| Risk factor | Finding | Evidence | Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sellable | Yes | Transfer simulation | 26 Oct 2026 |
| Buy tax | 0% | Contract | 26 Oct 2026 |
| Sell tax | 0% | Contract | 26 Oct 2026 |
| Admin mint | Not present | Contract | 26 Oct 2026 |
| Transfers pausable | Not present | Contract | 26 Oct 2026 |
| Address blacklist | Not present | Contract | 26 Oct 2026 |
| Upgradeable proxy | No | Contract | 26 Oct 2026 |
| Source verified | Yes | Block explorer | 26 Oct 2026 |
| Top-10 holders | 48% | Holder distribution | 26 Oct 2026 |
| Liquidity locked | No | LP holders | 26 Oct 2026 |
| Holders | 64 | Token contract | 26 Oct 2026 |
| Deployed by | 0x3ebdf6…c51d98 |
| Current owner | None — ownership renounced |
| Holders | 64 |
| Rank | Address | Share |
|---|---|---|
| #1 · UniswapV2 · contract | 0xf39538…3b2c8c | 10.50% |
| #2 · contract | 0x3a79bf…0cc4c6 | 4.35% |
| #3 · contract | 0x9da197…e5e73e | 4.32% |
| #4 · contract | 0xf4dbd1…25add6 | 4.21% |
| #5 · contract | 0xabe8fc…20e03c | 4.20% |
This automated check looked at the contract code behind HIGGSFIELD and ran a series of mechanical tests. An automated transfer simulation found no honeypot behaviour was detected — the token could be bought and sold in the test. Buy and sell tax were both read at 0% in the contract at the time of the check, meaning no hidden transaction fee was found at this stage. No admin mint function was found, so the contract does not appear to let the owner create new tokens out of thin air and dilute holders. Transfers pausable and address blacklist functions were both not present, meaning nothing in the code currently lets the contract owner freeze the whole token or block specific wallets from moving their tokens. The contract is also not an upgradeable proxy, so its logic cannot be swapped out for different code after the fact without deploying a new contract entirely. On the less reassuring side, the top 10 holders control 48% of supply, which is a concentration level where a small number of wallets could move the market significantly if they sold, and liquidity is not locked, meaning whoever controls the liquidity pool could withdraw it at a time of their choosing. The source code is verified on the block explorer, which at least means the logic is publicly readable rather than hidden.
It's worth being clear about what this does not cover. This is a mechanical read of contract code and on-chain data only, performed automatically with no human review. It says nothing about who the team behind Higgsfield AI actually is, whether their stated plans or roadmap are realistic, how the token's supply and incentives are structured, or whether any legal or regulatory obligations apply to the project. A clean contract-level result does not speak to intent, competence or follow-through by the people running it.
Before putting money into this or any token, it's worth looking at who the team is and whether they're identifiable, checking whether there's a published audit from a reputable firm, looking at the liquidity pool directly to see its size and who holds the LP tokens, and reviewing the project's own documentation and communications for consistency. Given liquidity is unlocked and holder concentration is high, these points are particularly worth confirming independently rather than taking the project's word for it.
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.