| Risk factor | Finding | Evidence | Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sellable | Yes | Transfer simulation | 4 Sept 2026 |
| Buy tax | 0% | Contract | 4 Sept 2026 |
| Sell tax | 0% | Contract | 4 Sept 2026 |
| Admin mint | Enabled | Contract | 4 Sept 2026 |
| Transfers pausable | Not present | Contract | 4 Sept 2026 |
| Address blacklist | Not present | Contract | 4 Sept 2026 |
| Upgradeable proxy | No | Contract | 4 Sept 2026 |
| Source verified | Yes | Block explorer | 4 Sept 2026 |
| Top-10 holders | 74.8% | Holder distribution | 4 Sept 2026 |
| Liquidity locked | No | LP holders | 4 Sept 2026 |
| Holders | 9807 | Token contract | 4 Sept 2026 |
This automated check looked at the contract code for T (Threshold Network Token) on Ethereum and scored 11 out of 18. Here is what the individual findings mean in practical terms. The simulation found the token can be bought and sold with no transfer-blocking behaviour detected, and both buy and sell tax are set to 0% in the contract. No pause function or address blacklist was found, meaning the code does not currently contain a mechanism for the owner to freeze transfers or lock out specific wallets, and the contract is not upgradeable, so its core logic cannot be swapped out later by design. However, admin mint is enabled — this means whoever holds the owner or admin key can create new tokens at will, which can dilute existing holders' share of supply without their consent. Liquidity is also not locked, so whoever controls the liquidity pool tokens could withdraw that liquidity from the pool at any time, which can make it difficult or impossible to sell at a stable price. Separately, the top 10 wallets hold 74.8% of supply, a concentration level that means a small number of holders could move large amounts of the token and affect its price significantly. The contract source being verified means the code is publicly readable and was checked against what's deployed, which is what allowed these findings to be generated in the first place.
It's worth being clear about what this check does not cover. It reads contract mechanics only — mint functions, tax rates, pause and blacklist logic, proxy structure, and on-chain holder and liquidity data. It says nothing about who is behind the project, whether the team's identities are known or verifiable, how tokens were allocated or vested, whether any legal entity stands behind the project, or what the stated intentions of the admin keyholders are. A contract can score well on mechanics while still carrying risk from concentrated ownership, an inactive project, or a team that is anonymous or unaccountable.
Before putting any money in, it's worth looking into who controls the admin/owner address and whether it's a multisig or a single key, checking whether that address has a history of minting or other privileged actions, looking at the liquidity pool directly to see who holds the LP tokens and whether they're locked via a third-party locker contract, researching the team's public identity and track record, and reviewing the project's own documentation on token distribution and vesting schedules. None of these steps are covered by this automated check, and none of the findings above should be read as a recommendation to buy, hold, or avoid the token.
Contracts change after they are checked. Leave an email or a Telegram chat ID and we will tell you the moment this one does — taxes raised, minting switched on, liquidity unlocked. Free for three contracts, no account and no password.
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.