| Risk factor | Finding | Evidence | Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sellable | Yes | Transfer simulation | 22 Sept 2026 |
| Buy tax | No data | Contract | 22 Sept 2026 |
| Sell tax | No data | 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 | 42.2% | Holder distribution | 22 Sept 2026 |
| Liquidity locked | No | LP holders | 22 Sept 2026 |
| Holders | 421249 | Token contract | 22 Sept 2026 |
| Deployed by | 0x3095a4…1e8c41 |
| Holders | 421,249 |
| Rank | Address | Share |
|---|---|---|
| #1 | 0xfd821d…64a00b | 10.38% |
| #2 | 0xebede4…42ef27 | 6.57% |
| #3 | 0xca9165…22a7a3 | 5.37% |
| #4 | 0x5a52e9…70efcb | 4.99% |
| #5 | 0x4a6372…a8367a | 4.37% |
This automated check scanned the BAT contract on Ethereum and scored it 14 out of 18 on the mechanics it looks for. A few things stand out and are worth translating into plain terms. The contract includes an admin mint function, which means whoever controls that permission can create new tokens beyond the current supply; this doesn't necessarily happen, but the capability exists in the code. Top-10 wallets hold 42.2% of all tokens, which is a concentration level that means a small number of holders could move a large share of supply if they chose to sell, potentially affecting price independent of anything else happening with the project. Liquidity is not locked, meaning whoever provided the trading pool could withdraw it, which would affect the ability to buy or sell the token on that pool. On the positive side, no pausable transfer function or address blacklist was detected on the date of this check, meaning the contract does not appear to let an admin freeze transfers or block specific wallets, and the contract is not upgradeable via proxy, meaning its core logic cannot be silently swapped out later. The source code is verified on the block explorer, so the logic behind these findings can be independently read by anyone.
It's important to be clear about what this check does not cover. This is a purely automated read of contract mechanics — it looks at what the code allows, not at who is behind the project, what they intend to do with those permissions, how the token is distributed economically, or whether any legal or regulatory structure sits behind it. A high score here reflects an absence of certain detected technical red flags on this date; it says nothing about team credibility, roadmap viability, or business fundamentals, none of which are assessed by this tool.
Before making any decision, it's worth looking into who currently holds the mint and admin permissions on this contract and whether that control sits with a multisig, a DAO, or a single wallet — this is publicly checkable on-chain. It's also worth reviewing the liquidity pool directly to see its current size and depth, since that affects how easily a position could be exited. Reading up on the project's own documentation, audit history if any, and community discussion around governance decisions can add useful context that a contract scan alone cannot provide. Finally, remember that on-chain findings can change: mint permissions can be renounced or reassigned, and liquidity conditions shift, so a check performed today reflects conditions on that date only.
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.