| Risk factor | Finding | Evidence | Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sellable | Yes | Transfer simulation | 21 Oct 2026 |
| Buy tax | 0% | Contract | 21 Oct 2026 |
| Sell tax | 0% | Contract | 21 Oct 2026 |
| Admin mint | Enabled | Contract | 21 Oct 2026 |
| Transfers pausable | Not present | Contract | 21 Oct 2026 |
| Address blacklist | Not present | Contract | 21 Oct 2026 |
| Upgradeable proxy | No | Contract | 21 Oct 2026 |
| Source verified | Yes | Block explorer | 21 Oct 2026 |
| Top-10 holders | 88.4% | Holder distribution | 21 Oct 2026 |
| Liquidity locked | No | LP holders | 21 Oct 2026 |
| Holders | 3235 | Token contract | 21 Oct 2026 |
| Deployed by | 0x92c91a…f49fc1 |
| Current owner | None — ownership renounced |
| Holders | 3,235 |
| Rank | Address | Share |
|---|---|---|
| #1 · contract | 0x73d8bd…4946db | 63.70% |
| #2 · PancakeV3 · contract | 0x1b8756…626b6b | 17.68% |
| #3 | 0x85f57e…8b8c5d | 1.97% |
| #4 | 0x8983ff…f8bc13 | 1.30% |
| #5 · contract | 0x25969b…225032 | 0.89% |
This automated check scanned USELESS's contract code and on-chain data on BSC and scored it 11 out of 18. A few things stood out. The mint function is enabled, which means the owner retains the ability to create new tokens at any time, increasing total supply and diluting the value of coins already held by others. No pause function or address blacklist was detected, so as of the check date the owner does not appear able to freeze transfers or lock out specific wallets, and sell simulations went through without the automatic denial of trade that defines a honeypot. Buy and sell taxes both came back at 0%, meaning no fee was detected being taken on trades at the time of testing. The contract source is verified, so the code is publicly readable, though verification only confirms the code is visible, not that it's reassuring. Two findings are worth sitting with: top-10 wallets hold 88.4% of supply, a concentration level that means a small number of holders could sell in size and move the price sharply; and liquidity is not locked, meaning whoever supplied the trading pool can withdraw it, which can leave buyers holding tokens with no functioning market to sell into.
It's worth being clear about what this check does not cover. It reads contract mechanics only — what the code permits the owner to do. It says nothing about who the team is, whether they're pseudonymous or doxxed, what the tokenomics or vesting schedule actually look like, whether any legal entity stands behind the project, or what the team's intent is. A contract can score well on mechanics and still be attached to a project with no real plan, and a contract with flags can still belong to a team with no intention of misusing them. Mechanics and intent are separate questions, and this tool only answers the first.
Before putting money in, it would be worth checking the liquidity pool directly on a BSC explorer to see who controls it and whether a lock contract or timelock exists, since none was detected here. Look at the top holder addresses to see if they're exchange wallets, team wallets, or unconnected individuals — concentration reads very differently depending on who's holding. Search for the team's public presence, prior projects, and any audit beyond automated contract scanning. And given mint is enabled and liquidity is unlocked, treat any supply or liquidity changes as something to monitor on an ongoing basis, not a one-time check.
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.