On-chain security analysis — is it a scam or legit?
Is this your token? Publish your own audit on this page →
0x0d8c…e153
The audit of the BEP20 Token implementation contract identified a medium-level risk related to centralized control over token minting, which could lead to supply manipulation if the owner's key is compromised. Minor issues include the immutability of the mintable flag and an incomplete internal function. The contract demonstrates good practices for upgradeability and uses SafeMath to prevent arithmetic overflows. Overall, the contract is well-structured but requires careful management of the owner's privileges.
Share held by contracts — treasury, vesting, bridge or staking — is discounted against share held by wallets when the score is computed: a contract cannot decide to sell the way an anonymous holder can, though it can still be drained or voted to sell. Effective concentration is the figure the risk score is actually calculated from.
The 20 remaining pairs hold $20.1K between them and are not listed.
The risk score reads depth across every pair. The volume figure and the volume-to-liquidity ratio elsewhere on this page describe only the pair this audit analysed, so the two are not directly comparable.
0x81b7…3cce0x73fe…e24e0x5eec…ab700x90f3…25190x9cbb…3e160xa306…cb4b0x2789…90bf0xf8ac…66660x5e79…ca580x384d…ff6e0x9b4c…7dcbNo privileged address appears among these holders: the unlocked liquidity sits with independent providers, not with the deployer.
Each factor is an on-chain fact recorded at the time of this analysis. The score is computed from them by a deterministic function, so the same contract returns the same score for anyone who runs the audit. How scores are computed
Our AI-powered scanner gives you a deeper, real-time smart contract analysis — free, with every scoring factor shown.
Get Detailed Audit