fletch_

$🐸

🐸
0xD796322cc28a7bAbAc1C305757659A56b37142A9explorer β†—
No alarms from the checks we ran. That is not a clean bill of health β€” it means these specific checks found nothing, and every one of them can be defeated by a contract written to defeat it.
trades on
none in scanned window
sell simulation
not run
top holder
β€”
top 10
β€”
$🐸5m · no data

No swaps for this token were indexed in the window we queried β€” from 2026-08-07 17:46 UTC to now. That is a fact about the window, not about the token: it may have traded before that, before the index started, or on a venue this walker does not cover.

Partial history. This series begins where our index window opened β€” 2026-08-05 17:29 UTC, not at this token's first trade. Highs and lows are the extremes WE measured, never all-time.

Prices are read from the sqrtPriceX96 of indexed Uniswap V4 swaps in a single pool, in ETH per token. Other venues and other pools for the same token are not blended in β€” an averaged cross-pool price is a number that never traded.

trade $🐸
1.00% fee
max slippage
simulating…

Routed through Uniswap's router on Robinhood Chain. Simulations describe this block only β€” a contract can behave differently in the next one. Not advice; most new tokens on this chain go to zero.

what this scan could not determine
  • β€” No V2 or V3 pool exists, and no V4 pool was created in the last 120,000 blocks (about 3.3 hours) that this scan walked β€” a V4 pool created earlier would not be seen.
  • β€” No Uniswap pool was found to simulate a buy or a sell against, so the trade simulation did not run.
  • β€” No Transfer events were seen in the scanned window, so holder concentration could not be derived.

These are on-chain measurements taken at 2026-08-08 17:46:30 UTC, not an audit and not advice. A token can change behaviour in the next block: liquidity can be pulled, and a contract can behave differently for you than for this simulation. We never accept payment to change what a scan says.

SYNCING