| 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 | 52% | Holder distribution | 12 Oct 2026 |
| Holders | 383309 | Token contract | 12 Oct 2026 |
| Deployed by | 0x41653c…142cfb |
| Current owner | 0x1a9c81…be35bc |
| Holders | 383,309 |
| Rank | Address | Share |
|---|---|---|
| #1 · contract | 0x1a9c81…be35bc | 26.22% |
| #2 · burned | 0x000000…00dead | 11.28% |
| #3 | 0x5a52e9…70efcb | 3.45% |
| #4 | 0xf97781…41acec | 2.31% |
| #5 | 0x61cb39…2096eb | 2.30% |
This automated check scanned the UNI contract on Ethereum and scored 14 out of 18 on the mechanics it tests for. A transfer simulation found the token to be sellable, with a 0% buy tax and 0% sell tax detected on the date of the check, meaning nothing in the code currently forces a fee on trades. No admin mint function was detected, so there is no on-chain mechanism found that would let a privileged address create new tokens out of thin air and dilute holders. No pause function was detected, meaning no code path was found that lets an owner freeze transfers and trap holders' tokens. No blacklist function was detected, so no mechanism was found to block specific wallets from trading. The contract is not upgradeable through a proxy, which means the logic holders are interacting with today cannot be silently swapped for different logic later. Source code is verified on the block explorer, which lets anyone read the actual deployed logic rather than trusting an unverified black box. The one notable flag is holder concentration: the top 10 wallets hold 52.3% of supply, which is relevant because large holders moving in or out can affect available liquidity and price far more than smaller holders can.
It is important to be clear about what this check does not cover. It only reads contract mechanics as they exist on-chain at the time of the scan — it does not assess who is behind the project, whether the team's identity has been verified, how tokens were allocated or vested, whether marketing claims match reality, or whether any legal or regulatory structure exists around the token. A clean mechanical result says nothing about the intentions of the people who deployed or manage the token, and it cannot detect off-chain risks such as exchange custody issues, exit scams orchestrated through means other than the contract itself, or future governance decisions.
Before putting money in, it's worth independently verifying who controls any admin or owner wallets tied to the contract and whether that control is or is documented publicly. Check whether liquidity is locked and for how long, look at the distribution and vesting schedule of the top holders flagged above, and cross-reference the project's own documentation and audits against what's shown here. Reviewing discussion on independent forums or explorer comment sections for this specific address, and checking whether the contract has been audited by a named third party, can also add context this automated check does not 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.