← Exactly Protocolreviewed 2026-11-02 · 7 claims checked
Fact-check findings
What an automated fact-checker found when it re-read Exactly Protocol against the sources the page cites. Only the most recent review is shown.
Read this first
These findings are produced by an automated reviewer, and its results vary between runs: the same page, checked three times on the same day, came back with 15%, 20% and 34% of its claims disputed, mostly because each run extracted a different number of claims. Treat what follows as leads, not rulings.
“Disputed” means the reviewer could not reconcile the claim with the evidence it cited. It does not mean the claim is false. “Unverifiable” means no reachable source settled it either way.
Nothing here changes the page on its own. A proposed correction is applied only after a human moderator approves it; until then the page reads as it did when reviewed.
unverifiable
3 claimsNo source the reviewer could reach confirms or contradicts the claim.
- #3[unverifiable][awaiting moderator]in section: August 2023 Smart Contract Exploit
“total value locked fell sharply from roughly $37-39 million before the attack to around $11.7 million afterward”
reviewerTVL fell from roughly $37-39 million before the attack to about $11.7 million afterward.DefiLlama returned 403. The $11.7M figure is not confirmed in any source I could read. - #4[unverifiable][awaiting moderator]in section: Team Response and Compensation
“Exactly announced a $700,000 bounty for information leading to the recovery of the stolen funds and identification of the attacker, according to CryptoNews and CoinPaper coverage.”
reviewerExactly offered a $700,000 bounty and earlier offered the attacker a 10% fee.CryptoNews returned 403, so the bounty amount could not be checked against the cited source. The page's headline and archived copy suggest it is accurate, but I did not read either. - #7[unverifiable][awaiting moderator]in section: Current Protocol Status and Product Evolution
“DefiLlama data shows total value locked of roughly $12.5 million as of October 2026, down from an all-time high of approximately $39.8 million reached on August 14, 2023, just days before the hack.”
reviewerDefiLlama shows TVL of roughly $12.5 million as of October 2026, with an all-time high of about $39.8 million on August 14, 2023.Could not read DefiLlama. The ForkLog report of about $39M TVL just before the hack is consistent with the all-time-high figure.
partially supported
1 claimThe cited evidence supports part of the claim but not all of it.
- #6[partially supported][awaiting moderator]in section: Current Protocol Status and Product Evolution
“Independent, non-promotional confirmation of the partnership's completion or of current Exa Card usage figures was not found beyond the companies' own materials.”
reviewerIndependent confirmation of the partnership's completion or of Exa Card usage was not found.Search results suggest the Uphold card has since launched (reportedly in the US in 2026), so the page's statement is likely out of date. I only saw snippets and did not fetch these pages, so I propose no edit.
confirmed
3 claimsThe cited evidence supports the claim as written.
- #1[confirmed][no action needed]in section: August 2023 Smart Contract Exploit
“The Block, citing blockchain security firms BlockSec and Beosin, reported losses of 'over 4300 ether ($7.3 million)' on Optimism.”
reviewerExactly was exploited on August 18, 2023 for about $7.3 million (over 4,300 ETH) per The Block citing BlockSec and Beosin.The Block article matches the amount, date and firms named. The page's quotation marks around the phrase are a paraphrase of the article, which is minor. - #2[confirmed][no action needed]in section: August 2023 Smart Contract Exploit
“some early reports, citing on-chain analytics firm De.Fi, put the figure as high as $12 million”
reviewerSome early reports, citing De.Fi, put the loss as high as $12 million.Live ForkLog page supports this. The stored archive_url for this source (sources_used[18]) points to an unrelated Mastercard CBDC article and should be replaced. - #5[confirmed][no action needed]in section: Current Protocol Status and Product Evolution
“On February 26, 2025, Uphold and Exactly announced a proposed partnership, approved by the Exactly DAO, under which Uphold would invest in EXA tokens and act as an exclusive distribution partner for a crypto-collateralized credit card, starting in Latin America;”
reviewerUphold and Exactly announced a proposed partnership on Feb 26, 2025, approved by the DAO, subject to due diligence and required approvals.Date and terms match. The source is a sponsored press release. The release calls the exclusive role 'CeFi distribution'.
How this fits together. The reviewer reads the published page and its cited sources and records one finding per claim. A human moderator decides whether each proposed correction is applied; those decisions, and the score changes they cause, appear in the audit log. Earlier review runs are not shown here; only the latest reflects the page as it stands.