DexProof recorded ITEM as CAUTION on Robinhood Chain under formula v2.0.1, in verdict #1465 published 28 Oct 2026 (UTC). Of 28 checks, 14 passed, 2 warned, 1 failed and 11 could not be run.
Trade with care. Read the warnings first.
Top 10 holders hold 98% of the tokens in circulation.
Scanned 1d ago. Scan again before you trade.
Price
—
Liquidity
—
Volume 24h
—
FDV
—
Buys 24h
—
Age
—
Top 10 holders hold 98% of the tokens in circulation.
The largest holder is , a contract, holding 54.0% of the tokens in circulation on its own. Against total supply, the top 10 hold 88.6%. Liquidity pools hold 9.5% 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.
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.
The deployer (), a contract, holds 100.0% of the liquidity backing this V4 pool at the current price.
This contract is not a trusted locker, so this liquidity is not considered locked. Its controller or contract code may still move or withdraw it. The contract needs an audit before we can say more. This pool is on Uniswap V4 and holds 90.0% of the liquidity we could read. One other pool for this token has liquidity one wallet could pull. We could not confirm who opened it. 2 other pools charge a fee too large to trade through, so nothing a holder owns is at risk there.
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 79 transactions by the creator that could remove liquidity.
Applies to: Funder rug history, Deployer launch history, Funding lineage, Tax manipulation
So we can't check for past rugs, because many people launch through it. The transaction that created it was sent by , but a transaction sender can be the pad's own relayer rather than the launcher, so we don't attribute any history to that address.
So we can't check its past launches. The transaction that created it was sent by , but a transaction sender can be the pad's own relayer rather than the launcher, so we don't attribute any history to that address.
So we can't trace who funded it. The transaction that created it was sent by , but a transaction sender can be the pad's own relayer rather than the launcher, so we don't attribute any history to that address.
So we can't check whether it changed fees or limits.
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.
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.
This token does not share its name and symbol with any real tokenized share.
The explorer has not tagged this contract as a scam.
The token's main pool and every other pool large enough to matter let it be sold in our test.
This does not show how large a sale those pools can absorb, or that Uniswap's own router will carry it out. A new wallet can also send this token to the pool, the transfer a sell actually makes. A price quote alone can't test that.
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.
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 partially verified on the explorer, matched from another address with identical bytecode, not proven against this one.
We found no mint, pause, blacklist or limit functions in the token contract's code.
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 contract was 9 days old at this scan.
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