| Risk factor | Finding | Evidence | Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sellable | Yes | Transfer simulation | 25 Oct 2026 |
| Buy tax | No data | Contract | 25 Oct 2026 |
| Sell tax | No data | Contract | 25 Oct 2026 |
| Admin mint | Not present | Contract | 25 Oct 2026 |
| Transfers pausable | Not present | Contract | 25 Oct 2026 |
| Address blacklist | Not present | Contract | 25 Oct 2026 |
| Upgradeable proxy | No | Contract | 25 Oct 2026 |
| Source verified | Yes | Block explorer | 25 Oct 2026 |
| Deployed by | 0x0ce13e…caa576 |
This automated check looked at the LAUNCH contract's code and simulated a transfer to see how it behaves. On the date of the check, a sale went through successfully in simulation, which means no honeypot behaviour was detected — that is, the contract did not appear to block holders from selling. No admin mint function was found, meaning the owner does not currently appear able to create new tokens out of thin air and dilute holders. No pause function was detected, so the owner does not appear able to freeze all transfers at will. No blacklist mechanism was found, meaning there is no evident function letting the owner block specific wallets from trading. The contract is also not upgradeable through a proxy, so the underlying code is not set up to be swapped out for different logic later without deploying a new contract. The contract's source code is verified on the block explorer, which means the code you can read matches what is actually deployed and running on-chain. Buy and sell tax data was not available, so any transaction fees built into trading could not be confirmed either way.
It's worth being clear about what this score does not cover. This is an automated read of contract mechanics only — no person has reviewed this token or formed a judgement on it. The check cannot tell you who is behind the project, whether the team is anonymous, whether there are plans to abandon it, or whether the stated purpose matches the actual intent of the people running it. It also says nothing about tokenomics: how many tokens exist, who holds them, how concentrated ownership is, or whether a small number of wallets could sell and move the price significantly. Liquidity depth, lock status of liquidity pools, and whether liquidity could be pulled are also outside the scope of this check. A clean contract-mechanics result does not speak to any of these.
Before putting money in, it's worth looking at a few things this check didn't cover: who holds the largest shares of supply and how concentrated that is, whether liquidity is locked and for how long, whether the deployer wallet has a history of similar token launches, and whether there's a real, identifiable team or community behind the project rather than an anonymous one. Checking a block explorer for holder distribution and recent large transfers, and looking at the liquidity pool directly, are reasonable next steps. None of these replace independent research, and nothing here should be read as a recommendation to buy or sell.
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 12 points out of 100.
The other 88 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.