Trade with care. Read the warnings first.
We couldn't finish the sell test on the other exchanges we checked.
Scanned 3d ago. Scan again before you trade.
- WARNHoneypot
- WARNChecks with missing data
- WARNHolder concentration
DexProof recorded WOOD as CAUTION on Robinhood Chain under formula v2.0.1, in verdict #1290 published 27 Oct 2026 (UTC). Of 28 checks, 24 passed, 3 warned and 1 could not be run.
Trade with care. Read the warnings first.
We couldn't finish the sell test on the other exchanges we checked.
Scanned 3d ago. Scan again before you trade.
Price
$0.0019
Liquidity
$251,133
Volume 24h
$10,942
FDV
$1.88M
Buys 24h
44
41 sells
Age
109d 14h
We couldn't finish the sell test on the other exchanges we checked.
At least one pool did not pass its sell test and could not be shown too small to matter, so we can't say this token can be sold everywhere. Sells on this pool go through a swap hook we could not verify. Our code check found no owner-set sell controls, but that does not show what the hook does to a sale.
We couldn't work out who controls this token's liquidity on this scan.
Missing data limits the verdict. A pool we couldn't read is not a pool we cleared. This describes what we could see, not the token.
Top 10 holders hold 40% of the tokens in circulation.
The largest holder is , a contract, holding 11.0% of the tokens in circulation on its own. Against total supply, the top 10 hold 36.3%. Liquidity pools hold 9.1% of total supply, and we leave them out of the tokens in circulation. The top 10 share also moves when pool liquidity moves, even if no holder trades. Some of these tokens sit inside a staking or escrow contract, and we could only partly tell who deposited them. We report the highest share the evidence supports.
These are gaps in what we could see, not problems found in this token.
We found no active rug markers in the funding records we checked, but we couldn't trace every wallet linked to this deployer.
The funds were sent through a batch-send contract.
This token does not share its name and symbol with any real tokenized share.
The explorer has not tagged this contract as a scam.
No liquidity removal by this token's creator from its own pool.
The creator's recent history has no removal calls either.
Nothing on record ties , the wallet that funded the creator, to a past rug on Robinhood Chain.
The funds were sent through a batch-send contract.
This token is not on our list of confirmed rugs.
This token has no honeypot mark in our records.
This token has no pump-and-dump mark in our records.
100.0% of this pool's liquidity is burned, so it can never be pulled.
This pair's LP tokens sit at the dead address, which no one holds the keys to. This pool is on Uniswap V2 and holds 73.6% of the liquidity we could read. 5 other pools charge a fee too large to trade through, so nothing a holder owns is at risk there.
This deployer has no earlier launches on record.
Ownership was renounced.
The owner is the zero or dead address.
The deepest pool holds $251,133.
This contract's code is fixed.
We found no standard upgrade setup on it.
This contract's source is verified on the explorer.
This token's value at full supply is 7× its pool liquidity, a proportionate ratio.
We found no privileged powers in the token contract's code.
We looked at its audited source and compiled code.
Trading volume over 24 hours is 0.0× the pool's liquidity, below our warning level.
Volume is 0.0× the pool's liquidity, below our warning level.
Our market data had no trader counts, so we could not check for wallets trading back and forth.
We saw no fee or limit changes by the deployer in the transactions we searched.
We only looked at the deployer's recent history, so changes by a separate fee owner would not show.
No active paid boosts.
DexScreener has paid listing services on record for this token (a token profile), which is common for a launched token.
This token's code doesn't match any code template we know of.
This token's pool was 106 days old at this scan.
This contract was 106 days old at this scan.
No launchpad deployed this token.
It was deployed directly, which counts neither for nor against it. The on-chain checks decide this one.
The source is verified, so anyone can read the code.
We could not match it to a known template.