CheckCrypto checkcrypto.cc 한국어
← To list

Balancer BAL

base General token
Contract address 0x4158734d47fc9692176b5085e0f52ee0da5d47f1
🗼 Watch 🔄 Re-inspect
D
68% Estimated scam risk (uncalibrated)
Risk: High
Assessed 2026-08-18 14:30 KST · heuristic uncalibrated estimate · heuristic-0.2.0 ⓘ
95% 21/22 checks
Observation coverage
We checked a broad set of core on-chain indicators. Unchecked indicators are neither risky nor safe.

📊 Of the 23,317 tokens we have inspected, 6% score a higher risk than this coin. — This is a relative position within the sample we inspected, which was built by deliberately hunting scams and rugs, so it is not a general market distribution. A ranking is not a statement of safety.

This assessment is an uncalibrated estimate of fraud patterns — not a price or investment judgment.

Contract safety

⚠ 3 signals · +52%p
Mintable — supply can be diluted without limit
Go to evidence below ↓

Liquidity / market

⚠ 2 signals · +47%p
Liquidity (LP) not locked — rug pull possible
Go to evidence below ↓

Holder distribution

✓ No signals
No risk signals fired among the checked indicators
Go to evidence below ↓

Project / dev

— Insufficient data
Counted as neither risky nor safe
Go to evidence below ↓

Identity / impersonation

✓ No signals
No risk signals fired among the checked indicators
Go to evidence below ↓

Axis cards show where signals are, not a per-axis score — the %p contribution is a simple sum, while the actual combine uses diminishing returns (overlaps add less).

Can you sell? — Sellable as currently observed — but this is not a safety guarantee

This only means no sell-block signals were observed at inspection time. 1 indicator(s) remain unverified, and upgrades or owner actions can change the state at any time.

Check item by item →
🔗 Omnichain identity confirmed — the same token exists on 6 chains (risk is checked per chain)

These are per-chain instances of the same omnichain token. Thin liquidity on one chain does not by itself mean fraud, and the identity is confirmed on-chain / by listing. How do we verify? →

Observation history (60 observations · 07/25 ~ 08/18 · source: our own observation snapshots)

Liquidity $3 → $1 -57.7%
Holders 30.9K → 30.9K +0.0%

This General token has an estimated scam risk of about 68% (grade D). The main risk signals include Liquidity, Mintable, Owner can arbitrarily change wallet balances. 3 positive signals were also found. This is an uncalibrated estimate and not investment advice.

How this score was produced

  • ⚠ Risk signals combined (diminishing returns): 68% (overlapping signals add less and less)
  • = Final 68% (the larger of the two, capped at 100% · the weights are human-set)

Collection & verification method →

Risk signals (probability contribution)

MEDIUM Owner can arbitrarily change wallet balances +12

The owner can arbitrarily change wallet balances, effectively zeroing out holders' tokens.

⚖️ Canonical-verified token — the holder of this privilege is judged to be a standard bridge/issuer (e.g., the OP Stack bridge 0x4200…0010), the normal structure of a bridge token, so it is reflected only as mint-centralization information rather than a hard risk. For a non-canonical token this would be a hard risk.

HIGH Mintable — supply can be diluted without limit +28

The operator can mint additional tokens, inflating the supply without limit and diluting the value you hold.

⚖️ In projects that keep distributing rewards or airdrops, this is a common design. Even so, the fact that the privilege exists is unchanged, and the risk does not disappear.

MEDIUM Ownership not renounced — owner powers remain (0x4200000000000000000000000000000000000010) +12

Owner powers are still active, so the owner-only functions listed above can actually be exercised.

⚖️ In projects that keep distributing rewards or airdrops, this is a common design. Even so, the fact that the privilege exists is unchanged, and the risk does not disappear.

HIGH Liquidity (LP) not locked — rug pull possible (Locked 0.0%) +35

The liquidity (LP) is not locked, so the operator can pull the liquidity in a rug pull.

MEDIUM Very low liquidity ($1) +12

Liquidity is very low, so even a small sell swings the price sharply and exiting is difficult.

🟢 Positive signals (Green Flags)

These are observed facts, not approvals — appearing on a listing or data service means a profile exists there, not that anyone vetted the project.

GOOD Source code verified and published

The contract source is public and verified, so anyone can check its behavior.

GOOD Sells work normally (not a honeypot)

A static check found no sell-blocking configuration. This reflects a code/configuration check, not an actual trade run — cross-checking via a real sell simulation is shown separately as the 'second-source cross-check' item.

GOOD No blacklist function

There is no function to arbitrarily block specific wallets from trading.

Web reputation & whitepaper check (optional · about 10s)

The score above is based on on-chain indicators. This button searches the public web now for scam allegations and whitepaper content (no re-run of the on-chain check). Web search is paid and slow, so we do not run it automatically on every token — only manually when needed. Once run, the result is saved and shown automatically from then on. Web allegations are not conclusions, so verify them directly.

Liquidity & volume (for rug-risk judgment · not a price/value assessment)

Total liquidity $1 1 trading pairs combined
Total 24h volume $0 1 trading pairs combined

Main pair (deepest pool) liquidity $1 (balancer) · the totals combine every pair on this chain · View pool ↗

⚠ Note the two different bases: the risk score and signals are computed from the main pair alone, while the figures above are the sum of all pairs. A low main-pair pool can therefore raise a "very low liquidity" signal even when the combined total looks large.

Community rating (for reference · not in the score)

Loading…

🔄 Re-inspect 🗼 Watch this token 📣 Report on the board Method

This estimate is as of the assessment time — a token's state can change at any moment · Method · Grade criteria