| Risk factor | Finding | Evidence | Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sellable | Yes | Transfer simulation | 11 Sept 2026 |
| Buy tax | 0% | Contract | 11 Sept 2026 |
| Sell tax | 0% | Contract | 11 Sept 2026 |
| Admin mint | Not present | Contract | 11 Sept 2026 |
| Transfers pausable | Not present | Contract | 11 Sept 2026 |
| Address blacklist | Not present | Contract | 11 Sept 2026 |
| Upgradeable proxy | Yes | Contract | 11 Sept 2026 |
| Source verified | Yes | Block explorer | 11 Sept 2026 |
| Top-10 holders | 44.8% | Holder distribution | 11 Sept 2026 |
| Liquidity locked | No | LP holders | 11 Sept 2026 |
| Holders | 219397 | Token contract | 11 Sept 2026 |
| Contract deployed | 19 Apr 2023 — 1,241 days ago |
| Deployment transaction | 0x014172…f61624 |
| Deployed by | 0xdae424…4c9f26 |
| Holders | 219,397 |
| Rank | Address | Share |
|---|---|---|
| #1 | 0xf97781…41acec | 11.10% |
| #2 | 0x5a52e9…70efcb | 10.52% |
| #3 | 0x76ec5a…78fbd3 | 5.65% |
| #4 | 0x7d96d2…cd42c3 | 3.53% |
| #5 | 0x187c9f…7b4100 | 2.85% |
This automated check scanned GALA's contract mechanics on Ethereum and returned 15 out of 18, with four findings worth understanding in practical terms. The contract uses an upgradeable proxy, which means whoever controls the upgrade keys can change the underlying logic of the token after the fact — including, in theory, rules around transfers, fees, or supply. This is a common pattern for actively developed projects, but it does place a degree of trust in whoever holds that upgrade authority, since the rules you see today are not necessarily permanent. Separately, the top 10 wallets hold 44.8% of the supply, meaning a small number of holders could move a large amount of tokens at once, which can affect available liquidity and price stability. Liquidity was also found to not be locked, so whoever provided the trading pool could, in principle, withdraw it. On the positive side, no admin mint, transfer-pausing, or blacklist functions were detected, no buy or sell tax was found, a sell simulation completed successfully, and the contract source is verified on the block explorer, meaning its code is public and readable.
It's important to be clear about what this check does not cover. It reads only what the smart contract itself allows, based on its code and current on-chain state, as observed on the date of the check. It says nothing about who is behind the project, whether the team has a track record, how tokens are allocated or vested, whether there are legal or regulatory obligations attached, or whether the stated purpose of the token matches its actual use. A contract can score well on mechanics while the people or plans behind it remain entirely unverified by this tool, and conversely, some legitimate, actively developed projects use upgradeable proxies for ordinary maintenance reasons.
Before putting money into any token, it's worth looking beyond contract structure. Check who controls the proxy's upgrade key and whether it sits behind a multisig or timelock, which can reduce the risk of unilateral changes. Look at where the unlocked liquidity sits and who controls that wallet. Review the concentration of top holders over time, not just as a single snapshot, to see whether large wallets are exchanges, staking contracts, or individual holders. Research the team's public history, read any available audits in full rather than trusting a summary, and check independent community discussion for reports of past incidents.
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.