AINFT

Liquidity and market dynamics score 88 out of 100. The token shows a strong volume-to-market-cap relationship (Vol/MCap of 3.53%) and solid liquidity depth, with $11,309,872 in 24h volume. Exchange listing data is extensive (34 exchanges total), with a favorable mix of statuses (14 green, 16 yellow, 2 red), which generally supports healthier tradability.

Team credibility score 86 out of 100. Public records indicate the team is publicly identified, and there are 2 audit firm(s) on record. Audit coverage is relatively strong (80), while the whitepaper quality is rated medium (70). One limitation is that there is no deploy or genesis date available, which reduces historical context but does not negate the other credibility signals.

Social and behavioral score 74 out of 100. Social audience data is available for Telegram (28,767) and Twitter is marked as linked with limited audience metrics, while sentiment is evenly split (50% up / 50% down). Agent risk signals are clean in the provided snapshot: 0 allegations, 0 bad press, 0 regulatory flags, and 0 incidents. This supports a generally stable social profile in the available data.

Contract mechanics score 5 out of 100. Core safety checks are missing or not provided: there is no contract security scan, no contract verification data, no ownership safety data, and no block explorer data in the inputs. While a hard supply cap is defined (999,990,000,000,000) and circulation is complete (100% of total supply circulating), the lack of verification and security assessment is the dominant risk factor.

Inherent crypto risk for AINFT remains elevated primarily because smart-contract and verification/ownership data are not available in the provided inputs. Even with strong liquidity and team/audit signals, the inability to confirm contract safety and parameters via public records means investors cannot reliably assess technical risk, upgradeability, or administrative controls from the data shown.