| Risk factor | Finding | Evidence | Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sellable | Yes | Transfer simulation | 5 Sept 2026 |
| Buy tax | 0% | Contract | 5 Sept 2026 |
| Sell tax | 0% | Contract | 5 Sept 2026 |
| Admin mint | Not present | Contract | 5 Sept 2026 |
| Transfers pausable | Not present | Contract | 5 Sept 2026 |
| Address blacklist | Not present | Contract | 5 Sept 2026 |
| Upgradeable proxy | No | Contract | 5 Sept 2026 |
| Source verified | Yes | Block explorer | 5 Sept 2026 |
| Top-10 holders | 100% | Holder distribution | 5 Sept 2026 |
| Holders | 1 | Token contract | 5 Sept 2026 |
| Contract deployed | 23 Apr 2025 — 500 days ago |
| Deployment transaction | 0x8ee229…7c79e9 |
| Deployed by | 0xafc97f…e47538 |
| Current owner | 0x694fa0…33c4e6 |
| Holders | 1 |
| Rank | Address | Share |
|---|---|---|
| #1 | 0x694fa0…33c4e6 | 100.00% |
This automated check ran against the HEMI contract on Ethereum and scored 12 out of 18. In practical terms, several capabilities that would let a contract owner control or restrict holders were not detected on the date of the check: there is no admin mint function present, meaning the owner cannot appear to create new tokens out of thin air and dilute existing holders; transfers are not pausable, so the ability to freeze the token network for everyone was not found; there is no address blacklist mechanism, which would otherwise let an owner block specific wallets from trading; and the contract is not an upgradeable proxy, meaning its underlying code cannot be swapped out later for different logic. A test transfer also confirmed the token is sellable, and both buy and sell tax were read from the contract as 0%, meaning no fee-on-transfer behaviour was detected at the time of the check. The contract source is verified on the block explorer, which means the code is publicly readable rather than hidden. Set against this, top-10 wallets currently hold 100% of supply, which is a significant concentration indicator regardless of the mechanical checks above — a small number of holders control the entire circulating supply, so their trading decisions alone can move the market for this token.
It is important to understand what this check does not cover. This is an automated read of the contract's mechanical behaviour only: mint functions, pause switches, blacklist logic, proxy structure, tax rates, and holder distribution as recorded on-chain. It says nothing about who is behind the project, whether the team's identity is known or verifiable, how tokens were allocated or vested, whether there are off-chain agreements, marketing claims, roadmap credibility, or legal and regulatory status. No human has reviewed this token, and the absence of a flag means the corresponding behaviour was not detected on the date of the check — it is not a certification that the token is safe or that no such behaviour could be introduced or exist elsewhere.
Before considering any transaction, it would be worth independently verifying who controls the top holding wallets and whether they include exchange or liquidity addresses rather than individuals, checking whether liquidity is locked and for how long, reviewing the contract's ownership functions directly on the block explorer to confirm current permissions, looking for any external audits and reading their actual findings rather than relying on a badge, and researching the team's public identity and track record. Concentrated holdings and contract mechanics are only two pieces of a much larger picture.
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.