| Risk factor | Finding | Evidence | Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sellable | Yes | Transfer simulation | 26 Oct 2026 |
| Buy tax | 0% | Contract | 26 Oct 2026 |
| Sell tax | 0% | Contract | 26 Oct 2026 |
| Admin mint | Not present | Contract | 26 Oct 2026 |
| Transfers pausable | Not present | Contract | 26 Oct 2026 |
| Address blacklist | Not present | Contract | 26 Oct 2026 |
| Upgradeable proxy | No | Contract | 26 Oct 2026 |
| Source verified | Yes | Block explorer | 26 Oct 2026 |
| Top-10 holders | 26.1% | Holder distribution | 26 Oct 2026 |
| Liquidity locked | 100% burned | LP holders | 26 Oct 2026 |
| Holders | 430 | Token contract | 26 Oct 2026 |
| Deployed by | 0x724f53…718b45 |
| Current owner | None — ownership renounced |
| Holders | 430 |
| Rank | Address | Share |
|---|---|---|
| #1 · UniswapV2 · contract | 0x74affd…d7ddcb | 14.89% |
| #2 | 0xdb8b55…16db07 | 3.13% |
| #3 | 0x0ae68e…6d6c4b | 1.68% |
| #4 | 0x3648a9…8c23bc | 1.18% |
| #5 | 0x2a06e7…5ba589 | 1.10% |
This automated check scanned the token's contract code and on-chain data, and as of the check date, none of the higher-risk mechanisms commonly used to trap or drain holders were detected. A transfer simulation showed the token can currently be sold, with no buy or sell tax applied. The contract does not contain an admin mint function, meaning the owner cannot currently create new tokens out of thin air and dilute holders. Transfers are not pausable, so the owner cannot freeze trading at will, and there's no blacklist function, meaning specific wallets cannot be singled out and blocked from selling. The contract is also not an upgradeable proxy, which means its logic cannot be swapped out for different code after the fact. Liquidity is reported as 100% burned, which means the tokens backing the trading pair have been sent to an address no one controls, reducing the risk of liquidity being pulled by whoever provided it. Source code is verified on the block explorer, so the actual logic is publicly readable rather than hidden.
What this does not tell you is anything about the people behind the token, their intentions, or the project's economics. The check cannot assess whether the team is anonymous, whether there are off-chain promises or roadmaps, whether the token has any real use case, or whether holder wallets are controlled by related parties despite appearing separate. Top-10 holders currently control 26.1% of supply, which is a moderate concentration — it does not on its own indicate coordinated selling, but it means a meaningful share of supply sits in few hands, and concentrated holdings can affect price if sold together. This is a mechanical read of the contract and holder distribution, not a judgement on the project as a whole, and no human has reviewed it.
Before putting money in, it's worth looking at who holds those top wallets and whether any are exchange or team addresses rather than independent holders, checking whether the contract owner's wallet is renounced or still active, reviewing the project's social channels and any public team information, and looking at trading volume and liquidity depth on a DEX tracker to gauge how easily a position could be exited. Checking whether the contract has been flagged elsewhere, and reading the liquidity lock details directly on-chain rather than relying on a single summary, is also reasonable groundwork before deciding anything.
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.