| Risk factor | Finding | Evidence | Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sellable | No — transfers blocked | ChainSift simulation | 26 Oct 2026 |
| Buy tax | 0% | ChainSift simulation | 26 Oct 2026 |
| Sell tax | No data | Contract | 26 Oct 2026 |
| Admin mint | No data | Contract | 26 Oct 2026 |
| Transfers pausable | No data | Contract | 26 Oct 2026 |
| Address blacklist | No data | Contract | 26 Oct 2026 |
| Upgradeable proxy | No data | Contract | 26 Oct 2026 |
| Source verified | No | Block explorer | 26 Oct 2026 |
| Top-10 holders | 0% | Holder distribution | 26 Oct 2026 |
| Liquidity locked | No | LP holders | 26 Oct 2026 |
| Holders | 1 | Token contract | 26 Oct 2026 |
| Deployed by | 0x1cf63a…804329 |
| Holders | 1 |
| Rank | Address | Share |
|---|---|---|
| #1 · Null Address · burned | 0x000000…000000 | 0.00% |
This automated check simulated a sale of BTW (Bitway) on BSC and found that selling is blocked by the contract. In practice, this means that once tokens are bought, the contract's current logic does not allow them to be sold back — the ability to exit the position is cut off at the contract level, regardless of how the price moves. Because this single finding was detected, the check scores this token 0 out of 18, and no other signal can offset it. The contract source is also unverified, meaning nobody can read the actual code behind the deployed bytecode, so there's no way to confirm what functions the owner can call — including whether they can mint new tokens, pause transfers, or blacklist specific wallets. Liquidity is also not locked, which means whoever controls the liquidity pool could remove it at any time, independent of the selling restriction already identified. The holder count of 1 and 0% top-10 concentration reflect that this check ran with almost no distribution yet on-chain, which is typical for a very newly deployed or lightly traded contract — it is not a sign of safety.
It's important to be clear about what this check does not cover. This is a mechanical read of the contract's code and current on-chain state, run automatically with no human review. It says nothing about who is behind the project, what they intend to do with it, whether marketing claims match reality, or whether any legal or regulatory structure exists around it. A contract can look mechanically simple and still be attached to a project with no real activity, or conversely, a complex contract isn't automatically a bad one. Findings here reflect only what was detected on the date and time of the check; contract states and permissions can change afterward if the contract is upgradeable or if admin functions are later discovered.
Given that selling is currently blocked, no amount of money put into this token — including a small test amount — would be retrievable if that restriction remains in place. Before considering any further action, it would be worth independently verifying the contract source code on the relevant block explorer, checking whether the project team has published any audit from a reputable third party, looking at the liquidity pool directly to see who controls it, and researching the team's public identity and track record outside of this contract. None of that is covered by this automated 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.