cryptosnif
IoTeX (IOTX)
Documentary contract0xbcbaf311cec8a4eac0430193a528d9ff27ae38c1
Unrated · 0% Evidence coverage
Operational strength remains unproven; unrated with 0% scoring coverage.
Documentary mechanisms alone cannot establish actual network behavior or investment outcomes.
Inspect the evidenceThe source review explains documented mechanisms. Independent network checks remain pending.
Promise
This dossier examines the documented purpose and mechanisms of IoTeX (IOTX) as presented in community-maintained registry entries for the Base network. The scope is limited to verifying what these specific records state about the asset identity, interface standards, and stated aims. No live network observation, security audit, or independent operational verification has been performed. The analysis focuses strictly on the supplied original summaries and their exact code versions.
Established facts
The pinned Trust Wallet integration record for the Base blockchain identifies a token named IoTeX with the symbol IOTX. The documentary address listed is 0xbcbaf311cec8a4eac0430193a528d9ff27ae38c1. The record specifies 18 decimal places, which defines how amounts are represented internally but does not measure total supply or market value. The entry is labeled BASE and active within the community registry. The description states that this is a BNB pegged version of IoTeX Network issued by Binance on Smart Chain, with a price pegged to the ERC20 version at a ratio of 1:1. These statements are attributed registry claims from the wallet project, not independently verified issuer statements. The Trust Wallet Assets README confirms this is a community-maintained registry where anyone can submit assets, and inclusion does not imply a direct partnership with the listed projects. The ERC-20 specification defines a standard interface for fungible tokens, including functions for total supply, balance checks, transfers, and allowances. An allowance permits a named spender to use a specified amount, and repeated approvals overwrite previous amounts. This standard describes interface requirements for conforming implementations but establishes no independently checked compliance for this specific token.
Unknowns
Present independent control, beneficial ownership, actual usage patterns, client adoption rates, total supply distribution, concentration of holdings, liquidity depth, and complete incident history remain unverified. The dossier may explain stated aims with attribution, but no deployed implementation, rights, safety mechanisms, or investment outcomes were checked. The generic application family identifies only a documentary token subject; its economic niche and scoring criteria remain unclassified. No token transaction was performed in this review. The active status is a metadata label with no live-network validation. Missing evidence makes it impossible to confirm if the pegged mechanism functions as described or if the contract behaves according to the ERC-20 standard in practice.
Consequences
Documentary mechanisms alone cannot establish actual network behavior or investment outcomes. Relying solely on registry labels risks conflating metadata presence with operational reality. Without independent dated network observations, users cannot verify if the address controls the claimed assets or if the peg remains stable under market conditions. The lack of verified supply and control data means risk assessment is incomplete. Any assumption of safety or performance based on registry inclusion is unsupported by this evidence set.
Verdict
Operational strength remains unproven. The asset is unrated with 0% scoring coverage. Critical missing elements include identity verification, supply confirmation, and control structure analysis. The current evidence supports only a documentary record check, not an operational rating. No public admission of liability or independent audit results are available to alter this status.
Evidence that would change it
Reproduced identity checks confirming the address matches the claimed issuer, independent dated network observations verifying transaction flow and peg stability, and criterion-specific evidence for supply, control, and security would be required. Calibration against live blockchain data and editorial review of those findings would be necessary before any score could be assigned. Current market data, return forecasts, or adoption metrics are excluded from this verification scope.
Each check earns its result.
| Check | Weight | Result |
|---|---|---|
| Exact asset identityEssential | 3% | Verification pending |
| Observable use | 15% | Verification pending |
| Economic role of the token | 10% | Verification pending |
| Supply mechanismsEssential | 10% | Verification pending |
| Ownership concentration | 8% | Verification pending |
| Value capture | 7% | Verification pending |
| Control powersEssential | 10% | Verification pending |
| Security verification | 7% | Verification pending |
| Decision process | 8% | Verification pending |
| Accountability | 7% | Verification pending |
| Incident history | 6% | Verification pending |
| Operational continuity | 4% | Verification pending |
| Execution conditions | 5% | Verification pending |
Family-specific checks: Observable usage, token necessity and dependencies.
Inspect the evidence
Sources behind this analysis
Trust Wallet: captured Base record for IoTeX
The pinned Trust Wallet Base integration record names IoTeX with symbol IOTX, documentary address 0xbcbaf311cec8a4eac0430193a528d9ff27ae38c1 and 18 decimal places. Decimal places concern amount representation and do not measure supply or value. The record labels the entry BASE and active. Its community-maintained description states: "BNB pegged IoTeX Network (IOTX BEP20) is a token issued by Binance on Smart Chain; its price is pegged to IoTeX Network (IOTX ERC20) at a ratio of 1:1." Every project, economic, partnership, performance, supply, date and adoption statement within this quoted description is an attributed registry claim, not an independently established issuer statement or operational observation. The dossier may explain those stated aims with that attribution. No deployed implementation, rights, ownership, safety, supply, use or investment outcome was checked. The generic application family identifies only a documentary token subject; its economic niche and scoring criteria remain unclassified and unknown. The general ERC-20 specification is separate from this token implementation.
Inspect the primary source ↗Trust Wallet: pinned Base directory context
The pinned Trust Wallet base network-context record identifies the community registry directory for Base. This supplies documentary network context for entries in the same pinned directory. Promotional statements, network performance, consensus behavior, current deployment and control are not verified or admitted from this context.
Inspect the primary source ↗Trust Wallet Assets: README.md (bbe582d25a22)
The Trust Wallet Assets README describes a community-maintained registry of token information and logos across blockchains, used by the wallet and other projects. It says additional token information is optional and unavailable on-chain. Anyone can submit assets, and inclusion does not imply a direct partnership with the listed projects. It also explicitly excludes brand-new tokens from submissions, so this source cannot provide an exhaustive inventory of recent launches. The README states that its scripts and documentation use the MIT license. This source is the wallet project's own integration registry, maintained with community submissions. Its project descriptions are documentary claims from that registry, not independently verified issuer statements or operational observations. The active status is a metadata label, with no live-network validation. No deployment bytecode, controller, supply, reserve, use, concentration, liquidity, security audit, incident completeness or investment return has been established.
Inspect the primary source ↗Ethereum ERC-20: pinned token interface specification
The pinned ERC-20 specification describes a standard interface for fungible tokens in smart contracts. It defines totalSupply and balanceOf reads, transfers, third-party transfers after authorization, approval and remaining allowance. An allowance is the amount a named spender may use; a repeated approval overwrites that amount. The specification says callers must handle a false transfer result and describes Transfer and Approval events. Name, symbol and decimal-place metadata are optional in the standard. These interface requirements describe what a conforming implementation should do. A wallet ERC20 label establishes no independently checked compliance, actual deployed implementation, controller permissions, token use, supply or security. No token transaction was performed in this review. Copyright and related rights are waived under CC0.
Inspect the primary source ↗Only original summaries are distributed. Licensed raw market data stays private.