Vitalikius Bulleus VITALIKIUS
0xeeab52deb7a53b3979a51f4b18a55fe5a2b2e995This assessment is an uncalibrated estimate of fraud patterns — not a price or investment judgment.
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).
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.
Observation history (36 observations · 07/06 ~ 08/20 · source: our own observation snapshots)
⚠ Observed liquidity fell by 90%+ during this period. What that means is not yet confirmed — we have not verified here whether it is the same pool throughout (a pool migration looks the same) or a measurement gap. Treat it as a signal to check, not as a rug verdict.
- 유동성 급감 — $17,721 → $0 (−100%) · 07/07
- 소유권/권한 변경 — 소유자의 잔액 변경 권한이 활성화됨 · 08/07
The risk transitions above were detected in the observation history — register on the Watchtower to get instant push notifications of such changes.
This General token has an estimated scam risk of about 88% (grade F). Decisive risk factors were found: Owner can arbitrarily change wallet balances. The main risk signals include Trading tax can be changed at will. 7 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 88%
- ⚠ Risk signals combined (diminishing returns): 8% (overlapping signals add less and less)
- = Final 88% (the larger of the two, capped at 100% · the weights are human-set)
🔴 Decisive facts (reproducible, near-certain)
The owner can arbitrarily change wallet balances, effectively zeroing out holders' tokens.
⚖️ Co-observed fact: ownership is renounced, so if this function is owner-only there is no one left to execute it and it may be locked. However, if the function is tied to a non-owner address such as the creator or an admin, it may still be effective regardless of the renouncement, so the score is kept conservative.
Risk signals (probability contribution)
The trading tax can be changed later, enabling a trap that spikes the tax after launch.
🟢 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.
Ownership was transferred to a burn address, so no one can call owner-only functions such as minting or pausing.
No additional tokens can be minted, so there is no supply-dilution risk.
⚖️ However, a balance-change privilege exists, so holdings could be manipulated even without additional minting.
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.
The liquidity is locked, so the risk of the operator pulling liquidity in a rug is low.
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.
Community rating (for reference · not in the score)
Loading…
This estimate is as of the assessment time — a token's state can change at any moment · Method · Grade criteria