DexProof recorded casino as CAUTION on Robinhood Chain under formula v2.0.1, in verdict #1577 published 29 Oct 2026 (UTC). Of 28 checks, 14 passed, 2 warned, 4 failed and 8 could not be run.
Trade with care. Read the warnings first.
This result is from the scan on 12 October 2026.
Scanned 1d ago. Scan again before you trade.
Price
—
Liquidity
—
Volume 24h
—
FDV
—
Buys 24h
—
Age
—
This result is from the scan on 12 October 2026.
This scan could not read the pool's liquidity history yet, so we are keeping it until we can. None of this V3 pool's liquidity is burned or locked. The largest liquidity provider is , a contract, and not the deployer. It holds 100.0% of this pool's liquidity. This contract is not a trusted locker, so this liquidity is not considered locked. Its code is not published, so nothing shows what it can do with this liquidity, and it is controlled by the wallet . This pool is on Uniswap V3 and holds 100.0% of the liquidity this scan could read. 2 other pools charge a fee too large to trade through, so nothing a holder owns is at risk there.
Top 10 holders hold 99% of the tokens in circulation.
The largest holder is , a plain wallet, holding 84.0% of the tokens in circulation on its own. Against total supply, the top 10 hold 6.3%. Liquidity pools hold 93.7% 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 exact code was used by 13 other tokens, and 13 of them lost most of their value or had their liquidity removed.
They include 0x324d…3545, 0x39aa…5598, 0x9465…d56a. That describes those tokens, and it does not say who created this one.
Launched on an unregistered launchpad, but we don't know how that launchpad works, so we can't say whether there was a raise for the creator to buy into.
95.8% of the token supply was bought for 23.0000 ETH by 4 wallets in the transaction that opened its pool, before outside buyers could trade.
This token crashed after launch.
On 2026-10-16, its price or liquidity fell 95% or more below its 72-hour peak, and a second data source confirmed it. This often happens when early buyers sell. On its own it does not mean the contract or its liquidity is unsafe.
We couldn't read some checks on this scan, so the verdict is limited.
A failed read is not a clean result. This describes what we could see, not the token.
These are gaps in what we could see, not problems found in this token.
We can't rule out that the creator pulled liquidity from this token's pool.
We didn't check 286 transactions by the creator that could remove liquidity.
We couldn't work out which wallet funded the creator, so there was no funder to check for past rugs.
We couldn't find the wallet that first funded this deployer, so we have no funding trail to check.
We could not read this token's market data, so we did not measure its pool depth.
That is a gap in what we could see, not a finding about the token. The opening token deposit into pool contained no ETH. Its opening ETH came from buyers.
We don't have the market data needed to compare this token's value at full supply with its liquidity.
We don't have the volume and liquidity figures needed to check turnover.
We don't have the market data needed to check for wash trading.
We could not find when this token's pool was created.
This token does not share its name and symbol with any real tokenized share.
The explorer has not tagged this contract as a scam.
A test sale worked from two separate new wallets.
A test buy worked too. We ran it at this chain's live gas price (41364000 wei).
This token is not on our list of confirmed rugs.
This token has no honeypot mark in our records.
This deployer has no earlier launches on record.
The contract has no owner function, so it has no single owner wallet.
This contract's code is fixed.
We found no standard upgrade setup on it.
This contract's source is verified on the explorer, but it was matched from another address with identical bytecode, not proven against this one.
We found no privileged powers in the token contract's code.
We looked at its audited source and compiled code.
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 paid promotion found on DexScreener.
This contract was 17 days old at this scan.
The source is verified, so anyone can read the code.
We could not match it to a known template.
Robinhood