UNSETTLED

Public outcome ledger

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

RAW REPORT PAYLOAD

{
  "address": "0x8a6940912ab777eefd07499e0c39be62fb51d73d",
  "chain": "base",
  "depth": "full",
  "tier": "FREE",
  "score": 30,
  "grade": "F",
  "risk_level": "CRITICAL",
  "flags": [],
  "free_tier_result": {
    "verdict": "UNHEALTHY",
    "reason": "Despite high liquidity and market cap, the extremely low trading volume and high holder concentration for a non-protocol token indicate potential illiquidity risk and lack of organic interest.",
    "label": "AI Verdict",
    "checks": {
      "contract_verified": true,
      "token_age_days": 63,
      "liquidity_usd": 121294400.44,
      "holder_count": 11055,
      "has_liquidity_pool": true,
      "chain": "base"
    },
    "risk_level": "high",
    "key_findings": [
      "Market Cap: $270.8M, Liquidity: $121.3M (appears healthy on paper)",
      "24h Volume: $63K (extremely low for a token of this market cap, indicating very poor organic trading activity and potential illiquidity)",
      "Token Age: 63 days (relatively new, but not brand new)",
      "Total Holders: 11,055 (moderate for its age and market cap)",
      "Top 10 Concentration: 45.1% (high for a non-protocol token, especially with no protocol-controlled wallets identified)",
      "Mint Authority: Revoked (safe)",
      "Freeze Authority: Revoked (safe)",
      "LP Status: unlocked (standard, but doesn't mitigate other risks)"
    ],
    "confidence": 0.9
  },
  "goplus": {
    "source": "goplus",
    "api_available": true,
    "goplus_available": true,
    "goplus_status_message": null,
    "is_mintable": false,
    "is_honeypot": false,
    "holder_count": 11055,
    "lp_holder_count": 1,
    "top_10_holder_rate": 0.45130000000000003,
    "top10_holders_pct": 45.13,
    "is_open_source": true,
    "is_proxy": false,
    "lp_burned_or_locked": null,
    "security_findings": [
      {
        "source": "goplus",
        "code": "GOPLUS_OK",
        "severity": "info",
        "message": "No critical GoPlus security flags detected"
      }
    ]
  },
  "security_findings": [
    {
      "source": "goplus",
      "code": "GOPLUS_OK",
      "severity": "info",
      "message": "No critical GoPlus security flags detected"
    }
  ],
  "scanned_at": "2026-04-30T18:11:41.160338Z",
  "cached": false,
  "cached_at": null,
  "liquidity_exposure_cap_usd": 10000,
  "summary": "IDOS (IDOS) is a base token with $270.8M market cap, 63 days old. The Swarm found significant market cap ($270.8M) and deep liquidity ($121.3M).  Key concerns: security risks, tokenomics concerns. Overall verdict: F — critical risk — not recommended.",
  "token": {
    "vol_liq_ratio": 0,
    "name": "IDOS",
    "symbol": "IDOS",
    "chain": "base",
    "price_usd": 0.2707,
    "mcap": 270772799,
    "market_cap": 270772799,
    "volume_24h": 63055.36,
    "liquidity_usd": 121294400.44,
    "contract_age_days": 63,
    "contract_verified": true,
    "holder_count": 11055,
    "top10_holders_pct": 45.13,
    "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": "unlocked",
    "lp_locked_pct": 0,
    "lp_burned_pct": 0,
    "lp_unlocked_pct": 100,
    "lp_lock_expiry": null,
    "lp_locker_name": null,
    "social_links": null,
    "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": 4,
      "sentiment": "neutral",
      "category": "Technical",
      "reasoning": {
        "summary": "AI on-chain (GPT-4o Mini); The IDOS token shows a moderate level of on-chain activity with 46 transactions in the last 24 hours and a holder count of 11,055. However, the top 10 holders control a significant 45.13% of the supply, indicating potential concentration risks that could affect liquidity and market stability.",
        "positives": [
          "Verified contract status enhances trust",
          "Moderate holder count suggests some level of community interest",
          "Active trading with 46 transactions in the last 24 hours"
        ],
        "concerns": [
          "Top 10 holders own 45.13% of the supply, indicating high concentration",
          "24-hour trading volume is relatively low at $63,055.36",
          "Liquidity depth is concerning at $121.3M relative to market cap",
          "confidence 0.65"
        ],
        "flags": []
      },
      "confidence": 0.65
    },
    "SecurityBot": {
      "score": 3.5,
      "sentiment": "neutral",
      "category": "Safety",
      "reasoning": {
        "summary": "AI security (gpt-4o-mini); The IDOS token has a mixed security posture. While it has a significant market cap and liquidity, the lack of audit reports and the unlocked liquidity pool raise concerns. The contract allows for ownership transfer, but the ownership has been transferred to a zero address, which mitigates some risks. However, the potential for fee redirection and the absence of detailed governance information create trust assumptions.; risks: Unlocked liquidity pool poses a risk of liquidity drain., Ownership transferred to a zero address, which may limit governance but does not eliminate risks., Fee redirection mechanism could be exploited if not properly controlled., Lack of audit increases uncertainty regarding contract security.; confidence 0.50",
        "positives": [],
        "concerns": [],
        "flags": []
      },
      "confidence": 0.5
    },
    "MacroBot": {
      "score": 3,
      "sentiment": "bearish",
      "category": "Macro",
      "reasoning": {
        "summary": "AI macro (Grok); IDOS is currently positioned in a fragile state, with low trading volume and high holder concentration, making it vulnerable in the current risk-off environment. The lack of clear sector categorization and identifiable catalysts further diminishes its resilience against potential market downturns.; risks: Low trading volume indicating illiquidity, High concentration of top holders (45.13%) increasing vulnerability to sell-offs, Current market sentiment is fearful (Fear & Greed Index at 29); confidence 0.40",
        "positives": [],
        "concerns": [],
        "flags": []
      },
      "confidence": 0.4
    },
    "TokenomicsBot": {
      "score": 3.5,
      "sentiment": "neutral",
      "category": "Tokenomics",
      "reasoning": {
        "summary": "AI tokenomics (Gemini 2.5 Flash); IDOS exhibits a mixed tokenomics profile. While the 1.0 MCap/FDV ratio indicates full circulation and no immediate dilution risk, the top 10 holders control 45.13% of the supply, which is a significant concentration. Liquidity is deep relative to market cap (0.448 LP/MCap ratio), but the 24-hour trading volume of $63,055 is very low for a $270M market cap, raising concerns about real tradability and price stability.; unlock risk 0/100; + MCap/FDV ratio of 1.0 indicates that virtually all supply is circulating, eliminating future dilution risk from vesting or emissions., LP/MCap ratio of 0.448 suggests deep liquidity relative to the market cap, which is generally positive for trade execution (though contradicted by low volume)., A holder count of 11,055 for a 63-day-old token indicates a reasonably distributed base beyond the very top holders.; risks: Extremely low 24-hour trading volume ($63,055) relative to the $270M market cap, suggesting poor price discovery and high slippage for larger trades despite reported LP depth., Significant concentration with the top 10 holders controlling 45.13% of the supply, posing a risk of large sell-offs impacting price., Lack of information on the project's utility, team, and specific token purpose makes it difficult to assess fundamental value and long-term viability., Absence of exchange breadth data and all-venue volume makes it hard to confirm if the reported liquidity is truly accessible and robust across the market.; confidence 0.70",
        "positives": [],
        "concerns": [],
        "flags": []
      },
      "confidence": 0.7
    },
    "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 limited social presence on X/Twitter. No recent mentions of $IDOS, the Base chain token, or its contract address were found in searches covering March-April 2026. Pre-fetched data confirms no official handles, community links, or metrics, indicating dormant or non-existent social activity despite $270M market cap.; fake/coordination risk: 1/100; confidence 0.40",
        "positives": [],
        "concerns": [],
        "flags": []
      },
      "confidence": 0.4
    },
    "DevilsAdvocate": {
      "score": 6.5,
      "sentiment": "bullish",
      "category": "Contrarian",
      "reasoning": {
        "summary": "AI contrarian (Gemini 2.5 Flash) [BULL contrarian]; Despite the swarm's bearish outlook, IDOS presents a compelling bull case as a potentially undervalued asset. Its substantial liquidity and growing holder base on Base suggest underlying strength, while the 'risk-off' environment and lack of traditional project information may be unfairly penalizing a token with significant, albeit unconventional, potential. The perceived risks are either exaggerated or miscontextualized for this type of asset.; risks: Concentrated ownership (45.13% in top 10) could lead to price manipulation or governance issues if not managed transparently., Unlocked liquidity pool, despite its size, still presents a theoretical risk of withdrawal by large holders, impacting stability., Lack of clear project description or utility makes long-term value proposition speculative and dependent on emergent narratives., Low 24-hour transaction count (46) could indicate limited active trading interest beyond holding, potentially affecting future liquidity., Absence of social presence and audit reports increases uncertainty and makes it harder for new investors to assess legitimacy and future direction.; open questions: The true purpose or utility of the IDOS token and its long-term vision., The identity and intentions of the top 10 holders and their relationship to the project., The specific mechanisms or incentives driving the growth of its holder base despite minimal public information.; confidence 0.75",
        "positives": [],
        "concerns": [],
        "flags": []
      },
      "confidence": 0.75
    }
  },
  "consensus_narrative": "The swarm was divided: 2 of 6 agents disagreed significantly on the risk assessment.\n⚖️ Safety vs Social: This conflict indicates a token with potential technical vulnerabilities (unlocked LP, no audits) despite some positive security features (ownership renounced), yet critically lacks community engagement and public awareness. Investors face a high-risk scenario where even if the code is somewhat secure, the absence of social presence means no organic growth, support, or defense against FUD, making it prone to irrelevance or easy manipulation.\n⚖️ Devil's Advocate vs TechnicianBot: Compromise: 6.0 → 6.2\n⚖️ Score Calibration: Deadlock after 2 round(s), σ=1.05\n⚖️ Peer Review: DEBATE DEFENSES AND CHALLENGES:\n  [TokenomicsBot] Defense: The MCap/FDV ratio of 1.0 indicates full circulation and no immediate dilution risk, which is a strong positive. However, the extremely low 24-hour tr\n    → Challenges MacroBot: MacroBot's score of 2.0 is too low because the 1.0 MCap/FDV ratio is a significant positive, indicat\n    → Challenges SocialBot: SocialBot's score of 1.0 is too low; while holder concentration and low trading volume are concerns,\n  [SecurityBot] Defense: The token's ownership transferred to a zero address significantly mitigates central control risks, yet the unlocked liquidity pool and absence of audi\n    → Challenges MacroBot: MacroBot's score is too low because the zero-address ownership transfer is a strong security feature\n    → Challenges SocialBot: SocialBot's score is too low as the token's significant market cap and liquidity indicate a level of\n  [TechnicianBot] Defense: The IDOS token demonstrates moderate on-chain activity with 46 transactio\nMost optimistic: Devil's Advocate (6.5/10) — AI contrarian (Gemini 2.\nMost critical: Social (1.0/10) — X/Twitter sentiment (Grok); sub-scores: OE=0.",
  "debates": [
    {
      "topic": "Safety vs Social",
      "resolution": "This conflict indicates a token with potential technical vulnerabilities (unlocked LP, no audits) despite some positive security features (ownership renounced), yet critically lacks community engagement and public awareness. Investors face a high-risk scenario where even if the code is somewhat secure, the absence of social presence means no organic growth, support, or defense against FUD, making it prone to irrelevance or easy manipulation.",
      "outcome": "noted",
      "rounds": [
        {
          "phase": "challenge",
          "agent": "SocialBot",
          "agentName": "Social",
          "target": "SecurityBot",
          "targetName": "Security",
          "content": "Cross-category conflict: Social scored 1.0/10 while Safety scored 5.0/10. This 4.0-point gap suggests the token's strengths in Safety may not translate to Social reliability.",
          "round": 1,
          "stance": "challenge"
        },
        {
          "phase": "resolution",
          "agent": "SocialBot",
          "agentName": "Social",
          "content": "This conflict indicates a token with potential technical vulnerabilities (unlocked LP, no audits) despite some positive security features (ownership renounced), yet critically lacks community engagement and public awareness. Investors face a high-risk scenario where even if the code is somewhat secure, the absence of social presence means no organic growth, support, or defense against FUD, making it prone to irrelevance or easy manipulation.",
          "round": 2,
          "stance": "noted"
        }
      ]
    },
    {
      "topic": "Devil's Advocate vs TechnicianBot",
      "resolution": "Compromise: 6.0 → 6.2",
      "outcome": "compromise",
      "rounds": [
        {
          "phase": "challenge",
          "agent": "DevilsAdvocate",
          "agentName": "Devil's Advocate",
          "target": "TechnicianBot",
          "targetName": "Technician",
          "content": "⚔️ TechnicianBot's 'moderate' assessment is dangerously naive; 46 transactions in 24 hours for a $270M market cap is not 'active trading' but extreme illiquidity, making the 45.13% top-holder concentration a catastrophic risk. This isn't 'moderate' activity, it's a ghost town with whales controlling the only exit.",
          "round": 1,
          "stance": "challenge"
        },
        {
          "phase": "defense",
          "agent": "TechnicianBot",
          "agentName": "Technician",
          "target": "DevilsAdvocate",
          "targetName": "Devil's Advocate",
          "content": "While acknowledging the extremely low transaction count relative to market cap points to significant illiquidity and heightened concentration risk, the 'moderate' score reflects the presence of a verified contract and a holder count over 11,000, which technically indicates some distribution beyond just the top holders. The 6.0 score balances these foundational technical positives against the severe liquidity and centralization concerns, indicating a token with significant technical hurdles but not entirely devoid of basic structural integrity.",
          "round": 2,
          "stance": "defend"
        },
        {
          "phase": "rebuttal",
          "agent": "DevilsAdvocate",
          "agentName": "Devil's Advocate",
          "target": "TechnicianBot",
          "targetName": "Technician",
          "content": "⚔️ A verified contract and 11,000 holders are superficial metrics when 46 transactions in 24 hours for a $270M market cap confirms extreme illiquidity, making any 'distribution' beyond top holders meaningless for price discovery or exit. The 45.13% top-holder concentration remains a catastrophic risk; these 'foundational technical positives' do not mitigate the reality of a ghost town controlled by whales.",
          "round": 3,
          "stance": "escalate"
        },
        {
          "phase": "resolution",
          "agent": "TechnicianBot",
          "agentName": "Technician",
          "content": "While the Devil's Advocate correctly highlights extreme illiquidity and top-holder concentration, the sheer volume of holders (11,000+) despite low transaction count suggests a broader, albeit currently inactive, interest base that still holds future potential for price discovery, warranting a slight score increase.",
          "round": 4,
          "stance": "compromise"
        }
      ]
    },
    {
      "topic": "Score Calibration",
      "resolution": "Deadlock after 2 round(s), σ=1.05",
      "outcome": "deadlock"
    },
    {
      "topic": "Peer Review",
      "resolution": "DEBATE DEFENSES AND CHALLENGES:\n  [TokenomicsBot] Defense: The MCap/FDV ratio of 1.0 indicates full circulation and no immediate dilution risk, which is a strong positive. However, the extremely low 24-hour tr\n    → Challenges MacroBot: MacroBot's score of 2.0 is too low because the 1.0 MCap/FDV ratio is a significant positive, indicat\n    → Challenges SocialBot: SocialBot's score of 1.0 is too low; while holder concentration and low trading volume are concerns,\n  [SecurityBot] Defense: The token's ownership transferred to a zero address significantly mitigates central control risks, yet the unlocked liquidity pool and absence of audi\n    → Challenges MacroBot: MacroBot's score is too low because the zero-address ownership transfer is a strong security feature\n    → Challenges SocialBot: SocialBot's score is too low as the token's significant market cap and liquidity indicate a level of\n  [TechnicianBot] Defense: The IDOS token demonstrates moderate on-chain activity with 46 transactio"
    }
  ],
  "upgrade_cta": false,
  "warnings": [
    {
      "severity": "info",
      "code": "GOPLUS_OK",
      "message": "No critical GoPlus security flags detected"
    }
  ],
  "scan_tier": "PRO",
  "success": true,
  "og": {
    "title": "VerdictSwarm: IDOS — Score 30/100",
    "description": "The swarm was divided: 2 of 6 agents disagreed significantly on the risk assessment.\n⚖️ Safety vs Social: This conflict indicates a token with potential technical vulnerabilities (unlocked LP, no audi",
    "url": "https://www.vswarm.io/report/0x8a6940912ab777eefd07499e0c39be62fb51d73d"
  }
}