| Risk factor | Finding | Evidence | Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sellable | Yes | Transfer simulation | 6 Sept 2026 |
| Buy tax | 0% | Contract | 6 Sept 2026 |
| Sell tax | 0% | Contract | 6 Sept 2026 |
| Admin mint | Enabled | Contract | 6 Sept 2026 |
| Transfers pausable | Not present | Contract | 6 Sept 2026 |
| Address blacklist | Not present | Contract | 6 Sept 2026 |
| Upgradeable proxy | No | Contract | 6 Sept 2026 |
| Source verified | Yes | Block explorer | 6 Sept 2026 |
| Top-10 holders | 90.2% | Holder distribution | 6 Sept 2026 |
| Liquidity locked | No | LP holders | 6 Sept 2026 |
| Holders | 1337 | Token contract | 6 Sept 2026 |
| Deployed by | 0x92c91a…f49fc1 |
| Current owner | None — ownership renounced |
| Holders | 1,337 |
| Rank | Address | Share |
|---|---|---|
| #1 | 0x73d8bd…4946db | 69.76% |
| #2 · PancakeV3 | 0x1b8756…626b6b | 12.78% |
| #3 | 0x85f57e…8b8c5d | 2.00% |
| #4 | 0x8983ff…f8bc13 | 1.32% |
| #5 | 0x9e229b…e277ed | 1.19% |
This automated check looked at the USELESS Coin contract on BSC and scored it 10 out of 18. A few things stand out from the findings, and it's worth understanding what each one actually means for someone holding the token, rather than just the score itself.
The contract allows the owner to mint new supply at will. In practice, this means the person or entity controlling the contract can create additional tokens whenever they choose, which can dilute the value of tokens already held by others. No blacklist function or transfer-pausing mechanism was detected on the date of this check, meaning the contract does not currently appear to give the owner the ability to freeze specific wallets or halt transfers outright. A transfer simulation also indicated the token can be sold, and no buy or sell tax was detected, so there is no evidence of a honeypot structure that traps funds on purchase. However, top-10 wallets were found to hold 90.2% of the total supply, which is a high concentration — if a small number of holders decide to sell, it can affect the token's price significantly. Liquidity was also found to be unlocked, meaning whoever controls the liquidity pool could withdraw it, which would make the token difficult or impossible to sell on that pool.
It's important to be clear about what this check does not cover. This is an automated read of the contract's code and on-chain data only — it does not assess the team behind the project, their track record, the token's economic design, whether there is a company or legal entity involved, or the intentions of those in control. Source code being verified on the explorer means the code is publicly readable, but it does not mean the code has been judged safe or that the people behind the project have been vetted in any way. No human has reviewed this token as part of this check.
Before considering any transaction, it would be worth looking into who controls the contract's owner address and whether that control has been renounced, checking whether the liquidity pool tokens are held by an individual wallet or locked in a time-locked contract, and researching the project's public presence, social channels and any available audit reports from third parties. Reviewing the holder distribution list directly on a block explorer to see whether the top wallets are exchange addresses or contract addresses (rather than individual holders) can also add useful context. None of these steps guarantee an outcome, but they provide additional information beyond what an automated contract check can capture.
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.