| Risk factor | Finding | Evidence | Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sellable | Yes | Transfer simulation | 12 Oct 2026 |
| Buy tax | 1% creator tax + 1% Pons fee | Pons factory | 12 Oct 2026 |
| Sell tax | 1% creator tax + 1% Pons fee | Pons factory | 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 | 80% | Holder distribution | 12 Oct 2026 |
| Liquidity locked | Launch pool, permanently | Pons factory | 12 Oct 2026 |
| Holders | 5484 | Token contract | 12 Oct 2026 |
| Deployed by | 0xc7c649…648600 |
| Holders | 5,484 |
| Rank | Address | Share |
|---|---|---|
| #1 · contract | 0x529562…e10079 | 43.43% |
| #2 · Uniswap v4 pool · contract | 0x8366a3…e40951 | 10.02% |
| #3 · Pons locker, locked for good · contract | 0x267444…574952 | 8.16% |
| #4 · contract | 0x51c012…917c7a | 4.61% |
| #5 | 0x85b1f1…c9c66c | 3.00% |
This automated check found a score of 12 out of 18 for GG (Golden Goose) on the Robinhood chain, based on contract mechanics detected on the date of the check. Here's what the individual findings mean in practice. A 1% creator tax plus a 1% Pons fee applies on both buys and sells, meaning every trade sends a small cut to the creator and the platform — this does not change over time based on what's detected now, but it is a cost built into every transaction. No admin mint function was detected, which means the contract owner does not currently have a built-in way to create new tokens and dilute holders. No transfer-pausing function was detected, so the owner does not appear to have a switch to freeze trading. No blacklist function was detected, meaning there is no on-chain mechanism found that would let the owner block specific addresses from transacting. The contract is not upgradeable, so its current logic cannot be swapped out later by the owner. Source code is verified, which allows the logic to be read and checked by anyone, and liquidity in the launch pool is locked permanently, meaning that specific pool of funds cannot be withdrawn by the creator. Top-10 wallets hold 80% of supply, which is a concentration level worth weighing, since large holders moving funds can affect the market for everyone else.
It's important to be clear about what this check does not cover. This is an automated read of contract code and on-chain data only — it does not assess who the team behind the project is, whether their stated plans or roadmap are credible, how the tokenomics are designed to play out over time, whether any legal or regulatory structure applies, or what the creators actually intend to do with their holdings or tax revenue. A clean reading of contract mechanics does not speak to any of that, and no human has reviewed this project or vouched for it.
Before putting any money in, it's worth independently verifying holder concentration by looking at the live holder list yourself, since large wallets can move the market. Check whether the top holders include known exchange or liquidity addresses rather than individual wallets, as that changes the picture. Look into who the creator is, whether they're identifiable, and what public communication exists about the project's purpose. Review the liquidity lock details directly on the locking platform to confirm the terms and duration. Finally, consider the total amount of liquidity available relative to the market cap, since thin liquidity can make a token difficult to exit even without any red flags in the contract itself.
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.