UNSETTLED

Public outcome ledger

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

RAW REPORT PAYLOAD

{
  "address": "0xaf4b5982bc89201551f1ed2518775a79a2705d47",
  "chain": "base",
  "depth": "full",
  "tier": "FREE",
  "score": 23,
  "grade": "F",
  "risk_level": "CRITICAL",
  "flags": [
    "high_holder_concentration"
  ],
  "free_tier_result": {
    "verdict": "UNHEALTHY",
    "reason": "This token is unlaunched, has no liquidity, no market cap, and an extremely concentrated holder distribution, making it untradable and highly susceptible to a developer dump if ever launched.",
    "label": "AI Verdict",
    "checks": {
      "contract_verified": true,
      "token_age_days": 0,
      "liquidity_usd": 0,
      "holder_count": 118,
      "has_liquidity_pool": false,
      "chain": "base"
    },
    "risk_level": "critical",
    "key_findings": [
      "Token is 0 days old with $0.00 price, market cap, volume, and liquidity, indicating it is unlaunched or completely dead.",
      "Top 10 holders control 99.9% of the supply, with 0% attributed to protocol-controlled wallets, signifying extreme centralization.",
      "Mint and Freeze authorities are revoked, which is a positive, but irrelevant given the token's unlaunched state and concentration.",
      "No social presence or external risk data (RugCheck N/A) for a token with no market activity."
    ],
    "confidence": 1
  },
  "goplus": {
    "source": "goplus",
    "api_available": true,
    "goplus_available": true,
    "goplus_status_message": null,
    "is_mintable": false,
    "is_honeypot": false,
    "holder_count": 118,
    "lp_holder_count": null,
    "top_10_holder_rate": 0.9990000000000001,
    "top10_holders_pct": 99.9,
    "is_open_source": true,
    "is_proxy": false,
    "lp_burned_or_locked": null,
    "security_findings": [
      {
        "source": "goplus",
        "code": "TOP10_CONCENTRATION",
        "severity": "high",
        "message": "Top 10 holders concentration is very high",
        "value": 99.9
      }
    ]
  },
  "security_findings": [
    {
      "source": "goplus",
      "code": "TOP10_CONCENTRATION",
      "severity": "high",
      "message": "Top 10 holders concentration is very high",
      "value": 99.9
    }
  ],
  "scanned_at": "2026-04-23T14:13:50.886705Z",
  "cached": false,
  "cached_at": null,
  "liquidity_exposure_cap_usd": 0,
  "summary": "Unknown Token () is a base token with verified contract.  Key concerns: security risks, tokenomics concerns. Overall verdict: F — critical risk — not recommended.",
  "token": {
    "vol_liq_ratio": null,
    "name": "",
    "symbol": "",
    "chain": "base",
    "price_usd": 0,
    "mcap": 0,
    "market_cap": 0,
    "volume_24h": 0,
    "liquidity_usd": 0,
    "contract_age_days": 0,
    "contract_verified": true,
    "holder_count": 118,
    "top10_holders_pct": 99.9,
    "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": null,
    "lp_locked_pct": null,
    "lp_burned_pct": null,
    "lp_unlocked_pct": null,
    "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": {
    "MacroBot": {
      "score": 5,
      "sentiment": "neutral",
      "category": "Macro",
      "reasoning": {
        "summary": "AI macro (Grok); Given the nascent nature of this token and the lack of available data, it is positioned neutrally within the current market regime. The absence of liquidity and market cap data suggests fragility, but the token's recent deployment means it could capture interest if market conditions improve.; drivers: Potential for speculative interest as a new token, Market sentiment is neutral, allowing for potential upside, Low liquidity could attract early investors looking for high-risk, high-reward opportunities; risks: Extremely low liquidity and market cap make it vulnerable to sharp drawdowns, High concentration of supply among top holders (99.9%) poses risks of manipulation, Lack of established trading volume and market presence could hinder adoption; confidence 0.40",
        "positives": [],
        "concerns": [],
        "flags": []
      },
      "confidence": 0.4,
      "structured_findings": {
        "summary": "Given the nascent nature of this token and the lack of available data, it is positioned neutrally within the current market regime. The absence of liquidity and market cap data suggests fragility, but the token's recent deployment means it could capture interest if market conditions improve.",
        "key_drivers": [
          "Potential for speculative interest as a new token",
          "Market sentiment is neutral, allowing for potential upside",
          "Low liquidity could attract early investors looking for high-risk, high-reward opportunities",
          "Recent deployment may lead to community engagement and promotion"
        ],
        "key_risks": [
          "Extremely low liquidity and market cap make it vulnerable to sharp drawdowns",
          "High concentration of supply among top holders (99.9%) poses risks of manipulation",
          "Lack of established trading volume and market presence could hinder adoption",
          "Current macro conditions are mixed, with BTC and ETH showing negative trends"
        ],
        "correlations": {
          "btc": "likely to track BTC due to nascent status",
          "eth": "similar to BTC, expected to follow ETH trends",
          "rates": "not directly correlated due to lack of established data",
          "dxy": "not directly correlated due to lack of established data"
        },
        "sector_outlook": "The token's sector is currently undefined, but its nascent status suggests it may be in a speculative phase, which could attract interest if broader market sentiment shifts positively.",
        "confidence": 0.4,
        "volume_24h": 0,
        "mcap": 0
      }
    },
    "TechnicianBot": {
      "score": 1,
      "sentiment": "bearish",
      "category": "Technical",
      "reasoning": {
        "summary": "AI on-chain (GPT-4o Mini); The token exhibits extremely poor on-chain health, with no recorded transactions and a highly concentrated holder distribution where the top 10 holders control 99.9% of the supply. The absence of liquidity and market activity indicates a fragile structure, making it unlikely to support healthy trading dynamics.",
        "positives": [
          "Contract is verified on the Base chain",
          "Holder count is relatively decent for a nascent token at 118",
          "Contract age is recorded as 0 days, indicating it is very new"
        ],
        "concerns": [
          "24-hour transaction count is 0, indicating no trading activity",
          "Top 10 holders control 99.9% of the token supply, showing extreme concentration",
          "Liquidity is reported as 0.00 USD, indicating no market depth",
          "confidence 0.00"
        ],
        "flags": []
      },
      "confidence": 1,
      "structured_findings": {
        "summary": "The token exhibits extremely poor on-chain health, with no recorded transactions and a highly concentrated holder distribution where the top 10 holders control 99.9% of the supply. The absence of liquidity and market activity indicates a fragile structure, making it unlikely to support healthy trading dynamics.",
        "positives": [
          "Contract is verified on the Base chain.",
          "Holder count is relatively decent for a nascent token at 118.",
          "Contract age is recorded as 0 days, indicating it is very new.",
          "No negative signals from missing data, as gaps are expected for this maturity tier."
        ],
        "negatives": [
          "24-hour transaction count is 0, indicating no trading activity.",
          "Top 10 holders control 99.9% of the token supply, showing extreme concentration.",
          "Liquidity is reported as 0.00 USD, indicating no market depth.",
          "Market cap and price are both reported as 0.00 USD, suggesting no valuation."
        ],
        "anomaly_flags": [],
        "confidence": 0,
        "contract_age_days": 0,
        "tx_count_24h": 0,
        "volume_24h": 0,
        "price_usd": 0
      }
    },
    "TokenomicsBot": {
      "score": 1.5,
      "sentiment": "bearish",
      "category": "Tokenomics",
      "reasoning": {
        "summary": "AI tokenomics (Gemini 2.5 Flash); This token is 0 days old with all market metrics (price, volume, liquidity, market cap, FDV) reported as $0, indicating it has not yet launched or gained any market traction. The top 10 holders control 99.9% of the supply, which is extremely concentrated, even for a nascent token, and suggests significant insider control or a pre-launch state. With no active liquidity or trading, the tokenomics are currently non-functional and highly speculative.; unlock risk: uncertain; + Contract is verified on the Base chain, providing basic transparency for the code., The token is extremely nascent (0 days old), meaning there is still a theoretical opportunity for organic distribution if the project launches properly., The exclusion of Virtuals Protocol infrastructure from concentration metrics is a positive for data accuracy, though the remaining concentration is still extreme.; risks: Extreme holder concentration (99.9% by top 10) indicates severe insider control and high risk of manipulation., Zero market activity (price, volume, liquidity, market cap, FDV all $0) means the token has no established value or tradability., Lack of liquidity and trading history makes any future valuation highly speculative and prone to volatility., Absence of project description, team status, and token name/symbol creates a high information vacuum, increasing investment risk.; confidence 0.80",
        "positives": [],
        "concerns": [],
        "flags": []
      },
      "confidence": 0.8,
      "structured_findings": {
        "summary": "This token is 0 days old with all market metrics (price, volume, liquidity, market cap, FDV) reported as $0, indicating it has not yet launched or gained any market traction. The top 10 holders control 99.9% of the supply, which is extremely concentrated, even for a nascent token, and suggests significant insider control or a pre-launch state. With no active liquidity or trading, the tokenomics are currently non-functional and highly speculative.",
        "key_risks": [
          "Extreme holder concentration (99.9% by top 10) indicates severe insider control and high risk of manipulation.",
          "Zero market activity (price, volume, liquidity, market cap, FDV all $0) means the token has no established value or tradability.",
          "Lack of liquidity and trading history makes any future valuation highly speculative and prone to volatility.",
          "Absence of project description, team status, and token name/symbol creates a high information vacuum, increasing investment risk.",
          "Potential for a 'soft rug' or immediate sell-off by concentrated holders once liquidity is added."
        ],
        "positives": [
          "Contract is verified on the Base chain, providing basic transparency for the code.",
          "The token is extremely nascent (0 days old), meaning there is still a theoretical opportunity for organic distribution if the project launches properly.",
          "The exclusion of Virtuals Protocol infrastructure from concentration metrics is a positive for data accuracy, though the remaining concentration is still extreme."
        ],
        "unlock_risk": "uncertain",
        "distribution_assessment": "The distribution is extremely concentrated, with 99.9% of the supply held by the top 10 wallets out of 118 total holders. While some concentration is expected for a nascent token, this level, combined with zero market activity, suggests the token is either in a pre-launch phase or controlled almost entirely by insiders. This poses a severe risk of manipulation and rug pull once liquidity is established.",
        "comparable_models": {
          "successful": [],
          "failed": [
            "Many tokens with 99%+ top-holder concentration at launch, often leading to rug pulls or immediate price collapse upon initial liquidity provision."
          ]
        },
        "confidence": 0.8,
        "mcap": 0,
        "fdv": 0,
        "mcap_fdv_ratio": null,
        "top10_holders_pct": 99.9,
        "holder_count": 118,
        "liquidity_usd": 0,
        "liquidity_mcap_ratio": null
      }
    },
    "SecurityBot": {
      "score": 1,
      "sentiment": "bearish",
      "category": "Safety",
      "reasoning": {
        "summary": "AI security (gpt-4o-mini); The token exhibits significant risks due to its nascent status, extreme holder concentration, and lack of governance transparency. The absence of liquidity and market activity further exacerbates the risk profile.; CRITICAL: Extreme holder concentration (99.9% held by top 10 holders)., No liquidity or market activity reported., Contract is newly deployed with no historical data., Missing governance and creator information.; risks: Top 10 holders control 99.9% of the token supply, indicating extreme centralization., Contract is newly deployed (0 days old) with no historical activity or market presence., No liquidity reported, which poses a risk of illiquidity and inability to sell., Lack of governance information raises concerns about potential misuse of privileges.; confidence 0.20",
        "positives": [],
        "concerns": [],
        "flags": []
      },
      "confidence": 0.2,
      "structured_findings": {
        "summary": "The token exhibits significant risks due to its nascent status, extreme holder concentration, and lack of governance transparency. The absence of liquidity and market activity further exacerbates the risk profile.",
        "key_risks": [
          "Top 10 holders control 99.9% of the token supply, indicating extreme centralization.",
          "Contract is newly deployed (0 days old) with no historical activity or market presence.",
          "No liquidity reported, which poses a risk of illiquidity and inability to sell.",
          "Lack of governance information raises concerns about potential misuse of privileges.",
          "No audit or third-party verification available, increasing the risk of undiscovered vulnerabilities."
        ],
        "critical_flags": [
          "Extreme holder concentration (99.9% held by top 10 holders).",
          "No liquidity or market activity reported.",
          "Contract is newly deployed with no historical data.",
          "Missing governance and creator information.",
          "No audit or security review available."
        ],
        "confidence": 0.2,
        "mint_authority": null,
        "freeze_authority": null,
        "lp_status": null,
        "contract_verified": true
      }
    },
    "SocialBot": {
      "score": 5,
      "sentiment": "neutral",
      "category": "Social",
      "reasoning": {
        "summary": "X/Twitter sentiment (Grok); sub-scores: OE=5.0, IQ=5.0, CG=5.0, BSD=5.0; No detectable social activity or mentions on X/Twitter for this nascent token. Expected for a 0-day-old project with no pre-fetched social metrics.; fake/coordination risk: 0/100; confidence 0.30",
        "positives": [],
        "concerns": [],
        "flags": []
      },
      "confidence": 0.3,
      "structured_findings": {
        "summary": "No detectable social activity or mentions on X/Twitter for this nascent token. Expected for a 0-day-old project with no pre-fetched social metrics.",
        "fake_engagement_risk": 0,
        "confidence": 0.3,
        "sub_dimensions": {
          "organic_engagement": {
            "score": 5,
            "rationale": "No posts found; neutral as expected for 0-day token.",
            "weight": 0.4
          },
          "influencer_quality": {
            "score": 5,
            "rationale": "No mentions; no data to assess.",
            "weight": 0.25
          },
          "community_growth": {
            "score": 5,
            "rationale": "No activity; expected gap.",
            "weight": 0.2
          },
          "bot_spam_detection": {
            "score": 5,
            "rationale": "No posts, so no bot risk detected; neutral.",
            "weight": 0.15
          }
        }
      }
    },
    "DevilsAdvocate": {
      "score": 6.5,
      "sentiment": "bullish",
      "category": "Contrarian",
      "reasoning": {
        "summary": "AI contrarian (Gemini 2.5 Flash) [BULL contrarian]; The token, being 0 days old, is in a pre-market or initial distribution phase. The bearish consensus misinterprets expected nascent conditions (zero liquidity, high concentration, no transactions) as fundamental flaws. While security fundamentals (mint/LP status) are unknown, the current data does not confirm a 'failed' or 'scam' status, leaving significant upside potential if a legitimate launch occurs.; risks: Unknown mint authority status: If mint authority is not renounced, it poses a significant centralization risk., Unknown LP lock status: If liquidity is added and not locked, it's vulnerable to a rug pull., Lack of project information: No description or team details makes it impossible to assess legitimacy or future plans., No market activity: While expected, prolonged absence of market activity post-launch would indicate abandonment or failure., Extreme holder concentration: While normal pre-launch, if this persists post-launch without clear distribution, it's a centralization risk.; open questions: Mint authority status (renounced/unrenounced), LP lock status (locked/unlocked), Project's actual launch plan and timeline; confidence 0.75",
        "positives": [],
        "concerns": [],
        "flags": []
      },
      "confidence": 0.75
    }
  },
  "consensus_narrative": "The swarm was divided: 6 of 6 agents disagreed significantly on the risk assessment.\n⚖️ Social vs Safety: This conflict highlights a critical divergence between perceived social sentiment and fundamental security. While SocialBot's neutral score reflects a lack of *negative* social data typical for a new token, SecurityBot identifies severe, immediate risks like 99.9% holder concentration and no liquidity, indicating potential rug pull or manipulation threats. Investors should prioritize SecurityBot's warnings, as strong technical risks can quickly negate any future social interest or adoption.\n⚖️ Devil's Advocate vs MacroBot: Compromise: 5.0 → 5.8\nMost optimistic: Devil's Advocate (6.5/10) — AI contrarian (Gemini 2.\nMost critical: Technician (1.0/10) — AI on-chain (GPT-4o Mini); The token exhibits extremely poor on-chain health, with no recorded transactions and a highly concentrated holder distribution where the top 10 holders control 99.",
  "debates": [
    {
      "topic": "Social vs Safety",
      "resolution": "This conflict highlights a critical divergence between perceived social sentiment and fundamental security. While SocialBot's neutral score reflects a lack of *negative* social data typical for a new token, SecurityBot identifies severe, immediate risks like 99.9% holder concentration and no liquidity, indicating potential rug pull or manipulation threats. Investors should prioritize SecurityBot's warnings, as strong technical risks can quickly negate any future social interest or adoption.",
      "outcome": "noted",
      "rounds": [
        {
          "phase": "challenge",
          "agent": "SecurityBot",
          "agentName": "Security",
          "target": "SocialBot",
          "targetName": "Social",
          "content": "Cross-category conflict: Safety scored 1.0/10 while Social scored 5.0/10. This 4.0-point gap suggests the token's strengths in Social may not translate to Safety reliability.",
          "round": 1,
          "stance": "challenge"
        },
        {
          "phase": "resolution",
          "agent": "SecurityBot",
          "agentName": "Security",
          "content": "This conflict highlights a critical divergence between perceived social sentiment and fundamental security. While SocialBot's neutral score reflects a lack of *negative* social data typical for a new token, SecurityBot identifies severe, immediate risks like 99.9% holder concentration and no liquidity, indicating potential rug pull or manipulation threats. Investors should prioritize SecurityBot's warnings, as strong technical risks can quickly negate any future social interest or adoption.",
          "round": 2,
          "stance": "noted"
        }
      ]
    },
    {
      "topic": "Devil's Advocate vs MacroBot",
      "resolution": "Compromise: 5.0 → 5.8",
      "outcome": "compromise",
      "rounds": [
        {
          "phase": "challenge",
          "agent": "DevilsAdvocate",
          "agentName": "Devil's Advocate",
          "target": "MacroBot",
          "targetName": "Macro",
          "content": "⚔️ MacroBot's 'neutral' stance ignores the stark reality that 99.9% holder concentration and zero liquidity, as highlighted by TechnicianBot and TokenomicsBot, don't just suggest 'fragility' but scream pre-rug pull or non-launch. There's no 'interest to capture' when the token is effectively dead on arrival with no actual market activity or distribution.",
          "round": 1,
          "stance": "challenge"
        },
        {
          "phase": "defense",
          "agent": "MacroBot",
          "agentName": "Macro",
          "target": "DevilsAdvocate",
          "targetName": "Devil's Advocate",
          "content": "While acknowledging the critical concerns of extreme concentration and zero liquidity, my neutral macro score (5.0) reflects the *potential* for speculative interest in new AI-themed tokens, especially if broader market sentiment improves. This score isn't an endorsement of safety but a recognition that even 'dead on arrival' tokens can briefly capture speculative attention in a bullish macro environment, which my analysis considers neutral for nascent projects.",
          "round": 2,
          "stance": "defend"
        },
        {
          "phase": "rebuttal",
          "agent": "DevilsAdvocate",
          "agentName": "Devil's Advocate",
          "target": "MacroBot",
          "targetName": "Macro",
          "content": "⚔️ Macro's 'potential for speculative interest' is moot when 99.9% concentration and zero liquidity signify a token that has no market to speculate *in* or *on*, effectively making it a non-entity rather than a speculative asset. A 'bullish macro environment' cannot create a market where fundamental distribution and liquidity are entirely absent, rendering any 'interest' uncapturable and the token dead on arrival.",
          "round": 3,
          "stance": "escalate"
        },
        {
          "phase": "resolution",
          "agent": "MacroBot",
          "agentName": "Macro",
          "content": "While acknowledging the critical illiquidity and extreme concentration, the potential for a small, strategic market entry or a future liquidity event in a bullish macro environment still presents a non-zero, albeit high-risk, speculative opportunity that was previously undervalued.",
          "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"
    }
  ],
  "scan_tier": "PRO",
  "success": true,
  "og": {
    "title": "VerdictSwarm:  — Score 23/100",
    "description": "The swarm was divided: 6 of 6 agents disagreed significantly on the risk assessment.\n⚖️ Social vs Safety: This conflict highlights a critical divergence between perceived social sentiment and fundamen",
    "url": "https://www.vswarm.io/report/0xaf4b5982bc89201551f1ed2518775a79a2705d47"
  }
}