| Risk factor | Finding | Evidence | Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sellable | Yes | Transfer simulation | 9 Sept 2026 |
| Buy tax | No data | Contract | 9 Sept 2026 |
| Sell tax | No data | Contract | 9 Sept 2026 |
| Admin mint | Not present | Contract | 9 Sept 2026 |
| Transfers pausable | Not present | Contract | 9 Sept 2026 |
| Address blacklist | Not present | Contract | 9 Sept 2026 |
| Upgradeable proxy | Yes | Contract | 9 Sept 2026 |
| Source verified | Yes | Block explorer | 9 Sept 2026 |
| Top-10 holders | 83.3% | Holder distribution | 9 Sept 2026 |
| Liquidity locked | No | LP holders | 9 Sept 2026 |
| Holders | 1420 | Token contract | 9 Sept 2026 |
| Contract deployed | 9 Apr 2025 — 518 days ago |
| Deployment transaction | 0x3f9196…a4b7f2 |
| Deployed by | 0x8266fe…43e827 |
| Holders | 1,420 |
| Rank | Address | Share |
|---|---|---|
| #1 | 0xaec397…87c073 | 23.67% |
| #2 | 0xebef09…83c482 | 14.01% |
| #3 | 0x9c1310…3c3a83 | 11.01% |
| #4 | 0x189140…231738 | 11.01% |
| #5 | 0xcd1a3e…89f9dc | 10.65% |
This automated check scanned the LA contract on Ethereum and returned a score of 12 out of 18. In practical terms, the most significant finding is that the contract uses an upgradeable proxy, which means the logic behind the token can be replaced by whoever controls the upgrade permissions — potentially changing how the token behaves after you've already bought it, without requiring a new contract address. No admin mint function, transfer pause, or address blacklist was detected on the date of this check, meaning those specific mechanisms for restricting or diluting holders were not found in the contract code as it currently stands. The source code is verified on the block explorer, which allows anyone to read the underlying logic, though verification alone does not confirm the logic is free of concerning code paths. Sell simulation indicates the token is sellable, and no buy or sell tax data was returned, meaning tax behaviour was not confirmed either way at the time of the check.
Two other findings are worth sitting with. Liquidity is not locked, which means whoever supplied the trading pool can withdraw it, and top-10 wallets hold 83.3% of supply, a concentration level that means a small number of holders could move a large share of tokens at once, affecting price and liquidity available to others.
None of this tells you who runs the project, what the tokenomics or vesting schedule look like, whether there is a real team behind it, what jurisdiction it operates in, or what their intentions are. This check reads contract mechanics only — it does not assess the people, the business model, marketing claims, or legal exposure. A clean mechanical read does not mean the token or the people behind it are trustworthy, and flagged behaviour does not by itself mean fraud is intended.
Before putting any money in, it's worth looking up who holds the top wallets and whether they're exchange or team addresses, checking whether the upgrade/admin keys sit behind a multisig or timelock rather than a single wallet, searching for the project's own documentation on tokenomics and vesting, confirming whether liquidity is expected to be locked later or was never intended to be, and checking independent sources — audits, community discussion, the team's public history — separately from this contract-level scan.
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.