| Risk factor | Finding | Evidence | Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sellable | Yes | Transfer simulation | 10 Sept 2026 |
| Buy tax | No data | Contract | 10 Sept 2026 |
| Sell tax | No data | 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 | 23 Jul 2026 — 49 days ago |
| Deployment transaction | 0xaf2fb2…9425f8 |
| Deployed by | 0xb145d9…724816 |
| Current owner | 0x605227…80d31f |
| Holders | 1 |
| Rank | Address | Share |
|---|---|---|
| #1 | 0xb145d9…724816 | 100.00% |
This automated check looked at the FLOCK contract's code and on-chain data as they stood on the date of the check, and scored 10 out of 18. A transfer simulation found the token to be sellable, and no pausable-transfer function or address blacklist capability was detected, meaning that, as of this check, nothing in the code lets the owner freeze the contract or block a specific wallet from moving its tokens. However, an admin mint function was found to be enabled, which means whoever controls the contract can create new tokens at will. In practice this lets the owner increase total supply after you buy, which can dilute the value of existing holdings without any action on your part. The contract source code is verified on the block explorer, so the code behind these findings can be read by anyone, which is itself a positive transparency signal, but it does not change what the code permits the owner to do. Separately, holder distribution data shows the top 10 holders controlling 100% of supply, with only 1 holder recorded at the time of the check — this points to extremely concentrated ownership, meaning a very small number of wallets (or one) currently hold the ability to move large amounts of the circulating supply at once.
It's worth being clear about what this check does not cover. This is an automated read of contract mechanics only: mint functions, tax logic, pausability, blacklists, proxy structure, and holder concentration as recorded on-chain. It says nothing about who is behind the project, whether the team's stated plans match what the contract allows, how tokens are meant to be distributed over time, whether any legal or regulatory structure exists, or the intent of whoever holds the admin keys. A clean set of findings here is not a statement that the token is safe, and flagged findings are not a statement that it is a scam — they simply describe what the code permits and what the holder data showed at the time of the check.
Before deciding anything, it would be sensible to look into who controls the admin/mint privileges and whether that control sits behind a multisig or timelock, since that materially changes how quickly supply could change. Checking whether the concentrated holder wallets are known exchange or team addresses versus unidentified private wallets would also help clarify the concentration figure. Beyond the contract itself, reviewing the project's own documentation, team identity and communications, any audit reports from independent security firms, and the token's stated distribution schedule would all fall outside what this on-chain check can tell you, and are worth examining separately.
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.