| Risk factor | Finding | Evidence | Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sellable | Yes | Transfer simulation | 22 Sept 2026 |
| Buy tax | 0% | Contract | 22 Sept 2026 |
| Sell tax | 0% | Contract | 22 Sept 2026 |
| Admin mint | Enabled | Contract | 22 Sept 2026 |
| Transfers pausable | Not present | Contract | 22 Sept 2026 |
| Address blacklist | Not present | Contract | 22 Sept 2026 |
| Upgradeable proxy | No | Contract | 22 Sept 2026 |
| Source verified | Yes | Block explorer | 22 Sept 2026 |
| Top-10 holders | 37.4% | Holder distribution | 22 Sept 2026 |
| Liquidity locked | No | LP holders | 22 Sept 2026 |
| Holders | 52660 | Token contract | 22 Sept 2026 |
| Deployed by | 0x2d407d…47d45c |
| Current owner | 0x026d4b…1dfb61 |
| Holders | 52,660 |
| Rank | Address | Share |
|---|---|---|
| #1 | 0x86e635…50d182 | 7.74% |
| #2 | 0x979d08…293674 | 5.23% |
| #3 | 0x5a52e9…70efcb | 4.48% |
| #4 | 0x90c1f9…588ad5 | 4.19% |
| #5 | 0x42b252…ecc016 | 3.68% |
This automated check on YFI scored 14 out of 18, and the individual findings are worth unpacking so the numbers translate into something concrete. The contract's mint function is enabled, which means whoever holds owner/admin permissions can create new tokens beyond the current supply — this can dilute existing holders if exercised, though its presence alone does not mean it will be used. No pause function or address blacklist was detected on the date of this check, meaning the contract does not appear to give the owner a built-in switch to freeze transfers or block specific wallets from moving tokens. The contract is not an upgradeable proxy, so its core logic cannot be silently swapped out later, and a buy/sell simulation found the token sellable with 0% buy and sell tax, meaning no honeypot-style transfer trap was detected at the time of testing. Source code is verified on the block explorer, which allows anyone (including automated tools like this one) to actually read the logic rather than trust a black box. Top-10 wallets hold 37.4% of supply, a concentration level that means large holders could move price significantly if they sold, and liquidity is not locked, meaning whoever provided it could withdraw it from the pool without a time-lock preventing them.
What this check does not tell you is at least as important as what it does. This is a purely mechanical read of the contract's code and on-chain data — it says nothing about who is actually behind the project, whether the team has a history of delivering, how tokens were originally distributed to insiders, what the project's legal or regulatory standing is, or whether anyone involved intends to act in holders' interest. A contract can score well on mechanics while the humans running it behave in ways no automated scanner can detect, and conversely a lower mechanical score doesn't imply intent to harm.
Before putting money in, it's worth looking at who controls the admin/owner keys and whether that control sits with a multisig, a DAO, or a single private key — this materially changes what "owner can mint" means in practice. Check whether the liquidity pool address and its LP tokens are visibly held by a known contract or a single wallet, look at the top-10 holder addresses individually to see if they're exchanges, treasury, or unknown wallets, and review any public documentation or audits the project has published independently of this check. Cross-referencing this data with community discussion, audit reports, and the project's own governance documentation will give a fuller picture than contract mechanics alone can provide.
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.