| Risk factor | Finding | Evidence | Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sellable | Yes | Transfer simulation | 22 Oct 2026 |
| Buy tax | 0% | Contract | 22 Oct 2026 |
| Sell tax | 0% | Contract | 22 Oct 2026 |
| Admin mint | Owner renounced — no one can call it | ChainSift simulation | 22 Oct 2026 |
| Transfers pausable | Not present | Contract | 22 Oct 2026 |
| Address blacklist | Not present | Contract | 22 Oct 2026 |
| Upgradeable proxy | No | Contract | 22 Oct 2026 |
| Source verified | Yes | Block explorer | 22 Oct 2026 |
| Top-10 holders | 90.6% | Holder distribution | 22 Oct 2026 |
| Liquidity locked | No | LP holders | 22 Oct 2026 |
| Holders | 33363 | Token contract | 22 Oct 2026 |
| Deployed by | 0x97cf38…0a90a3 |
| Current owner | None — ownership renounced |
| Holders | 33,363 |
| Rank | Address | Share |
|---|---|---|
| #1 · contract | 0x3154cf…0f2c35 | 49.77% |
| #2 · contract | 0x37672d…0cb081 | 34.07% |
| #3 | 0x5a52e9…70efcb | 2.37% |
| #4 | 0xf97781…41acec | 1.11% |
| #5 | 0xc7c914…c23741 | 0.90% |
This automated check scanned the VIRTUAL contract on Ethereum and scored it 12 out of 18 on the mechanics it can detect. In plain terms: the contract does have a mint function, which would normally let whoever controls it create new tokens and dilute existing holders, but ownership has been renounced, so that function is no longer callable by anyone — this was confirmed by simulation rather than just read from the code. There is no pause function, so the owner cannot freeze transfers, and no blacklist function, so no address can be singled out and blocked from moving tokens. A simulated transfer showed the token can be bought and sold with 0% tax on both sides, and no honeypot behaviour was detected at the time of the check. The contract is not an upgradeable proxy, meaning its logic cannot be silently swapped out later, and its source code is verified on the block explorer, so anyone can read what it actually does. The one concentration flag worth noting is that the top 10 holders control 90.6% of supply, and the main liquidity pool is not locked under a single contract — though this is shared across 18 separate providers rather than sitting in one wallet, which is typical for large, established tokens rather than a distinct red flag on its own.
It's important to be clear about what this check does not cover. It only reads the contract's code and current on-chain state — it says nothing about who is behind the project, how tokens were allocated at launch, what the team's plans are, whether there are off-chain agreements affecting large holders, or any legal or regulatory status. High holder concentration, for instance, is reported here as a statistic; the check cannot tell you whether those wallets belong to a team, an exchange, early investors, or a contract-controlled treasury, nor what they intend to do with that supply.
Before acting on this information, it's worth looking up who the top holders actually are using the block explorer's holder list, checking whether large wallets are labelled as exchanges, team allocations, or locked vesting contracts, and reviewing any public documentation on token distribution and unlock schedules. It's also sensible to check the project's own communications, audit reports from independent security firms if any exist, and recent transaction history for unusual large-holder movements. None of this constitutes investment advice, and nothing in this check should be read as a recommendation to buy, hold, or sell the 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.