Abelian

Liquidity and market dynamics score 37 out of 100. Liquidity is thin based on on-exchange depth, with $33,626 in 24h volume and a low volume-to-market-cap relationship (0.35%). There is some exchange presence across 2 exchanges, with 2 marked as green and none red, which helps with accessibility. However, the low depth and weak volume-to-mcap suggest higher price-impact risk during larger trades.

Team credibility score 50 out of 100. Public security assessment is limited: there is no deploy or genesis date and no audit data available. The team is anonymous (25), which reduces confidence in accountability. On a positive note, the whitepaper quality is rated 100, indicating strong documentation. Overall, the score reflects decent written materials but limited independent verification and identity transparency.

Social and behavioral score 78 out of 100. Public social presence appears established, with Telegram at 25,299 followers and a linked Twitter account (audience count not provided). The risk signal set is strong: 0 allegations, 0 bad press, 0 regulatory flags, and 0 incidents in the observed dataset, which supports a cleaner behavioral profile. Even with limited social analytics snapshot availability, the combined signals are comparatively favorable.

Contract mechanics score 5 out of 100. Critical safety inputs are largely missing: no contract security scan, no contract verification data, and no ownership data are available, limiting confidence in the technical risk profile. Supply controls are also weak—no hard supply cap is defined, flagged as potential inflation. With 61% of total supply circulating, the contract-level economics look under-parameterized from a safety perspective.

Inherent crypto risk for Abelian (smartcontracttoken): regardless of the available signals, smart-contract tokens carry execution and trust risks. When contract verification, security scanning, and ownership data are unavailable—as shown here—users face greater uncertainty about code correctness and control. Additionally, liquidity depth and supply design (lack of a hard cap) can amplify volatility and reduce protection against changing token economics.