| Risk factor | Finding | Evidence | Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sellable | Yes | Transfer simulation | 12 Oct 2026 |
| Buy tax | 0% | Contract | 12 Oct 2026 |
| Sell tax | 0% | Contract | 12 Oct 2026 |
| Admin mint | Not present | Contract | 12 Oct 2026 |
| Transfers pausable | Not present | Contract | 12 Oct 2026 |
| Address blacklist | Not present | Contract | 12 Oct 2026 |
| Upgradeable proxy | No | Contract | 12 Oct 2026 |
| Source verified | Yes | Block explorer | 12 Oct 2026 |
| Top-10 holders | 98.8% | Holder distribution | 12 Oct 2026 |
| Liquidity locked | 100% until 11 Aug 2027 | LP holders · UNCX Locker | 12 Oct 2026 |
| Holders | 283 | Token contract | 12 Oct 2026 |
| Deployed by | 0x625ea6…b9c394 |
| Current owner | None — ownership renounced |
| Holders | 283 |
| Rank | Address | Share |
|---|---|---|
| #1 · contract | 0xbd0bb9…07842c | 76.08% |
| #2 · contract | 0x548129…79ff0f | 20.02% |
| #3 | 0x176488…00cc3c | 1.01% |
| #4 | 0x9ce847…3c6ff4 | 1.00% |
| #5 | 0x1c228b…60edbd | 0.37% |
This automated check scored VERTO 12 out of 18, and it's worth translating what that number is actually built from. A transfer simulation found the token sellable, with no buy or sell tax detected at the time of the check, meaning holders are not presently blocked from moving or liquidating their tokens by the contract code itself. No admin mint function, no transfer-pausing mechanism, no address blacklist capability, and no upgradeable proxy were detected — in practice, this means the contract owner was not found to retain the ability to create new tokens out of thin air, freeze your wallet, block specific addresses from trading, or swap out the contract's logic after the fact. The contract source is verified on the block explorer, so the code behind these findings can be publicly read and checked by anyone, which supports confidence in the mechanical findings themselves. Liquidity is also reported as 100% locked until 11 August 2027, meaning the pooled funds backing the token's tradability are not accessible to be pulled by whoever controls that liquidity position before that date.
Set against that, top-10 holders currently control 98.8% of the supply, and only 283 holders were recorded in total. This is a significant concentration indicator: a small number of wallets holding the large majority of tokens means price action can be heavily influenced by the decisions of very few addresses, regardless of what the contract code permits or restricts.
It is important to be clear about what this check does not cover. This is an automated read of contract mechanics only — it looked at code behaviour, holder distribution, and liquidity lock status as recorded on-chain at the time of the check. It says nothing about who is behind the project, whether the team has a track record, what the token is actually meant to do, how its supply or incentives are structured long-term, or whether any legal or regulatory obligations apply. No human has reviewed intent, marketing claims, or future plans, and no absence of a flag here should be read as confirmation that related risks don't exist elsewhere.
Before putting money in, it would be worth looking into who the top holders are and whether any are known exchange, team, or locked-treasury addresses rather than independent buyers, checking whether the liquidity lock is verifiable directly on the locker contract (UNCX) rather than taking the label at face value, researching the team's public identity and prior projects if any, and reviewing any official documentation or community channels for stated tokenomics and vesting schedules.
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.