| Risk factor | Finding | Evidence | Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sellable | No — the sell tax takes the whole sale | ChainSift simulation | 27 Oct 2026 |
| Buy tax | 0% | Contract | 27 Oct 2026 |
| Sell tax | 100% | ChainSift simulation | 27 Oct 2026 |
| Admin mint | No data | Contract | 27 Oct 2026 |
| Transfers pausable | No data | Contract | 27 Oct 2026 |
| Address blacklist | Enabled | Contract bytecode | 27 Oct 2026 |
| Upgradeable proxy | No data | Contract | 27 Oct 2026 |
| Source verified | No | Block explorer | 27 Oct 2026 |
| Top-10 holders | 93.6% | Holder distribution | 27 Oct 2026 |
| Liquidity locked | No | LP holders | 27 Oct 2026 |
| Holders | 583 | Token contract | 27 Oct 2026 |
| Deployed by | 0xfb2028…ab6f67 |
| Holders | 583 |
| Rank | Address | Share |
|---|---|---|
| #1 | 0x12a172…511b79 | 44.06% |
| #2 | 0xb09926…e7a2c3 | 20.14% |
| #3 | 0xa868fd…7c1248 | 13.39% |
| #4 | 0x49bffc…ea34b5 | 6.41% |
| #5 | 0x5a1175…b2ae93 | 4.96% |
This automated check scored BSL (Baby Solana) 0 out of 18, and the findings point to several mechanisms built into the contract that affect what the owner can do and what a holder can do. The simulation found that selling is blocked: the sell tax is set to 100%, meaning any attempt to sell results in the entire sale value being taken, effectively a honeypot. The contract also supports blacklisting individual addresses, which would allow whoever controls it to prevent specific wallets from transacting. Top-10 holders were found to control 93.6% of total supply, a concentration level that means a small number of wallets could materially affect the market if they moved tokens. The contract source code is not verified on the block explorer, so the logic behind these behaviours can only be inferred from bytecode rather than read directly. Liquidity was also found to not be locked, meaning whoever supplied it could withdraw it from the trading pool at any time.
It's important to be clear about what this check does not cover. This is an automated read of contract mechanics only — it simulates transactions and inspects bytecode to flag functions like blacklisting, tax rates, and liquidity status. It does not assess who is behind the project, their intentions, the token's broader economic design, any roadmap or marketing claims, or whether any legal entity stands behind it. No human has reviewed this token, and a low or high score here says nothing about the people running it or their plans.
Given that selling was found to be blocked, no further testing of the sell function is advisable — not even with a small amount, since funds placed into a token that cannot be sold remain stuck regardless of the size of the transaction. Before considering any further action, it would be worth independently verifying the contract source on the block explorer, checking whether the project team has publicly addressed the tax structure and blacklist function, confirming the current liquidity lock status directly against the liquidity pool address, and reviewing holder distribution over time to see whether concentration has changed since this check was run. Any of these details can shift rapidly, so a fresh check closer to the time of any decision would reflect more current on-chain conditions than this one.
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.