| Risk factor | Finding | Evidence | Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sellable | Yes | Transfer simulation | 12 Oct 2026 |
| Buy tax | 0% | Contract | 12 Oct 2026 |
| Sell tax | 0% | Contract | 12 Oct 2026 |
| Admin mint | Not present | Contract | 12 Oct 2026 |
| Transfers pausable | Not present | Contract | 12 Oct 2026 |
| Address blacklist | Not present | Contract | 12 Oct 2026 |
| Upgradeable proxy | No | Contract | 12 Oct 2026 |
| Source verified | Yes | Block explorer | 12 Oct 2026 |
| Top-10 holders | 100% | Holder distribution | 12 Oct 2026 |
| Liquidity locked | 8.4% until 26 Sept 2036 | LP holders · UNCX Locker | 12 Oct 2026 |
| Holders | 106 | Token contract | 12 Oct 2026 |
| Deployed by | 0xfba2aa…a33993 |
| Holders | 106 |
| Rank | Address | Share |
|---|---|---|
| #1 | 0xfba2aa…a33993 | 92.86% |
| #2 | 0x8f6931…8dfde2 | 7.11% |
| #3 | 0xb18ce8…b47cb2 | 0.01% |
| #4 · contract | 0x1ce2e2…2a1351 | 0.00% |
| #5 | 0x754db8…f11a52 | 0.00% |
This automated check looked at how the X (X100) contract is built and how it behaves on-chain, not at who runs it or why. A transfer simulation found the token to be sellable, with 0% buy tax and 0% sell tax detected at the time of the check, which means there was no sign of the contract blocking sales or siphoning off a cut of each trade. No admin mint function was found, so there's no evidence the owner can create new tokens out of thin air to dilute holders. Transfers are not pausable and no blacklist function was detected, meaning the contract does not currently appear to give the owner a way to freeze the token or stop specific wallets from trading. It is also not an upgradeable proxy, so the underlying logic cannot be swapped out later for different code, and the source is verified, meaning the actual contract code is publicly readable rather than hidden. Liquidity locked stands at 8.4% until September 2036, which covers only a small slice of the liquidity pool — the bulk of liquidity is not shown as locked in this check. Separately, the top 10 holders control 100% of supply across only 106 holders total, which is a very high concentration: a small number of wallets could move a large share of the circulating supply at once.
What this check does not tell you is just as important. It does not assess who the team behind X100 is, whether they are identifiable or anonymous, what their track record looks like, or whether the project's stated purpose matches its actual tokenomics. It does not evaluate marketing claims, roadmap credibility, social media activity, or whether holder concentration reflects insiders, a presale, or an exchange wallet. Verified source code and no detected honeypot mechanics describe how the contract currently behaves — they say nothing about intent, future upgrades to related infrastructure, or off-chain arrangements between large holders.
Before putting money in, it's worth looking up who holds those top-10 wallets and whether any are labelled as exchange, team, or lock contracts, since 100% concentration among so few holders is a structural factor worth understanding on its own terms. Check the liquidity lock details directly on the locker contract (UNCX) to confirm what percentage and value is actually secured versus the 8.4% figure here. Look for independent confirmation of who built the project, cross-check any claims made in its documentation or community channels, and consider position sizing that reflects the concentration and limited liquidity lock rather than the absence of taxes or mint functions alone.
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.