| Risk factor | Finding | Evidence | Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sellable | Yes | Transfer simulation | 10 Sept 2026 |
| Buy tax | 0% | Contract | 10 Sept 2026 |
| Sell tax | 0% | Contract | 10 Sept 2026 |
| Admin mint | Enabled | Contract | 10 Sept 2026 |
| Transfers pausable | Not present | Contract | 10 Sept 2026 |
| Address blacklist | Not present | Contract | 10 Sept 2026 |
| Upgradeable proxy | No | Contract | 10 Sept 2026 |
| Source verified | Yes | Block explorer | 10 Sept 2026 |
| Top-10 holders | 100% | Holder distribution | 10 Sept 2026 |
| Holders | 1 | Token contract | 10 Sept 2026 |
| Contract deployed | 21 Oct 2025 — 324 days ago |
| Deployment transaction | 0xae4101…17a749 |
| Deployed by | 0x53e25a…186181 |
| Current owner | 0x3f68cf…0e8135 |
| Holders | 1 |
| Rank | Address | Share |
|---|---|---|
| #1 | 0x3f68cf…0e8135 | 100.00% |
This automated check scanned the FAB (Fabric Token) contract on Ethereum and returned a score of 10 out of 18. Three findings were flagged. First, the contract owner retains the ability to mint new tokens at will, which means the total supply is not fixed and could be increased at any time, potentially diluting the value of tokens already held by others. Second, the top 10 wallet addresses currently hold 100% of the supply, and the data shows only one holder on record — this level of concentration means a single wallet (or a small handful) has the ability to move or sell a very large portion of supply, which can affect the token's market if it happens. Third, the contract source code is verified on the block explorer, which means the code behind the token can be read and checked by anyone, rather than being hidden. On the positive side, no honeypot behaviour was detected in a transfer simulation, meaning a test sale went through, and no buy tax, sell tax, transfer-pausing function, address blacklist, or upgradeable proxy pattern were detected on the date of this check.
It's important to understand what this check does not tell you. This is an automated read of the contract's code and on-chain data only — it looks at what the contract mechanically allows the owner to do, and what the current holder distribution looks like. It does not assess who the team behind the project is, whether they have a track record, how the tokenomics are designed to work over time, what legal structure (if any) the project operates under, or what the team's intentions are. A contract can look clean on a technical level while still carrying risks that no automated tool can see.
Before putting any money in, consider looking into who controls the wallet(s) holding the supply and whether ownership of the contract has been renounced or is held by a multi-signature wallet rather than a single private key. Check whether the project has any public documentation, audits from named firms, or a history of activity beyond this contract. Look at how long the token has existed and whether trading volume and liquidity come from a wider base of participants rather than the same concentrated addresses shown here. None of this replaces independent research, and this check does not constitute investment advice.
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.