Don't trade this token.
This token's creator removed liquidity from this token's pool.
- FAILDeployer pulled liquidity
- FAILHolder concentration
- FAILSerial clone
DexProof recorded Altai as CRITICAL on Robinhood Chain under formula v2.0.1, in verdict #1886 published 6 Nov 2026 (UTC). Of 28 checks, 16 passed, 3 warned, 3 failed and 6 could not be run.
Don't trade this token.
This token's creator removed liquidity from this token's pool.
Price
—
Liquidity
—
Volume 24h
—
FDV
—
Buys 24h
—
Age
—
This token's creator removed liquidity from this token's pool.
It made 1 withdrawal on Uniswap V4, and that withdrawal closed the position completely.
Top 10 holders hold 100% of the tokens in circulation.
The largest holder is , a plain wallet, holding 99.6% of the tokens in circulation on its own.
This exact code was used by 3 other tokens, and 3 of them lost most of their value or had their liquidity removed.
They include 0xdf86…ebd3, 0x0d5a…5d05, 0x7eb9…023f. That describes those tokens, and it does not say who created this one.
We couldn't finish the sell test on the other exchanges we checked.
We couldn't get a clear result from any pool we tested, so we can't say whether this token can be sold. Sells on this pool go through a swap hook. Our code check found functions that let its owner set a router list, a whitelist or a blacklist. We can't see whether the owner has used them.
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.
This deployer is a new wallet funded by another new wallet, a common setup before a rug.
These are gaps in what we could see, not problems found in this token.
This pool has no liquidity at its current price, so there is no share of it to check.
One other pool charges a fee too large to trade through, so nothing a holder owns is at risk there. This token trades in 20 pools. We couldn't measure their sizes, so the pool named here may not be its main market. The full pool list is in the evidence.
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.
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.
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.
Ownership was renounced.
The owner is the zero or dead address.
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 active paid boosts.
DexScreener has paid listing services on record for this token (a token profile), which is common for a launched token.
This contract was 27 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.
This token trades in V4 pools that run a hook, a contract that executes on swaps. Here is what Uniswap's public hook list says about each one. It describes the hook, not this token.
Found by reading the hook's code. Whether the owner has used these controls is not something this scan can see.
We could not read Uniswap's hook list just now, so we cannot say whether this hook is described there.