| Risk factor | Finding | Evidence | Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sellable | Yes | Transfer simulation | 23 Sept 2026 |
| Buy tax | 0% | Contract | 23 Sept 2026 |
| Sell tax | 0% | Contract | 23 Sept 2026 |
| Admin mint | Not present | Contract | 23 Sept 2026 |
| Transfers pausable | Not present | Contract | 23 Sept 2026 |
| Address blacklist | Not present | Contract | 23 Sept 2026 |
| Upgradeable proxy | No | Contract | 23 Sept 2026 |
| Source verified | Yes | Block explorer | 23 Sept 2026 |
| Top-10 holders | 95% | Holder distribution | 23 Sept 2026 |
| Liquidity locked | No | LP holders | 23 Sept 2026 |
| Holders | 24190 | Token contract | 23 Sept 2026 |
| Deployed by | 0x182085…81a6a9 |
| Current owner | 0x06700c…646c21 |
| Holders | 24,190 |
| Rank | Address | Share |
|---|---|---|
| #1 | 0xfc128c…1ba66e | 27.34% |
| #2 | 0x303a3f…43ccef | 24.53% |
| #3 | 0xb845c1…0490b7 | 15.26% |
| #4 | 0x3c0c57…5e8b04 | 11.29% |
| #5 | 0x7f8410…007baf | 9.09% |
This automated check on ZKP (zkPass) returned a score of 12 out of 18, based on contract mechanics observed on the date of the check. In practical terms, the good news is that several risky owner capabilities were not detected: there is no admin minting function present, meaning the owner cannot appear to create new tokens out of thin air and dilute holders; transfers are not pausable, so the contract does not give the owner a switch to freeze all trading; there is no address blacklist function, meaning the owner cannot single out specific wallets and block them from selling; and the contract is not an upgradeable proxy, so its logic cannot be silently swapped out later. Sell simulation also came back positive with 0% buy and sell tax detected, meaning no honeypot behaviour was detected in this test. However, two findings stand out as elevated risk indicators: the top 10 wallets hold 94.8% of the total supply, which is a very high concentration — if any of those large holders sell, it can move the price sharply regardless of what the contract code allows. Liquidity is also not locked, meaning whoever controls the liquidity pool retains the ability to withdraw it, which could sharply reduce the ability to sell the token at a fair price, or at all.
It's important to be clear about what this check does not do. It reads the contract's code and current on-chain state only — it does not assess the team behind the project, their track record, the token's economic design, any legal structure, marketing claims, or intent. A contract can score well on mechanics like this one while still carrying substantial risk from factors this tool cannot see, such as who holds the concentrated wallets, whether the project has any real product or roadmap, or whether the people involved have a history of abandoning projects.
Before considering any transaction, it would be sensible to look into who the top holders are and whether any are known exchange or team wallets, to check the liquidity pool address directly to see who can withdraw it and when, to look for any independent audit reports, to search for the team's public identity and prior projects, and to read the project's own documentation on token distribution and vesting. None of the findings above should be read as a recommendation to buy, hold, or avoid this token.
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.