| Risk factor | Finding | Evidence | Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sellable | Yes | ChainSift simulation | 23 Oct 2026 |
| Buy tax | 0% | ChainSift simulation | 23 Oct 2026 |
| Sell tax | 0% | ChainSift simulation | 23 Oct 2026 |
| Admin mint | No data | Contract | 23 Oct 2026 |
| Transfers pausable | No data | Contract | 23 Oct 2026 |
| Address blacklist | Enabled | Contract bytecode | 23 Oct 2026 |
| Upgradeable proxy | No data | Contract | 23 Oct 2026 |
| Source verified | No | Block explorer | 23 Oct 2026 |
| Top-10 holders | 76.6% | Holder distribution | 23 Oct 2026 |
| Liquidity locked | 100% burned | LP holders | 23 Oct 2026 |
| Holders | 43 | Token contract | 23 Oct 2026 |
| Deployed by | 0x39c50e…cd17da |
| Holders | 43 |
| Rank | Address | Share |
|---|---|---|
| #1 · contract | 0x580b3b…c6de9d | 15.52% |
| #2 | 0x9aec3e…ae9aa5 | 11.98% |
| #3 | 0x165885…1f93d6 | 9.01% |
| #4 | 0xe6a279…0659f0 | 7.44% |
| #5 | 0xd86e3c…148130 | 7.19% |
This automated check gave ROBO a score of 1 out of 10, which reflects a combination of factors that increase risk for holders, though it does not mean a loss is certain. The contract's bytecode shows blacklisting capability, which means whoever controls the contract could potentially block specific wallet addresses from transacting with the token, including yours, at a later date. Because the contract source code is not verified, ChainSift could only read the raw bytecode rather than human-readable code, and this limited what could be checked: functions such as minting new tokens, pausing transfers, or upgrading the contract to change its rules could not be confirmed one way or the other, so they are marked as no data rather than ruled out. Separately, the top ten holders currently control 76.6% of the supply across only 43 total holders, meaning a small number of wallets could move large amounts of the token and affect its price significantly. On the positive side, a simulated buy and sell transaction completed without detecting honeypot behaviour, no tax was applied on either side, and the liquidity pool shows as 100% burned, meaning that portion of liquidity cannot be withdrawn by the pool creator.
It's important to be clear about what this check does not cover. This is an automated read of contract mechanics only, on the date the check ran. It does not assess who is behind the project, their track record, intentions, or whether any marketing claims match reality. It does not evaluate tokenomics design, vesting schedules, planned supply changes, or whether a liquidity lock might expire or be renewed. It cannot tell you whether the team has legal registration, whether promotional claims are accurate, or whether holder concentration will be used to move the market. No human has reviewed this contract or the project behind it — the findings above come entirely from automated analysis.
Before putting money toward ROBO, consider looking at the contract directly on a block explorer to see whether the source code has since been verified, which would allow a clearer read of its functions. Check whether the team or project has published any audit from a third-party security firm, and look at the history and behaviour of the top wallet addresses to see if they have moved tokens before. Researching the team's public identity and track record, reading any available whitepaper critically, and checking independent community discussion are also reasonable next steps before forming a view.
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 10 points out of 100.
The other 90 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.