| Risk factor | Finding | Evidence | Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sellable | Yes | ChainSift simulation | 25 Oct 2026 |
| Buy tax | 0% | Contract | 25 Oct 2026 |
| Sell tax | 0% | Contract | 25 Oct 2026 |
| Admin mint | Enabled | Implementation code | 25 Oct 2026 |
| Transfers pausable | Enabled | Implementation code | 25 Oct 2026 |
| Address blacklist | Enabled | Implementation code | 25 Oct 2026 |
| Upgradeable proxy | Yes — a single wallet can replace the code | Proxy contract | 25 Oct 2026 |
| Source verified | Yes | Block explorer | 25 Oct 2026 |
| Top-10 holders | 43.1% | Holder distribution | 25 Oct 2026 |
| Liquidity locked | No | LP holders | 25 Oct 2026 |
| Holders | 27612 | Token contract | 25 Oct 2026 |
| Deployed by | 0xe0bbfd…a2e69f |
| Current owner | 0x9ed857…1b8fe7 |
| Code can be replaced by | 0x9ed857…1b8fe7 — a single wallet |
| Current code | 0x435068…4402dd |
| Holders | 27,612 |
| Rank | Address | Share |
|---|---|---|
| #1 · contract | 0x9ea0f7…d57a45 | 15.48% |
| #2 · contract | 0x27f7a5…5528cd | 9.27% |
| #3 · contract | 0x3b9308…ed2cd6 | 4.32% |
| #4 · contract | 0xaa6e91…b82ca0 | 4.26% |
| #5 | 0x2b52e6…9cc785 | 2.65% |
This automated check looked at the contract code behind EURC on Ethereum and scored it 11 out of 18. A few of the findings describe powers the contract owner holds over the token, and it's worth understanding what each one actually permits in practice. "Admin mint" means the owner can create new tokens at will, which can affect the total supply. "Transfers pausable" means the owner has the ability to freeze all token movement across the network, stopping holders from sending or selling. "Address blacklist" means the owner can block specific wallets from transacting with the token entirely. The upgradeable proxy finding is the broadest of these: it means a single wallet can swap out the underlying contract logic at any time, which in principle could change or extend any of the mechanics listed here, including the ones that currently look standard. None of these were flagged as currently active against any holder — they describe what the contract architecture allows, not what has happened. Separately, no honeypot behaviour was detected in ChainSift's sell simulation, buy and sell tax were both read as 0% from the contract, and the source code is verified on the block explorer, meaning it can be read by anyone. Holder concentration sits at 42.6% among the top ten addresses, and liquidity in the main pool is spread across 28 providers rather than locked by one party, which is typical for an established, large-cap token rather than a sign of abandonment risk on its own.
What this check does not tell you is anything about who runs the issuing organisation, how the token is intended to be used, its legal or regulatory status, or whether the powers described above have ever been exercised responsibly or at all. This is a read of contract mechanics only, generated automatically — no person has reviewed this specific result, and the findings say nothing about intent, team conduct, or the broader business behind the token.
Before deciding anything, it's worth looking at who the contract owner or admin address actually is and whether it belongs to a known, identifiable entity, since centralised-issuer stablecoins commonly carry mint, pause and blacklist functions as part of their compliance design rather than as malicious features. You could also check the issuer's public disclosures or attestations about reserves, review the history of the admin wallet for past use of these powers, and look at independent commentary or audits covering the specific contract version deployed. Holder concentration and proxy upgradeability are worth tracking over time rather than treating as a single point-in-time verdict. None of the above should be read as a recommendation to buy, hold, or avoid this token.
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.