| Risk factor | Finding | Evidence | Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sellable | Yes | Transfer simulation | 9 Oct 2026 |
| Buy tax | 0% | Contract | 9 Oct 2026 |
| Sell tax | 0% | Contract | 9 Oct 2026 |
| Admin mint | Enabled | Contract | 9 Oct 2026 |
| Transfers pausable | Not present | Contract | 9 Oct 2026 |
| Address blacklist | Not present | Contract | 9 Oct 2026 |
| Upgradeable proxy | No | Contract | 9 Oct 2026 |
| Source verified | Yes | Block explorer | 9 Oct 2026 |
| Top-10 holders | 89.6% | Holder distribution | 9 Oct 2026 |
| Liquidity locked | No | LP holders | 9 Oct 2026 |
| Holders | 16486 | Token contract | 9 Oct 2026 |
| Deployed by | 0x4ec216…a0cfb8 |
| Holders | 16,486 |
| Rank | Address | Share |
|---|---|---|
| #1 · contract | 0xce01c9…e8a6a3 | 44.07% |
| #2 · contract | 0x929d9a…67a6f9 | 30.49% |
| #3 · contract | 0xa1ea1b…403f9a | 8.71% |
| #4 | 0xbaf24c…731897 | 1.62% |
| #5 | 0x5a52e9…70efcb | 1.13% |
This automated check scored SKY 11 out of 18 on the indicators it looks for. A few things are worth translating into plain terms. The contract allows the admin to mint new tokens at will, which means the circulating supply is not fixed and can be increased at the owner's discretion, potentially diluting existing holders. The top 10 wallets hold 89.6% of the supply, a high concentration that means a small number of addresses could move or sell large amounts and affect the market noticeably if they chose to. Liquidity is not locked, which means whoever controls the liquidity pool retains the technical ability to withdraw it. On a more reassuring note, no honeypot behaviour was detected at the time of this check: the token simulated as sellable, buy and sell taxes are both 0%, there is no transfer-pausing function present, no blacklist function present, and the contract is not an upgradeable proxy, meaning the deployed logic cannot be silently swapped out. The contract source is also verified on the block explorer, which allows the code to be read by anyone.
It is important to be clear about what this check does not cover. It reads contract mechanics only — the literal functions and permissions coded into the smart contract. It says nothing about who the team behind SKY is, their track record, or whether they have a history of following through on commitments. It does not assess tokenomics design, vesting schedules, treasury management, roadmap credibility, or whether the project has any legal structure, registration, or regulatory standing. It cannot tell you anything about intent — a contract can look clean on paper while still being part of a project with weak fundamentals or governance problems, and conversely some flagged mechanics (like mint functions) are sometimes used legitimately in governance tokens for inflation schedules or rewards. None of that is evaluated here.
Before considering any transaction, it would be reasonable to look into who controls the admin and mint permissions and whether that control sits behind a multisig or DAO vote rather than a single wallet. It is also worth checking whether the top holders include known exchange or treasury addresses versus unaffiliated wallets, since concentration alone does not tell you who those holders are. Reviewing the project's official documentation, any audit reports from named third-party firms, the liquidity provider and lock arrangements directly on-chain, and community or governance activity would all 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.