| 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 | Not present | Contract | 10 Sept 2026 |
| Transfers pausable | Not present | Contract | 10 Sept 2026 |
| Address blacklist | Not present | Contract | 10 Sept 2026 |
| Upgradeable proxy | Yes | Contract | 10 Sept 2026 |
| Source verified | Yes | Block explorer | 10 Sept 2026 |
| Top-10 holders | 96.7% | Holder distribution | 10 Sept 2026 |
| Liquidity locked | No | LP holders | 10 Sept 2026 |
| Holders | 6816 | Token contract | 10 Sept 2026 |
| Contract deployed | 25 Oct 2023 — 1,051 days ago |
| Deployment transaction | 0xdc11cf…b79a34 |
| Deployed by | 0x9458da…875d35 |
| Holders | 6,816 |
| Rank | Address | Share |
|---|---|---|
| #1 | 0xbeef0c…5ddb2f | 69.85% |
| #2 | 0x0529ea…c553b7 | 8.37% |
| #3 | 0x804b68…aa0c26 | 7.21% |
| #4 | 0x100ae0…3829ba | 2.97% |
| #5 | 0x7f604d…81b752 | 1.98% |
This automated check scored EURCV 11 out of 18 on contract-level indicators, and a few points are worth translating into plain terms. The contract uses an upgradeable proxy pattern, which means the logic controlling the token can be replaced by whoever holds upgrade rights, potentially after you already hold the asset — the rules you see today are not necessarily the rules that apply tomorrow. Top-10 wallets hold 96.7% of the supply on the date of this check, a concentration level that means a small number of addresses could move large amounts of the token, which tends to affect available liquidity and price stability. Liquidity was not found to be locked, meaning whoever provided the trading pool could withdraw it without a time-lock preventing them. On the more reassuring side, no admin mint function, transfer pausing, or address blacklist capability was detected in the contract, buy and sell tax both read 0%, a transfer simulation returned sellable, and the source code is verified on the block explorer — none of these being absolute guarantees, only what was observed on this date.
What this check does not do is assess who is behind the token, what EUR CoinVertible is meant to represent, whether it holds the reserves or backing its name implies, its legal or regulatory status, or the intentions of the team controlling the upgrade keys and the concentrated holdings. Contract mechanics and stated intent are two different things, and this tool only reads the former. A token can pass every mechanical check here and still carry risk tied to custody, redemption promises, or the entity issuing it — none of which shows up in bytecode.
Before treating any of this as reassurance, it's worth looking into who controls the upgrade admin key and whether any timelock or multisig governs it, since that determines how much unilateral power exists over the contract. It's also worth checking whether the issuer has published attestations, reserve reports, or a prospectus, since EURCV is presented as a euro-referenced token and that kind of backing claim needs independent verification, not a bytecode scan. Looking at how the top-10 addresses breakdown — are they exchange or custodian wallets, or unknown private addresses — adds useful context to the concentration figure. Finally, checking whether the liquidity pool you'd be trading against has any lock or vesting arrangement, and searching for any independent audits or news about this specific contract address, are reasonable next steps 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.