UNSETTLED

Public outcome ledger

Counts include misses. The report never hides an outcome because it contradicted the original call.

RAW REPORT PAYLOAD

{
  "address": "0x471e49de9a1521768d169aec6aa586dc0d0d64cc",
  "chain": "base",
  "depth": "full",
  "tier": "FREE",
  "score": 20,
  "grade": "F",
  "risk_level": "CRITICAL",
  "flags": [
    "high_holder_concentration",
    "low_liquidity"
  ],
  "free_tier_result": {
    "verdict": "UNHEALTHY",
    "reason": "This token is a ghost town with extremely low liquidity and trading volume, indicating it's a failed project with no active community or development.",
    "label": "AI Verdict",
    "checks": {
      "contract_verified": true,
      "token_age_days": 661,
      "liquidity_usd": 3284.3,
      "holder_count": 194,
      "has_liquidity_pool": true,
      "chain": "base"
    },
    "risk_level": "high",
    "key_findings": [
      "Market Cap is $2K with $3K liquidity, indicating a dead project.",
      "24h trading volume is $0.14, showing no trading activity.",
      "Top 10 holders control 95.4% of the supply, with 0% attributed to protocol-controlled wallets, suggesting high centralization among individual wallets.",
      "Token is 661 days old, but has failed to gain any traction or value.",
      "Mint and Freeze authorities are revoked, which is positive, but irrelevant given the token's overall state."
    ],
    "confidence": 1
  },
  "goplus": {
    "source": "goplus",
    "api_available": true,
    "goplus_available": true,
    "goplus_status_message": null,
    "is_mintable": false,
    "is_honeypot": false,
    "holder_count": 194,
    "lp_holder_count": 2,
    "top_10_holder_rate": 0.9541,
    "top10_holders_pct": 95.41,
    "is_open_source": true,
    "is_proxy": false,
    "lp_burned_or_locked": "burned",
    "security_findings": [
      {
        "source": "goplus",
        "code": "TOP10_CONCENTRATION",
        "severity": "high",
        "message": "Top 10 holders concentration is very high",
        "value": 95.41
      }
    ]
  },
  "security_findings": [
    {
      "source": "goplus",
      "code": "TOP10_CONCENTRATION",
      "severity": "high",
      "message": "Top 10 holders concentration is very high",
      "value": 95.41
    }
  ],
  "scanned_at": "2026-04-23T16:42:47.471223Z",
  "cached": false,
  "cached_at": null,
  "liquidity_exposure_cap_usd": 24.63,
  "summary": "Bad On Base (BOB) is a well-established base token with $2K market cap, 1+ years old.  Key concerns: security risks, tokenomics concerns. Overall verdict: F — critical risk — not recommended.",
  "token": {
    "vol_liq_ratio": 0,
    "name": "Bad On Base",
    "symbol": "BOB",
    "chain": "base",
    "price_usd": 0.000002007,
    "mcap": 1909,
    "market_cap": 1909,
    "volume_24h": 0.14,
    "liquidity_usd": 3284.3,
    "contract_age_days": 661,
    "contract_verified": true,
    "holder_count": 194,
    "top10_holders_pct": 95.41,
    "holders_by_acquisition": null,
    "holder_change_24h": null,
    "holder_change_7d": null,
    "holder_change_30d": null,
    "holder_supply_top10_pct": null,
    "holder_supply_top25_pct": null,
    "holder_supply_top50_pct": null,
    "holder_supply_top100_pct": null,
    "exchange_wallet_pct": null,
    "net_exchange_flow_24h_usd": null,
    "top_holders": null,
    "top10_whale_pct": null,
    "top10_protocol_pct": null,
    "mint_authority": null,
    "freeze_authority": null,
    "mutable_metadata": null,
    "lp_burned_or_locked": "burned",
    "lp_locked_pct": 100,
    "lp_burned_pct": 100,
    "lp_unlocked_pct": 0,
    "lp_lock_expiry": null,
    "lp_locker_name": null,
    "social_links": {
      "website": "https://www.badonbase.com/",
      "twitter": "https://x.com/badonbase",
      "telegram": "https://t.me/BadOnBase"
    },
    "creator_balance_pct": null,
    "authority_governance": null,
    "goplus_trusted": true,
    "goplus_available": true,
    "goplus_status_message": null,
    "bundle_detected": false,
    "is_honeypot": false
  },
  "bots": {
    "TechnicianBot": {
      "score": 1,
      "sentiment": "bearish",
      "category": "Technical",
      "reasoning": {
        "summary": "AI on-chain (GPT-4o Mini); The on-chain health of Bad On Base (BOB) is concerning, characterized by extremely low transaction activity and a high concentration of holdings among the top 10 holders, who control over 95% of the supply. The liquidity is also minimal relative to the market cap, indicating fragility in trading conditions.",
        "positives": [
          "Contract is verified, providing some level of trust",
          "Token has been operational for 661 days, indicating some level of maturity",
          "Current price is stable with a minor 24-hour change of -1.41%"
        ],
        "concerns": [
          "Only 3 transactions recorded in the last 24 hours, indicating very low activity",
          "Top 10 holders control 95.41% of the supply, leading to extreme concentration risk",
          "Total liquidity of $3,284.30 is very low compared to the market cap of $1,909.00",
          "confidence 0.25"
        ],
        "flags": []
      },
      "confidence": 0.25,
      "structured_findings": {
        "summary": "The on-chain health of Bad On Base (BOB) is concerning, characterized by extremely low transaction activity and a high concentration of holdings among the top 10 holders, who control over 95% of the supply. The liquidity is also minimal relative to the market cap, indicating fragility in trading conditions.",
        "positives": [
          "Contract is verified, providing some level of trust.",
          "Token has been operational for 661 days, indicating some level of maturity.",
          "Current price is stable with a minor 24-hour change of -1.41%.",
          "Holder count of 194 suggests some level of community engagement."
        ],
        "negatives": [
          "Only 3 transactions recorded in the last 24 hours, indicating very low activity.",
          "Top 10 holders control 95.41% of the supply, leading to extreme concentration risk.",
          "Total liquidity of $3,284.30 is very low compared to the market cap of $1,909.00.",
          "24-hour trading volume is only $0.14, suggesting negligible trading interest."
        ],
        "anomaly_flags": [],
        "confidence": 0.25,
        "contract_age_days": 661,
        "tx_count_24h": 3,
        "volume_24h": 0.14,
        "price_usd": 0.000002007
      }
    },
    "MacroBot": {
      "score": 2,
      "sentiment": "bearish",
      "category": "Macro",
      "reasoning": {
        "summary": "AI macro (Grok); Bad On Base (BOB) is currently positioned in a highly fragile state, with extremely low trading volume and a market cap that suggests it is illiquid and vulnerable to drawdowns. The lack of sector strength and the high concentration of holdings among top holders further exacerbate its risk profile in the current neutral market regime.; risks: Extremely low trading volume (0.0x market cap) indicating illiquidity., High concentration of holdings (95.41% by top 10 holders) leading to potential volatility., Current market sentiment is neutral but leaning towards fear (Fear & Greed Index at 46).; confidence 0.30",
        "positives": [],
        "concerns": [],
        "flags": []
      },
      "confidence": 0.3,
      "structured_findings": {
        "summary": "Bad On Base (BOB) is currently positioned in a highly fragile state, with extremely low trading volume and a market cap that suggests it is illiquid and vulnerable to drawdowns. The lack of sector strength and the high concentration of holdings among top holders further exacerbate its risk profile in the current neutral market regime.",
        "key_drivers": [],
        "key_risks": [
          "Extremely low trading volume (0.0x market cap) indicating illiquidity.",
          "High concentration of holdings (95.41% by top 10 holders) leading to potential volatility.",
          "Current market sentiment is neutral but leaning towards fear (Fear & Greed Index at 46).",
          "No identifiable catalysts or sector strength to support price resilience."
        ],
        "correlations": {
          "btc": "highly correlated but likely to underperform BTC in a downturn due to low liquidity.",
          "eth": "similar to BTC, expected to underperform ETH as well.",
          "rates": "not directly impacted but sensitive to overall market liquidity conditions.",
          "dxy": "indirectly affected; a stronger dollar could further pressure speculative assets."
        },
        "sector_outlook": "The meme coin sector is currently weak, with no significant trends or movements to suggest a recovery or interest in this category.",
        "confidence": 0.3,
        "volume_24h": 0.14,
        "mcap": 1909
      }
    },
    "SecurityBot": {
      "score": 4,
      "sentiment": "neutral",
      "category": "Safety",
      "reasoning": {
        "summary": "AI security (gpt-4o-mini); The token has a significant concentration of supply among the top holders, which poses a risk to holder safety. While the contract is verified and has been operational for over 661 days, the lack of detailed governance information and the absence of an audit contribute to a mixed security posture.; risks: High concentration of supply (top 10 holders control 95.41%), Unknown creator/deployer governance, No audit or third-party security review available, Potential for owner privileges to be exploited; confidence 0.50",
        "positives": [],
        "concerns": [],
        "flags": []
      },
      "confidence": 0.5,
      "structured_findings": {
        "summary": "The token has a significant concentration of supply among the top holders, which poses a risk to holder safety. While the contract is verified and has been operational for over 661 days, the lack of detailed governance information and the absence of an audit contribute to a mixed security posture.",
        "key_risks": [
          "High concentration of supply (top 10 holders control 95.41%)",
          "Unknown creator/deployer governance",
          "No audit or third-party security review available",
          "Potential for owner privileges to be exploited",
          "Low trading volume and market cap indicating limited liquidity"
        ],
        "critical_flags": [],
        "confidence": 0.5,
        "mint_authority": null,
        "freeze_authority": null,
        "lp_status": "burned",
        "contract_verified": true
      }
    },
    "TokenomicsBot": {
      "score": 1.5,
      "sentiment": "bearish",
      "category": "Tokenomics",
      "reasoning": {
        "summary": "AI tokenomics (Gemini 2.5 Flash); Bad On Base (BOB) exhibits extremely poor tokenomics, characterized by severe holder concentration where the top 10 holders control 95.41% of the supply. Despite a high Liquidity/MCap ratio of 1.72, the absolute liquidity of $3,284 is minimal, and the 24-hour trading volume is negligible at $0.14, indicating non-existent real trading activity. The token's market cap of $1,909 is not supported by any meaningful distribution or trading.; unlock risk 0/100; + LP is 100% burned, removing direct rug pull risk from LP withdrawal., MCap/FDV ratio of 1.0 indicates all supply is circulating, no future dilution from unlocks., Contract is verified, offering some transparency on the code.; risks: Extreme holder concentration (95.41% by top 10) poses severe manipulation risk., Non-existent trading volume ($0.14 in 24h) despite reported liquidity, indicating fake or illiquid market., Very low market capitalization ($1,909) makes it highly susceptible to volatility and abandonment., Lack of exchange breadth and all-venue volume suggests no real market presence beyond a single DEX pair.; confidence 0.90",
        "positives": [],
        "concerns": [],
        "flags": []
      },
      "confidence": 0.9,
      "structured_findings": {
        "summary": "Bad On Base (BOB) exhibits extremely poor tokenomics, characterized by severe holder concentration where the top 10 holders control 95.41% of the supply. Despite a high Liquidity/MCap ratio of 1.72, the absolute liquidity of $3,284 is minimal, and the 24-hour trading volume is negligible at $0.14, indicating non-existent real trading activity. The token's market cap of $1,909 is not supported by any meaningful distribution or trading.",
        "key_risks": [
          "Extreme holder concentration (95.41% by top 10) poses severe manipulation risk.",
          "Non-existent trading volume ($0.14 in 24h) despite reported liquidity, indicating fake or illiquid market.",
          "Very low market capitalization ($1,909) makes it highly susceptible to volatility and abandonment.",
          "Lack of exchange breadth and all-venue volume suggests no real market presence beyond a single DEX pair.",
          "No clear project utility or development, typical of meme coins with poor tokenomics."
        ],
        "positives": [
          "LP is 100% burned, removing direct rug pull risk from LP withdrawal.",
          "MCap/FDV ratio of 1.0 indicates all supply is circulating, no future dilution from unlocks.",
          "Contract is verified, offering some transparency on the code.",
          "High Liquidity/MCap ratio (1.72) on paper, though absolute liquidity is tiny."
        ],
        "unlock_risk": 0,
        "distribution_assessment": "The distribution is highly centralized, with 95.41% of the supply held by the top 10 addresses out of a total of 194 holders. This indicates a significant risk of price manipulation and a lack of broad community ownership, which is highly concerning for a token of 'MATURE' age. The low holder count combined with extreme concentration suggests a project with very limited organic interest or a controlled distribution.",
        "comparable_models": {
          "successful": [],
          "failed": [
            "Many rug pulls and abandoned meme coins with initial high concentration and low liquidity."
          ]
        },
        "confidence": 0.9,
        "mcap": 1909,
        "fdv": 1909,
        "mcap_fdv_ratio": 1,
        "top10_holders_pct": 95.41,
        "holder_count": 194,
        "liquidity_usd": 3284.3,
        "liquidity_mcap_ratio": 1.7204
      }
    },
    "DevilsAdvocate": {
      "score": 1.5,
      "sentiment": "bearish",
      "category": "Contrarian",
      "reasoning": {
        "summary": "AI contrarian (Gemini 2.5 Flash) [NEUTRAL contrarian]; Despite a 100% locked LP, 'Bad On Base' is a dead project with catastrophic liquidity and centralization issues. The token's 661-day age combined with near-zero trading volume, minimal holders, and extreme ownership concentration points to abandonment and an inevitable collapse if any significant holder decides to sell. The neutral consensus fails to grasp the severity of these fundamental flaws.; risks: Extreme price volatility and collapse due to concentrated ownership (top 10 holders control 95.41%) dumping into a tiny liquidity pool ($3,284)., Complete illiquidity and inability to trade due to near-zero 24-hour trading volume ($0.14) and only 3 transactions., Project abandonment given the 661-day age with no discernible activity or growth in holders., High potential for manipulation due to low market cap and liquidity., Lack of any clear utility or community engagement, typical of abandoned meme coins.; open questions: Mint authority status (unknown)., Creator address (missing)., Specific details of the LP lock mechanism and duration.; confidence 0.95",
        "positives": [],
        "concerns": [],
        "flags": []
      },
      "confidence": 0.95
    },
    "SocialBot": {
      "score": 1,
      "sentiment": "bearish",
      "category": "Social",
      "reasoning": {
        "summary": "X/Twitter sentiment (Grok); sub-scores: OE=0.0, IQ=0.0, CG=0.0, BSD=10.0; Extremely low social presence and activity on X/Twitter. Official account shows minimal activity, with the most recent post unrelated to the token (political comment). No recent mentions, discussions, whale activity, or notable engagement specific to this $BOB on Base.; fake/coordination risk: 1/100; confidence 0.30",
        "positives": [],
        "concerns": [],
        "flags": []
      },
      "confidence": 0.3,
      "structured_findings": {
        "summary": "Extremely low social presence and activity on X/Twitter. Official account shows minimal activity, with the most recent post unrelated to the token (political comment). No recent mentions, discussions, whale activity, or notable engagement specific to this $BOB on Base.",
        "fake_engagement_risk": 1,
        "confidence": 0.3,
        "sub_dimensions": {
          "organic_engagement": {
            "score": 0,
            "rationale": "No recent posts from official account about the token; single unrelated reply with zero engagement.",
            "weight": 0.4
          },
          "influencer_quality": {
            "score": 0,
            "rationale": "No influencer mentions or notable posts found.",
            "weight": 0.25
          },
          "community_growth": {
            "score": 0,
            "rationale": "No evidence of growth; searches yield no results.",
            "weight": 0.2
          },
          "bot_spam_detection": {
            "score": 10,
            "rationale": "No spam or bot activity detected due to lack of any posts.",
            "weight": 0.15
          }
        }
      }
    }
  },
  "consensus_narrative": "6 agents analyzed this token. Security was the lone dissenter (scored 4.0/10 vs swarm average 1.8).\n⚖️ Safety vs Technical: This conflict highlights a critical divergence between perceived smart contract integrity and actual market viability. While SafetyBot notes contract verification and operational longevity, TechnicianBot's assessment of extremely low transaction activity and 95%+ supply concentration among top holders reveals severe illiquidity and centralization risks, rendering the token practically untradable and highly susceptible to manipulation despite its 'safe' contract.\n⚖️ Devil's Advocate vs SecurityBot: Compromise: 4.0 → 2.8\nMost optimistic: Security (4.0/10) — AI security (gpt-4o-mini); The token has a significant concentration of supply among the top holders, which poses a risk to holder safety.\nMost critical: Technician (1.0/10) — AI on-chain (GPT-4o Mini); The on-chain health of Bad On Base (BOB) is concerning, characterized by extremely low transaction activity and a high concentration of holdings among the top 10 holders, who control over 95% of the supply.",
  "debates": [
    {
      "topic": "Safety vs Technical",
      "resolution": "This conflict highlights a critical divergence between perceived smart contract integrity and actual market viability. While SafetyBot notes contract verification and operational longevity, TechnicianBot's assessment of extremely low transaction activity and 95%+ supply concentration among top holders reveals severe illiquidity and centralization risks, rendering the token practically untradable and highly susceptible to manipulation despite its 'safe' contract.",
      "outcome": "noted",
      "rounds": [
        {
          "phase": "challenge",
          "agent": "TechnicianBot",
          "agentName": "Technician",
          "target": "SecurityBot",
          "targetName": "Security",
          "content": "Cross-category conflict: Technical scored 1.0/10 while Safety scored 4.0/10. This 3.0-point gap suggests the token's strengths in Safety may not translate to Technical reliability.",
          "round": 1,
          "stance": "challenge"
        },
        {
          "phase": "resolution",
          "agent": "TechnicianBot",
          "agentName": "Technician",
          "content": "This conflict highlights a critical divergence between perceived smart contract integrity and actual market viability. While SafetyBot notes contract verification and operational longevity, TechnicianBot's assessment of extremely low transaction activity and 95%+ supply concentration among top holders reveals severe illiquidity and centralization risks, rendering the token practically untradable and highly susceptible to manipulation despite its 'safe' contract.",
          "round": 2,
          "stance": "noted"
        }
      ]
    },
    {
      "topic": "Devil's Advocate vs SecurityBot",
      "resolution": "Compromise: 4.0 → 2.8",
      "outcome": "compromise",
      "rounds": [
        {
          "phase": "challenge",
          "agent": "DevilsAdvocate",
          "agentName": "Devil's Advocate",
          "target": "SecurityBot",
          "targetName": "Security",
          "content": "⚔️ SecurityBot's 4.0/10 score is overly generous; 'contract verified' merely means visibility, not security, and 'operational for 661 days' is irrelevant when the project is demonstrably dead with $0.14 trading volume. The extreme 95.41% holder concentration, coupled with no audit and unknown governance, renders its 'mixed security posture' assessment dangerously optimistic for a token that is effectively abandoned.",
          "round": 1,
          "stance": "challenge"
        },
        {
          "phase": "defense",
          "agent": "SecurityBot",
          "agentName": "Security",
          "target": "DevilsAdvocate",
          "targetName": "Devil's Advocate",
          "content": "While acknowledging the critical risks from extreme holder concentration (95.41%), lack of audit, and unknown governance, the 4.0/10 score reflects the contract's verified status, which offers transparency for review, and its operational longevity of over 661 days, indicating it wasn't an immediate rug. These factors, despite the project's low volume, prevent a lower score by confirming basic contract integrity and persistence, even if the project is effectively abandoned.",
          "round": 2,
          "stance": "defend"
        },
        {
          "phase": "rebuttal",
          "agent": "DevilsAdvocate",
          "agentName": "Devil's Advocate",
          "target": "SecurityBot",
          "targetName": "Security",
          "content": "⚔️ Security's reliance on 'contract verified' and 'operational longevity' is misplaced; transparency doesn't negate the 95.41% concentration risk, and 661 days of operation are meaningless when daily volume is $0.14, confirming a dead project, not a secure one. These basic functionalities offer no protection against the catastrophic single-point-of-failure inherent in extreme centralization and lack of audits.",
          "round": 3,
          "stance": "escalate"
        },
        {
          "phase": "resolution",
          "agent": "SecurityBot",
          "agentName": "Security",
          "content": "The compelling argument that 661 days of operation are meaningless with a daily volume of $0.14, indicating a dead project, significantly reduces my assessment of its operational security and viability.",
          "round": 4,
          "stance": "compromise"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "upgrade_cta": false,
  "warnings": [
    {
      "severity": "high",
      "code": "TOP10_CONCENTRATION",
      "message": "Top 10 holders concentration is very high"
    },
    {
      "severity": "medium",
      "code": "high_holder_concentration",
      "message": "high_holder_concentration"
    },
    {
      "severity": "medium",
      "code": "low_liquidity",
      "message": "low_liquidity"
    }
  ],
  "scan_tier": "PRO",
  "success": true,
  "og": {
    "title": "VerdictSwarm: BOB — Score 20/100",
    "description": "6 agents analyzed this token. Security was the lone dissenter (scored 4.0/10 vs swarm average 1.8).\n⚖️ Safety vs Technical: This conflict highlights a critical divergence between perceived smart contr",
    "url": "https://www.vswarm.io/report/0x471e49de9a1521768d169aec6aa586dc0d0d64cc"
  }
}