itself allows. Separately, the top 10 holders hold 81.5% of supply, a concentration level that means a small number of wallets could sell large amounts at once and move the price significantly.
It's important to be clear about what this check does not cover. This is an automated read of contract mechanics only — mint functions, pause switches, blacklists, tax settings, ownership status, and similar code-level behaviours. It says nothing about who the team behind EVAA actually is, whether they have a track record, how the token's supply and incentives are structured, what legal entity (if any) stands behind the project, or what their intentions are. A contract can score well on mechanics and still be attached to a project with weak fundamentals, unclear utility, or a team that has made no long-term commitments. None of that is assessed here.
Before putting any money into EVAA, it would be worth independently verifying the liquidity lock situation directly on a BSC explorer or lock-checking service, since this check found it unlocked and that status can change. It's also worth looking at who the top holders are — whether they are exchange wallets, the deployer, or unrelated addresses — since concentrated ownership carries different implications depending on who holds it. Researching the team's public identity and history, reading any available documentation on token supply and distribution plans, and checking independent community discussion are all reasonable next steps. 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.