Ad
News
Over 95% of tokens launched on Uniswap are scams – Research Over 95% of tokens launched on Uniswap are scams – Research

Over 95% of tokens launched on Uniswap are scams – Research

According to the study, Uniswap's simplicity and lack of regulation make it easy for scammers to list non-valuable tokens.

Over 95% of tokens launched on Uniswap are scams – Research

Cover art/illustration via CryptoSlate. Image includes combined content which may include AI-generated content.

About 97% of the crypto projects launched on Uniswap are rug pulls, according to a recent study titled “Do Not Rug On Me: Zero-Dimensional Scam Detection .”

The study undertaken by  Bruno Mazorra, Victor Adan, and Vanesa Daza suggests that the simplicity of Uniswap and its lack of regulation makes it easy for scammers to list non-valuable tokens on the platform. 

“If a token loses all its liquidity or its price drops to zero and these levels are never recovered, then the probability that the falls are due to malicious intent increases,” the report stated.

It was revealed in the analysis that different techniques are used to trick new investors into buying malicious tokens. Researchers classified malicious and non-malicious tokens manually to find the malicious tokens traded in UniswapV2, as shown below:

Uniswap ploys classification
Source: Malicious Uniswap ploys classification

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

“While this classification will provide a clear overview of the tokens in Uniswap, it depends on non-observable variables, such as intentionality and profits,” the report reads.

The study examined 27,588 tokens, of which 631 were deemed non-malicious, and 26,957 were deemed malicious. A total of 24,870 of the malicious are fast rug pulls, while 2,087 are not LP Burns. 

The researchers find this dataset enough to label all of 26,957 tokens malicious, meaning 97.7% of the tokens under study are malicious.

The research that was recently shared by crypto influencer drnick on Twitter received wide criticism, as many questioned the rationale behind the study. Some Twitter users claimed that the study lacks a substantial ground to make such a submission.