Bitano $BITA
0xb492432aa4557cf3d33e6c961985065150913a50
0xb49243…913a50
This assessment is an uncalibrated estimate of fraud patterns — not a price or investment judgment. Request a correction
Holder distribution
No signalsIdentity / impersonation
No signalsAxis 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).
Mechanisms an owner could use to block sells — transfer pause, blacklist, cooldown — were found. It can turn into a honeypot at any time.
This General token has an estimated scam risk of about 85% (grade F). Decisive risk factors were found: Hidden owner present. The main risk signals include Transfers can be paused, Trading tax can be changed at will, Liquidity (LP) not locked. 5 positive signals were also found. This is an uncalibrated estimate and not investment advice.
How this score was produced
- A decisive risk factor forces at least 85%
- Risk signals combined (diminishing returns): 63% (overlapping signals add less and less)
- = Final 85% (the larger of the two, capped at 100% · the weights are human-set)
Decisive facts (reproducible, near-certain)
There is an owner that is not openly visible, so real control may be hidden even when ownership looks renounced.
Risk signals (probability contribution)
The trading tax is a high 10-50%, so trading costs are abnormally large.
Transfers can be paused, letting the operator freeze trading.
The trading tax can be changed later, enabling a trap that spikes the tax after launch.
The transaction limit can be changed at will, even down to a sell limit of zero.
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.
The liquidity (LP) is not locked, so the operator can pull the liquidity in a rug pull.
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.
No additional tokens can be minted, so there is no supply-dilution risk.
The contract source is public and verified, so anyone can check its behavior.
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.
There is no function to arbitrarily block specific wallets from trading.
No single wallet monopolizes the supply, so the risk of a single dump is small.
However, this metric looks only at the single largest wallet — one party splitting holdings across several wallets lowers each share and can look distributed.
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)
Main pair (deepest pool) liquidity $58,995 (pancakeswap) · 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)
This estimate is as of the assessment time — a token's state can change at any moment · Method · Grade criteria