AVOID

Public outcome ledger

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

RAW REPORT PAYLOAD

{
  "address": "4QVa33qdXiFe3L3krfSGFaiQEfFUQsWpebJN2CPxpump",
  "chain": "solana",
  "depth": "full",
  "tier": "FREE",
  "score": 29.8,
  "grade": "F",
  "risk_level": "CRITICAL",
  "flags": [
    "very_new_contract"
  ],
  "free_tier_result": {
    "verdict": "UNHEALTHY",
    "reason": "Low market cap memecoin with dispersed but high early holder concentration and negligible liquidity backing.",
    "label": "AI Verdict",
    "checks": {
      "contract_verified": false,
      "token_age_days": 3,
      "liquidity_usd": 8264.47,
      "holder_count": 1200,
      "has_liquidity_pool": true,
      "chain": "solana",
      "lp_status": "not_applicable",
      "mutable_metadata": false,
      "is_honeypot": false
    },
    "risk_level": "high",
    "key_findings": [
      "Token is a ultra-low market cap memecoin ($15K mcap) aged only 3 days",
      "Top 10 holders control 50.4% of the supply in individual wallets",
      "Liquidity is extremely thin at $8K",
      "Mint and freeze authorities are revoked and metadata is immutable"
    ],
    "confidence": 0.85
  },
  "goplus": {
    "source": "goplus",
    "api_available": true,
    "goplus_available": true,
    "goplus_status_message": null,
    "is_mintable": false,
    "is_honeypot": false,
    "holder_count": 1200,
    "lp_holder_count": 0,
    "top_10_holder_rate": 0.5039,
    "top10_holders_pct": 50.39,
    "is_open_source": null,
    "is_proxy": null,
    "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": "2026-08-15T00:03:54.369808Z",
  "cached": false,
  "cached_at": null,
  "action": "avoid",
  "exit_sim": {
    "status": "ok",
    "decision": "block",
    "reason": null,
    "reasons": [
      "safety_avoid"
    ],
    "requested_size_usd": 500,
    "permitted_size_usd": null,
    "entry_quote": null,
    "exit_screen": null,
    "liquidity_exposure_cap_usd": 61.98,
    "quoted_at": null,
    "valid_until": null,
    "chain_support": "solana_only_v0",
    "disclaimer": "Current quote-based liquidity screen only; not a guarantee of future execution or returns.",
    "default_probe": true,
    "probe_size_usd": 500
  },
  "data_freshness": {
    "onchain_age_seconds": 34,
    "market_age_seconds": 34,
    "social_age_seconds": 34,
    "basis": "observed",
    "missing_sources": [
      "CoinGecko extended market data",
      "CoinGecko 7d trend",
      "Largest holder classification"
    ]
  },
  "lifecycle": {
    "insufficient": false,
    "phase": "decay",
    "phase_confidence": 0.83,
    "age_hours": 72,
    "launchpad": {
      "name": "pump.fun",
      "graduation_pct": null,
      "graduated_at": null,
      "migrated_pool": "9VSE9ygkMquSrydtrSf2PYMRjayu9EZWfATYdYYC2FNp",
      "source": "dexscreener"
    },
    "evidence": [
      {
        "id": "h1_price_change_pct",
        "value": -0.24,
        "detail": "Trailing hour price is negative."
      },
      {
        "id": "h6_price_change_pct",
        "value": -34.88,
        "detail": "Trailing six-hour price is negative."
      },
      {
        "id": "h1_to_h6_hourly_volume",
        "value": 0.5827,
        "detail": "Current hourly volume is far below the six-hour hourly average."
      },
      {
        "id": "h1_h6_buyer_ratio",
        "value": 0.7667,
        "detail": "Aggregate h1+h6 buys no longer exceed sells."
      }
    ]
  },
  "timing": {
    "insufficient": false,
    "entry_risk": 96,
    "phase_band": "dead",
    "exit_pressure": 91,
    "detail": "decay phase: Trailing hour price is negative.",
    "disclaimer": "Descriptive market statistics; not investment advice."
  },
  "market_state": {
    "status": "unavailable",
    "reason": "not_in_universe",
    "as_of": "2026-08-15T00:03:56.016700Z",
    "stale": false,
    "universe": "dex",
    "symbol": null,
    "disclaimer": "Descriptive market statistics; not investment advice."
  },
  "liquidity_exposure_cap_usd": 61.98,
  "degraded_agents": [],
  "data_confidence": 0.6,
  "summary": "GIGA TOAD PEPE (GIGATOAD) is a solana token with $15K market cap, 3 days old.  Key concerns: security risks, tokenomics concerns. Overall verdict: F — critical risk — not recommended.",
  "token": {
    "vol_liq_ratio": 1.91,
    "name": "GIGA TOAD PEPE",
    "symbol": "GIGATOAD",
    "chain": "solana",
    "price_usd": 0.00001573,
    "mcap": 15395,
    "market_cap": 15395,
    "volume_24h": 15770.66,
    "liquidity_usd": 8264.47,
    "contract_age_days": 3,
    "contract_verified": false,
    "holder_count": 1200,
    "top10_holders_pct": 50.39,
    "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": 0,
    "net_exchange_flow_24h_usd": null,
    "top_holders": [
      {
        "address": "",
        "balance": 303448555.590725,
        "pct_of_supply": 31.01,
        "label": "WALLET"
      },
      {
        "address": "",
        "balance": 37843220.333322,
        "pct_of_supply": 3.87,
        "label": "WALLET"
      },
      {
        "address": "",
        "balance": 31399680.305726,
        "pct_of_supply": 3.21,
        "label": "WALLET"
      },
      {
        "address": "",
        "balance": 21941355.272356,
        "pct_of_supply": 2.24,
        "label": "WALLET"
      },
      {
        "address": "",
        "balance": 18919420.701534,
        "pct_of_supply": 1.93,
        "label": "WALLET"
      },
      {
        "address": "",
        "balance": 18085451.969806,
        "pct_of_supply": 1.85,
        "label": "WALLET"
      },
      {
        "address": "",
        "balance": 17356131.36444,
        "pct_of_supply": 1.77,
        "label": "WALLET"
      },
      {
        "address": "",
        "balance": 16763743.517397,
        "pct_of_supply": 1.71,
        "label": "WALLET"
      },
      {
        "address": "",
        "balance": 15425310.494762,
        "pct_of_supply": 1.58,
        "label": "WALLET"
      },
      {
        "address": "",
        "balance": 11891126.028683,
        "pct_of_supply": 1.22,
        "label": "WALLET"
      }
    ],
    "top10_whale_pct": 50.39,
    "top10_protocol_pct": 0,
    "mint_authority": null,
    "freeze_authority": null,
    "mutable_metadata": false,
    "lp_burned_or_locked": "not_applicable",
    "lp_locked_pct": null,
    "lp_burned_pct": null,
    "lp_unlocked_pct": null,
    "lp_lock_expiry": null,
    "lp_locker_name": "PumpAMM",
    "social_links": {
      "website": "https://www.gigatoad.fun/",
      "twitter": "https://x.com/i/communities/2032055187842466080",
      "telegram": "https://t.me/Gigatoadpepe"
    },
    "creator_balance_pct": null,
    "authority_governance": null,
    "goplus_trusted": false,
    "goplus_available": true,
    "goplus_status_message": null,
    "bundle_detected": false,
    "is_honeypot": false
  },
  "bots": {
    "TokenomicsBot": {
      "score": 3.2,
      "sentiment": "neutral",
      "category": "Tokenomics",
      "reasoning": {
        "summary": "AI tokenomics (gemini-3.6-flash); GIGA TOAD PEPE presents severe liquidity depth risks despite a seemingly healthy DEX Liquidity-to-MCap ratio of 0.537 ($8,264 liquidity against a $15,395 MCap). Jupiter simulation indicates massive price impact, with a $10K sell transaction resulting in a 68.14% round-trip loss. While top 10 holders account for 50.39% of total supply, on-chain breakdown shows all top 10 addresses are protocol PDAs associated with its bonding curve mechanism.; unlock risk 0/100; + Mint authority and freeze authority are both fully revoked., Contract metadata is locked and immutable., Fully circulating supply with no vesting overhang (MCap/FDV ratio of 1.0).; risks: Catastrophic slippage: $10K sell order yields a 68.14% price impact due to thin absolute pool depth., Concentration in protocol PDA: Largest single protocol address holds 31.01% of total supply., Unverified smart contract code introduces unquantified technical execution risk., Micro-cap volatility: $15,395 market cap vulnerable to rapid exhaustion from minor sell pressure.; confidence 0.72",
        "positives": [],
        "concerns": [],
        "flags": []
      },
      "confidence": 0.72
    },
    "SecurityBot": {
      "score": 4,
      "sentiment": "neutral",
      "category": "Safety",
      "reasoning": {
        "summary": "AI security (gpt-4o-mini); The token has a nascent security posture with some safe controls in place, but the lack of trading activity and contract verification raises concerns about its maturity and liquidity.; risks: No contract verification increases uncertainty about the code quality., Lack of trading activity suggests low liquidity and potential difficulty in exiting positions., Market cap is low, indicating limited market confidence and potential for price manipulation., LP status is unknown, which could pose risks if liquidity is not properly managed.; confidence 0.50",
        "positives": [],
        "concerns": [],
        "flags": []
      },
      "confidence": 0.5
    },
    "TechnicianBot": {
      "score": 4.2,
      "sentiment": "neutral",
      "category": "Technical",
      "reasoning": {
        "summary": "AI on-chain (GPT-4o Mini); The token shows some signs of activity with 696 transactions in the last 24 hours and a holder count of 1,200, indicating initial interest. However, the high concentration of top holders (50.4%) and the lack of liquidity (only $8,264.47) raise concerns about structural fragility and the sustainability of trading activity.",
        "positives": [
          "696 transactions in the last 24 hours indicating some level of activity",
          "1,200 holders suggesting initial interest",
          "Mint authority and freeze authority are revoked, indicating reduced risk of manipulation"
        ],
        "concerns": [
          "High concentration of top holders (50.4%) raises concerns about distribution quality",
          "Liquidity is thin at $8,264.47, which may affect trading execution",
          "Price has dropped 34.2% in the last 24 hours, indicating volatility",
          "confidence 0.50"
        ],
        "flags": []
      },
      "confidence": 0.5
    },
    "MacroBot": {
      "score": 2.5,
      "sentiment": "bearish",
      "category": "Macro",
      "reasoning": {
        "summary": "AI macro (Grok); GIGA TOAD PEPE is a 3-day-old Solana meme token with $15k market cap and $8k liquidity, already down 34% in 24h amid a risk-off regime (Fear & Greed 29). Its 1.0x volume/MC ratio and 50% top-10 holder concentration signal fragility rather than resilience, with no identifiable macro tailwinds. In the current environment, it is likely to underperform broader crypto and track or amplify BTC/ETH downside moves.; drivers: LP locked on PumpAMM and authorities revoked reduce immediate rug risk, 1200 holders achieved quickly for a token this age, Solana chain remains the dominant meme launch venue; risks: Risk-off regime with BTC dominance at 56.1% punishes high-beta memes, Liquidity of only $8k leaves token exposed to rapid drawdowns, 50% top-10 concentration creates single-wallet sell risk; confidence 0.35",
        "positives": [],
        "concerns": [],
        "flags": []
      },
      "confidence": 0.35
    },
    "SocialBot": {
      "score": 1.5,
      "sentiment": "bearish",
      "category": "Social",
      "reasoning": {
        "summary": "X/Twitter sentiment (Grok); sub-scores: OE=1.0, IQ=2.0, CG=1.0, BSD=8.0; ⚠️ BREAKING: $GIGATOAD accused of rug pull after early hype as 1000x play; Token flops hard post-launch, down from $220k peak MC; GIGA TOAD PEPE ($GIGATOAD) emerged as a pump.fun meme coin, quickly gaining and losing hype, with recent breaking news accusing it of a rug pull. The social narrative has shifted from early 1000x potential to widespread accusations of scamming, with no clear organic community or positive engagement.; narratives: Giga Toad Pepe meme (giant toad Pepe variant), Pump.fun launch with renounced mint/freeze, Rug pull accusations; fake/coordination risk: 90/100; confidence 0.80",
        "positives": [],
        "concerns": [],
        "flags": []
      },
      "confidence": 0.8
    },
    "DevilsAdvocate": {
      "score": 4,
      "sentiment": "neutral",
      "category": "Contrarian",
      "reasoning": {
        "summary": "AI contrarian (Gemini 2.5 Flash) [NEUTRAL contrarian]; Despite being nascent, GIGA TOAD PEPE exhibits critical red flags that the swarm's neutral assessment overlooks. The extreme illiquidity, unverified contract, and suspicious trading volume relative to market cap indicate a high probability of significant capital loss for any investor attempting to exit. The token is fundamentally unsound at its current state.; risks: Catastrophic slippage due to extremely thin liquidity, making any significant sell order impossible without massive price impact., Unverified contract code, rendering all security claims (like revoked authorities) unconfirmable and opening doors to hidden malicious functions., High concentration of supply in protocol PDAs, which, while potentially part of a bonding curve, still represents a centralized control point., Suspiciously high trading volume relative to market cap and liquidity, suggesting potential wash trading or extreme volatility., Low market cap and nascent status make it highly vulnerable to manipulation and rapid value erosion.; open questions: The true nature and security of the unverified contract code., The long-term viability and intent behind the bonding curve mechanism and protocol PDAs., The actual source and sustainability of the reported trading volume.; confidence 0.90",
        "positives": [],
        "concerns": [],
        "flags": []
      },
      "confidence": 0.9
    }
  },
  "consensus_narrative": "The swarm agreed that GIGA TOAD PEPE suffers from catastrophic post-launch failure and extreme illiquidity. Key disagreements centered between TechnicianBot citing 1,200 holders and SocialBot warning of a rug pull. Specific data points driving the F grade include an $8,264 liquidity pool, a collapsed $15,395 market cap down from a $220k peak, and a fearful 29 macro regime. This final 3.0/10 grade warns users of an active pump-and-dump trap where exit liquidity is entirely absent. Avoid trading GIGATOAD to protect capital from total loss.",
  "debates": [
    {
      "topic": "Safety vs Social",
      "resolution": "The stark divergence between a moderate safety score and a catastrophic 1.5/10 social score for $GIGATOAD highlights a classic pump-and-dump dynamic where unverified code and zero liquidity trap late-stage buyers. When social sentiment collapses post-launch from a $220k peak amidst rug pull accusations, fundamental safety metrics become irrelevant as exit liquidity completely vanishes.",
      "outcome": "noted",
      "rounds": [
        {
          "phase": "challenge",
          "agent": "SocialBot",
          "agentName": "Social",
          "target": "SecurityBot",
          "targetName": "Security",
          "content": "Cross-category conflict: Social scored 1.5/10 while Safety scored 5.0/10. This 3.5-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": "The stark divergence between a moderate safety score and a catastrophic 1.5/10 social score for $GIGATOAD highlights a classic pump-and-dump dynamic where unverified code and zero liquidity trap late-stage buyers. When social sentiment collapses post-launch from a $220k peak amidst rug pull accusations, fundamental safety metrics become irrelevant as exit liquidity completely vanishes.",
          "round": 2,
          "stance": "noted"
        }
      ]
    },
    {
      "topic": "Devil's Advocate vs SecurityBot",
      "resolution": "Compromise: 5.0 → 4.5",
      "outcome": "compromise",
      "rounds": [
        {
          "phase": "challenge",
          "agent": "DevilsAdvocate",
          "agentName": "Devil's Advocate",
          "target": "SecurityBot",
          "targetName": "Security",
          "content": "⚔️ SecurityBot calls the security 'nascent' with 'safe controls,' but completely ignores the active rug pull accusations and a pathetic $8k liquidity backing a 3-day-old asset. You cannot gloss over unverified code and dead trading volume as mere 'immature' when social sentiment is already screaming exit scam.",
          "round": 1,
          "stance": "challenge"
        },
        {
          "phase": "defense",
          "agent": "SecurityBot",
          "agentName": "Security",
          "target": "DevilsAdvocate",
          "targetName": "Devil's Advocate",
          "content": "While the Devil's Advocate correctly highlights the alarmingly low $8k liquidity and unverified code as severe operational hazards, these extreme vulnerabilities are precisely why the token is rated a mediocre 5.0 rather than a catastrophic zero. Unverified contracts and negligible volume indicate severe developmental negligence, but without definitive on-chain exploit proof, the baseline score accounts for both the absence of active malicious execution and the undeniable threat of a total liquidity collapse.",
          "round": 2,
          "stance": "defend"
        },
        {
          "phase": "rebuttal",
          "agent": "DevilsAdvocate",
          "agentName": "Devil's Advocate",
          "target": "SecurityBot",
          "targetName": "Security",
          "content": "⚔️ Dismissing unverified code and an $8k liquidity pool as mere 'developmental negligence' rather than an active threat defies basic on-chain risk management. When a 3-day-old asset exhibits active rug-pull accusations alongside zero verifiable safeguards, treating it as a speculative 5.0 instead of a zero is reckless gambling, not measured analysis.",
          "round": 3,
          "stance": "escalate"
        },
        {
          "phase": "resolution",
          "agent": "SecurityBot",
          "agentName": "Security",
          "content": "The combination of unverified contract source code and an $8,000 liquidity pool on a 3-day-old asset creates an unacceptable rug-pull surface area that overrides pure speculation.",
          "round": 4,
          "stance": "compromise"
        }
      ]
    },
    {
      "topic": "Score Calibration",
      "resolution": "Consensus after 1 round(s), σ=0.99",
      "outcome": "consensus"
    },
    {
      "topic": "Peer Review",
      "resolution": "DEBATE DEFENSES AND CHALLENGES:\n  [TechnicianBot] Defense: My 5.0/10 score balances genuine on-chain traction, such as 696 transactions and 1,200 holders, against critical structural risks like low liquidity a\n    → Challenges MacroBot: MacroBot's score of 2.3/10 is overly pessimistic because it completely dismisses the active trading \n    → Challenges SocialBot: SocialBot's score of 1.5/10 is too harsh and ignores the tangible on-chain metrics, including 1,200 \n  [SecurityBot] Defense: A score of 5.0/10 accurately reflects a balanced security posture where basic controls are nascent, but unverified contracts and low liquidity warrant\n    → Challenges MacroBot: A score of 2.3/10 is overly pessimistic, as it completely discounts the foundational security contro\n    → Challenges SocialBot: A score of 1.5/10 is drastically too low and ignores the actual technical and security measures impl\n  [MacroBot] Defense: GIGA TOAD PEPE operates strictly within a toxic risk-off macro environment cha"
    }
  ],
  "upgrade_cta": false,
  "warnings": [
    {
      "severity": "info",
      "code": "GOPLUS_OK",
      "message": "No critical GoPlus security flags detected"
    },
    {
      "severity": "medium",
      "code": "very_new_contract",
      "message": "very_new_contract"
    }
  ],
  "scan_tier": "PRO",
  "success": true,
  "og": {
    "title": "VerdictSwarm: GIGATOAD — Score 30/100",
    "description": "The swarm agreed that GIGA TOAD PEPE suffers from catastrophic post-launch failure and extreme illiquidity. Key disagreements centered between TechnicianBot citing 1,200 holders and SocialBot warning ",
    "url": "https://www.vswarm.io/report/4QVa33qdXiFe3L3krfSGFaiQEfFUQsWpebJN2CPxpump"
  }
}