| Risk factor | Finding | Evidence | Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sellable | Yes | Transfer simulation | 28 Oct 2026 |
| Buy tax | 0% | Contract | 28 Oct 2026 |
| Sell tax | 0% | Contract | 28 Oct 2026 |
| Admin mint | Enabled | Contract | 28 Oct 2026 |
| Transfers pausable | Not present | Contract | 28 Oct 2026 |
| Address blacklist | Not present | Contract | 28 Oct 2026 |
| Upgradeable proxy | No | Contract | 28 Oct 2026 |
| Source verified | Yes | Block explorer | 28 Oct 2026 |
| Top-10 holders | 82.6% | Holder distribution | 28 Oct 2026 |
| Liquidity locked | No | LP holders | 28 Oct 2026 |
| Holders | 67139 | Token contract | 28 Oct 2026 |
| Deployed by | 0x0904da…b99859 |
| Current owner | 0xfe89cc…2d44b7 |
| Holders | 67,139 |
| Rank | Address | Share |
|---|---|---|
| #1 · contract | 0xd7a029…4df23f | 45.49% |
| #2 | 0x245445…84059d | 13.28% |
| #3 · contract | 0xfe89cc…2d44b7 | 8.63% |
| #4 · contract | 0x690f05…9606f2 | 3.57% |
| #5 | 0x2cd5bb…15c422 | 3.00% |
This automated check scanned the ENS contract's code and current on-chain data, and scored it 11 out of 18. Here is what the individual findings actually mean for someone holding the token. The simulation found the token can be sold, and both buy and sell tax are set at 0%, so no built-in fee was detected that would eat into a trade at the point of sale or purchase. There is no pause function and no blacklist mechanism present in the contract, meaning nothing was found that would let an owner freeze transfers or block a specific wallet from moving its tokens. The contract is also not an upgradeable proxy, so its core logic cannot be swapped out after the fact. However, admin mint is enabled, which means whoever controls the owner privileges retains the ability to create new tokens at will — this can dilute existing holders' share of supply. Source code is verified on the block explorer, which allows the underlying logic to be publicly read and audited by anyone, though verification alone doesn't tell you what that logic will be used for. Separately, the top 10 holders currently control 82.7% of supply, and liquidity is not locked, meaning a large holder or the entity providing trading liquidity could withdraw it without a technical restriction stopping them.
It's important to be clear about what this check does not cover. This is an automated read of contract mechanics only — it does not assess the team behind the project, their track record, intentions, or reachability. It says nothing about tokenomics design choices, vesting schedules, treasury management, legal structure, regulatory status, or whether any off-chain promises match on-chain reality. No human has reviewed this contract or the project around it, and a clean set of findings today does not mean the contract or its permissions cannot change tomorrow, particularly given the live mint function.
Before putting money in, it would be worth looking into who holds admin/owner keys for ENS and whether those permissions sit with a multisig, a DAO, or a single address, since that materially changes what "owner can mint" means in practice. Checking whether the top-10 concentration includes known exchange or treasury wallets versus unrelated individual holders would also add useful context. It's worth reviewing the project's own documentation on mint policy and circulating supply, checking liquidity pool ownership and lock status on a chain explorer directly, and looking at transaction history for past minting or large holder movements. None of this constitutes investment advice, and this check does not predict price or suggest any course of action.
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.