Gekko AI

Gekko AI — a reference card for a crypto project: what the product does and how verifiable the project’s key claims are; also — alignment with the Decentralized AI thesis (DecAI Fit).

Gekko AI — a project/token on Base (ERC‑20). The AI component is not established per Tier‑1.

Disclaimer

Important: this page is a reference overview of the project. Within DecAIHub, we separately record a verification based on open sources within the AI thesis (what is real AI/onchain/why a token, and which sources this is based on).
This is not financial advice and not a recommendation to buy/sell/hold any asset. We do not assess price, returns, or entry/exit timing.
Conclusions are based on publicly available materials found as of the verification date. The absence of confirmation does not imply the absence of the technology.

TL;DR (for readers who are not into AI)

What it is: the ERC‑20 token GEKKO on the Base network.
Who it’s for: users/token holders and trading/liquidity participants.
Why onchain/token: the verifiable onchain artifact is the token contract; other logic (other than the token) is not established per Tier‑1.

How it works (very briefly)

The user does: receives/sends the token, interacts with DEX/liquidity.
The system does: executes the standard ERC‑20 token logic.
The user gets: token balance/transactions on the Base network.
Where the blockchain is: Base mainnet.
Token role (if any): not established per Tier‑1 (utility/gov/fees not confirmed).

Quick links: AI thesis fit

Project passport

Field	Value
Project name	Gekko AI
Also known as (aliases)	—
Logo (logo)	—
Token symbol (ticker)	GEKKO
Category	—
Primary chain (chain)	Base
Type	EVM
Network status	mainnet
Consensus (consensus)	PoS (Base; Ethereum L2)
Launch date (launch_date)	—
Project status (status)	active
Token (standard)	ERC-20
Token contract	0xf7b0dd0B642a6ccc2fc4d8FfE2BfFb0caC8C43C8
Token model (token_type)	unknown
Max supply	1 000 000 000 GEKKO
Issuance	—
Tokenomics (tokenomics, brief)	—
Governance	—
Admins/keys	—
Audit	—
Bug bounty	—
Team (team)	—
Funding (investors/funding)	—
AI component (ai_component)	unknown
Use‑case (use_case)	unknown
DecAI Fit — AI thesis fit	0/6 — no AI reality and no AI intent (ai_score=0)
DecAI Fit component summary	ai_score 0 / onchain_score 1 / token_score 0 / evidence_score 2
Last verified	2026-02-11

Links (links_*)

Type	Link
Website	https://app.virtuals.io/virtuals/15589
Docs	—
GitHub	—
Releases / Changelog	—
Whitepaper	—
Roadmap	—
Security advisories	—
Explorer	https://basescan.org/token/0xf7b0dd0B642a6ccc2fc4d8FfE2BfFb0caC8C43C8
X	https://twitter.com/Gekko_Agent
Discord	—
Telegram	https://t.me/gekko2hq
Medium	—
Audit report(s)	—
Bug bounty	—
CoinGecko (profile, reference)	https://www.coingecko.com/en/coins/gekko-ai
CoinMarketCap (profile, reference)	https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/gekko-ai/

General project overview

Within this card, the confirmed Tier‑1 fact is the existence of the GEKKO token (ERC‑20) on the Base network per the explorer data. No public Tier‑1 materials (docs/repo) describing an AI component were found in this card.

Features/modules

Typical scenarios

Scenario 1: —
Scenario 2: —
Scenario 3: —

Getting started (wallet/network)

What you need: —
Network/chain: —
Fees: —

Architecture/tech (non‑AI)

Components: —
Participant roles: —
Where logic runs: —
Dependencies: —

Token/economics (expanded, no forecasts)

Token utility: —
Protocol necessity drivers: —
Who pays fees: —
Where fees go: —
Issuance/burn: —
Security/incentive mechanisms: —
Distribution and token issuance schedule: —
Treasury: —

Governance

Who makes decisions: —
How protocol parameters change: —
Where decisions are discussed/made: —
Keys/multisig: —

Security and incidents

Audits: — (if many — put a table below)
Bug bounty: —
Incidents: —
Threat model: —

Project status and timeline

Current status: —
Key releases/milestones: —
Roadmap: —

Ecosystem/integrations

Integrations: —
Partners: —
Where it’s actually used: —

AI component of the project

What is real AI here? not established per Tier‑1.
What is truly onchain? the GEKKO token contract (ERC‑20) on the Base network.
Why is a token needed? not established per Tier‑1 (utility/gov/fees not confirmed).
Red flags (based on the information found): absence of Tier‑1 documentation on the product/token utility; token‑washing risk.

DecAI Fit component summary

DecAI Fit: 0/6 — no AI reality and no AI intent (ai_score=0)

Component	Level	Score
AI reality	low	0
Onchain necessity	low	1
Token necessity	low	0
Evidence	Tier‑1 present	2

Details

AI reality

AI_0 — AI intent (Tier‑1 roadmap) (1/0)

AI_0 (decision): 0
Claim (one line): No Tier‑1 declaration of AI intent was found.
Evidence: Tier‑1 — —
Why sufficient / why not (one line): There is no Tier‑1 documentation/roadmap on AI in this card.
Conflict note (if any): —

AI_1 — what the AI does (1/0)

AI_1 (decision): 0
Claim (one line): What exactly the AI does is not established per Tier‑1.
Evidence: Tier‑1 — —
Why sufficient / why not (one line): There are no Tier‑1 artifacts describing AI features.
Conflict note (if any): —

AI_2 — demos/examples (1/0)

AI_2 (decision): 0
Claim (one line): Demos/examples of AI features are not established per Tier‑1.
Evidence: Tier‑1 — —
Why sufficient / why not (one line): There are no Tier‑1 links to a verifiable AI surface.
Conflict note (if any): —

AI_3 — metrics/quality (1/0)

AI_3 (decision): 0
Metrics: —
Context (version/date/how measured): —
Evidence: Tier‑1 — —
Why sufficient / why not (one line): —
Conflict note (if any): —

AI_4 — tech description/architecture/versions (1/0)

AI_4 (decision): 0
Claim (one line): A tech description of the AI part (architecture/versions/artifacts) is not recorded per Tier‑1.
Evidence: Tier‑1 — —
Why sufficient / why not (one line): There are no Tier‑1 docs/repo.
Conflict note (if any): —

Onchain necessity

OC_1 — contracts/addresses/chain (1/0)

OC_1 (decision): 1
Chain: Base
Addresses/identifiers: the GEKKO token (ERC‑20): 0xf7b0dd0B642a6ccc2fc4d8FfE2BfFb0caC8C43C8
Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://basescan.org/token/0xf7b0dd0B642a6ccc2fc4d8FfE2BfFb0caC8C43C8
Why sufficient / why not (one line): The Explorer confirms the network/address and max total supply.
Conflict note (if any): —

OC_2 — onchain beyond just a token (1/0)

OC_2 (decision): 0
What useful logic is onchain: —
Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://basescan.org/token/0xf7b0dd0B642a6ccc2fc4d8FfE2BfFb0caC8C43C8
Why sufficient / why not (one line): —
Conflict note (if any): —

OC_3 — onchain is critical (1/0)

OC_3 (decision): 0
“Replace the blockchain” test: what breaks without onchain: —
Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://basescan.org/token/0xf7b0dd0B642a6ccc2fc4d8FfE2BfFb0caC8C43C8
Why sufficient / why not (one line): —
Conflict note (if any): —

Token necessity

TK_0 — no token (1/0)

TK_0 (decision): 0
Claim (one line): The project has a token, GEKKO, on Base.
Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://basescan.org/token/0xf7b0dd0B642a6ccc2fc4d8FfE2BfFb0caC8C43C8
Why sufficient / why not (one line): The Tier‑1 explorer confirms the onchain token.
Conflict note (if any): —

TK_1..TK_4 (1/0)

TK_1 — payment for the service (1/0)

TK_1 (decision): 0
Claim (one line): —
Evidence: Tier‑1 — —
Why sufficient / why not (one line): —
Conflict note (if any): —

TK_2 — incentives/collateral/penalties (1/0)

TK_2 (decision): 0
Claim (one line): —
Evidence: Tier‑1 — —
Why sufficient / why not (one line): —
Conflict note (if any): —

TK_3 — governance (1/0)

TK_3 (decision): 0
Claim (one line): —
Evidence: Tier‑1 — —
Why sufficient / why not (one line): —
Conflict note (if any): —

TK_4 — token is replaceable (1/0)

TK_4 (decision): 0
Claim (one line): —
Evidence: Tier‑1 — —
Why sufficient / why not (one line): —
Conflict note (if any): —

Evidence (table)

Tier	Source	What it proves
Tier‑1	https://basescan.org/token/0xf7b0dd0B642a6ccc2fc4d8FfE2BfFb0caC8C43C8	Onchain fact: the GEKKO token on Base (address, decimals, max total supply).
Tier‑3	https://x.com/Gekko_Agent	Social channel (noise/marketing; does not confirm the product).