Token Audit Study: 15,008 CoinGecko & CoinMarketCap Tokens¶
Tokens Audited
High Risk
Clean
Chains Covered
Background¶
CoinGecko and CoinMarketCap together list tens of thousands of EVM token contracts - the reference point most retail investors use when deciding whether a token is legitimate. Being listed carries an implicit signal of credibility. This study tests that assumption at scale.
ChainAware ran Token Audit across 15,008 deduplicated EVM contracts drawn from both platforms, covering Ethereum, BSC, Base, Polygon, Arbitrum, Optimism, and Avalanche. 127 security checks were applied across 11 modules. 97.3% of contracts in the dataset had verified source code.
Chain Distribution¶
| Chain | Tokens | Share |
|---|---|---|
| Ethereum | 5,572 | 37.1% |
| BSC | 4,265 | 28.4% |
| Base | 2,609 | 17.4% |
| Arbitrum | 1,038 | 6.9% |
| Polygon | 1,007 | 6.7% |
| Optimism | 286 | 1.9% |
| Avalanche | 231 | 1.5% |
Risk Verdict Distribution¶
| Verdict | Count | Share |
|---|---|---|
| High Risk | 8,661 | 57.7% |
| Suspicious | 3,740 | 24.9% |
| Honeypot | 156 | 1.0% |
| Clean | 2,451 | 16.3% |
83.7% of listed tokens scored below Clean. The listing status of a token on CoinGecko or CoinMarketCap is not a security signal.
Risk by Chain¶
BSC had the worst risk profile of any chain in the dataset. Avalanche performed best, though even there less than 30% of tokens scored Clean.
| Chain | High Risk | Clean |
|---|---|---|
| BSC | 67.4% | 7.5% |
| Optimism | 63.3% | 10.5% |
| Arbitrum | 62.2% | 14.3% |
| Ethereum | 59.7% | 19.9% |
| Polygon | - | - |
| Base | - | - |
| Avalanche | 41.6% | 29.9% |
Primary Risk Drivers¶
No Mint Cap - 35.3% of Tokens¶
5,305 tokens (35.3%) have no cap on the total supply that can be minted. The deployer can expand supply without limit at any point after launch.
Zero tokens with this finding appeared in the Clean verdict bucket. No mint cap is the single strongest predictor of a High Risk verdict in the dataset.
No Timelock - 35.8% of Tokens¶
5,373 tokens (35.8%) have no timelock on administrative functions, allowing a single transaction to alter protocol parameters without advance notice to holders.
Liquidity Findings¶
Liquidity analysis revealed a significant share of listed tokens with no accessible market at all:
| Finding | Count | Share |
|---|---|---|
| No Pool Found | 4,343 | 28.9% |
| LP Unlocked | 7,423 | 49.5% |
| Critical TVL (under $1,000) | 3,911 | 26.1% |
| Low TVL (under $10,000) | 3,051 | 20.3% |
| Partial LP Lock | 271 | 1.8% |
28.9% of listed tokens have no liquidity on any tracked DEX - they cannot be sold. 49.5% have LP controlled entirely by the deployer, who can drain the pool at will.
Proxy and Upgradeability¶
5,235 tokens (34.9%) are upgradeable proxy contracts - the underlying logic can be replaced after deployment. Of those:
- EOA single-key controlled: 118 tokens - a single private key can rewrite the contract
- Multisig controlled: 31 tokens
- DAO / protocol governed: 1,324 tokens
Honeypots¶
156 confirmed honeypots were identified (1.0%). Common patterns among those 156:
| Pattern | Share of Honeypots |
|---|---|
| Custom transfer entry points | 56% |
| Layered transfer delegation | 51% |
| Unexpected events in transfers | 47% |
| Obfuscated variable names | 36% |
| Blacklist functions | 29% |
| Excessive branching | 28% |
Additional High-Risk Patterns¶
| Finding | Count | Share |
|---|---|---|
| Hidden mint functions | 980 | 6.5% |
| Asymmetric pause patterns | 718 | 4.8% |
| Fake burn functions | 330 | - |
| Currently paused tokens | 30 | - |
Risk Score Distribution¶
| Metric | Score |
|---|---|
| Mean | 102.2 |
| Median | 100.0 |
| 25th percentile | 55.0 |
| 75th percentile | 145.0 |
| Maximum | 1,375 |
Scores are additive - each triggered finding contributes its weighted severity to the total. A score of 1,375 represents a contract with critical findings across multiple modules simultaneously.
Products Used¶
- Token Audit - 127 checks across 11 modules: Ownership, Supply, Liquidity, Transfer, Approve, Permit, Pausability, Reentrancy, Honeypot, and more
- ChainAware Behavioral Database - 23M+ wallet profiles supporting deployer wallet analysis
- Source: CoinGecko + CoinMarketCap combined, deduplicated
Audit a Token → Token Audit Documentation →
Further Reading¶
- Full Study: Token Audit of 15,008 CoinGecko & CoinMarketCap Tokens (2026) - complete chain-by-chain breakdown, module analysis, and methodology
- Token Audit - full module and findings reference
- Token Audit Modules - all 129 individual findings with severity ratings
- Rug Pull on PancakeSwap V2 - 103,695 rug pull events, $569M extracted, 90.1% V3 detection accuracy
Dataset: 15,008 EVM contracts from CoinGecko and CoinMarketCap, 97.3% source-verified. Full methodology →