DexProof recorded DOGGIE as CAUTION on Robinhood Chain under formula v2.0.1, in verdict #1375 published 28 Oct 2026 (UTC). Of 28 checks, 19 passed, 6 warned and 3 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 2d ago. Scan again before you trade.
Price
$0.0001
Liquidity
$85,583
Volume 24h
$1,347
FDV
$109,237
Buys 24h
91
92 sells
Age
65d 1h
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.
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 43% of the tokens in circulation.
The largest holder is , a plain wallet, holding 8.4% of the tokens in circulation on its own. Against total supply, the top 10 hold 21.2%. Liquidity pools hold 50.3% 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.
This contract still has an active owner: .
The token contract has privileged powers (limit change, a switch that can block transfers or selling, privileged low-level code we couldn't read), but whoever controlled them gave up control or can no longer use them.
The code still contains these, but they can no longer be used: supply mint (initialize can only run once and already has), amm route change (initialize can only run once and already has), initialization (initialize can only run once and already has).
The same code has been deployed 15 times, which looks like a copycat pattern.
These are gaps in what we could see, not problems found in this token.
100.0% of the liquidity we could read is in a Uniswap V4 pool where its liquidity is locked, but a smaller pool has a problem.
We skipped this pool: it is one of 15 V4 pools for this token, outside the 6 with the most liquidity. We checked the pools that back the price instead. 2 other pools charge a fee too large to trade through, so nothing a holder owns is at risk there.
We found no active rug markers in the funding records we checked, but we couldn't trace every wallet linked to this deployer.
A contract created this token, so we can't see the person behind it.
So we can't check whether it changed fees or limits.
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 the wallet recorded as this token's creator from its own pool.
Other wallets removed liquidity from it 3 times, so this does not mean the pool is intact. 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.
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.
This deployer has no earlier launches on record.
The deepest pool holds $85,583.
This contract's code is fixed.
We found no standard upgrade setup on it.
This contract's source is partially verified on the explorer.
The code matches, but the compiler metadata does not. This is about its implementation at .
This token's value at full supply is 1× its pool liquidity, a proportionate ratio.
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.
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 pool was 63 days old at this scan.
This contract was 63 days old at this scan.
Launched on Doppler.
Our launchpad records don't show it graduating, but it has a DEX pool. The raise on record is too old to compare against, so how much of it the creator bought is unknown.
The source is partially verified through a bytecode match, so the code can be read.
We could not match it to a known template.
Robinhood