SCIENTER

0x4319…eced on Ethereum

0x431970583b131e7b8016ca933c513d6fbb5aeced

Rank, not probability. This list orders tokens against each other by a model's risk ranking. A position on it is not a probability that a token will rug, and no such probability is published.

Contract checks

Not checked. GoPlus: too many requests (relay: HTTP 530 with a non-JSON body) This is an absence of analysis, not a finding: nothing here says the token is safe.

Rank
49
of 60 ranked
Decile
9
1 is the riskiest tenth
Percentile
20%
position in the batch, not a probability
Evidence
97%
of model inputs observable

This launch is in the least risky tenth of the ranked launches, and 97% of the model's inputs were observable for this token. Observed 2026-10-04 19:10 UTC, in its first hour of trading.

What moved the rank

  • lowersdeployer: wallet age at launch9% of attribution · observed 136.535
  • lowersLP: liquidity already draining in hour one7% of attribution · observed 1
  • raisessupply: share of total supply put in the pool5% of attribution · observed 1

Evidence

Composite rug score

Automated risk scoring is switched off in this deployment. Scienter publishes forensic findings with citations rather than model output that has not passed its honesty gates. Nothing here is a statement about this address.

Not financial advice. A rank is not an allegation of wrongdoing against any named party. Open the evidence and judge for yourself. Why ranks and not probabilities.