Fact-check findings
What an automated fact-checker found when it re-read Hypervault Finance against the sources the page cites. Only the most recent review is shown.
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.
disputed
2 claimsThe reviewer could not reconcile the claim with the evidence it cited. This is a lead, not a ruling that the claim is false.
- #1[disputed][awaiting moderator]in section: Fabricated Audit Claims
“delivered privately to the Hypervault team on or around September 14–21, 2025”
reviewerZenith's private draft audit was delivered around September 14-21, 2025Rekt News gives Sept 14 as the audit start announcement and Sept 24 as draft delivery, not Sept 14-21.Proposed correction (not yet applied)delivered privately to the Hypervault team on or around September 24, 2025 - #2[disputed][awaiting moderator]in the timeline
“(dated September 21)”
reviewerZenith draft report delivered September 21 (timeline)Same error as the section text; the cited Rekt source says Sept 24. Findings count of 42 / 6 high / 10 medium is confirmed.Proposed correction (not yet applied)(dated September 24)
unverifiable
1 claimNo source the reviewer could reach confirms or contradicts the claim.
- #7[unverifiable][awaiting moderator]in section: Law Enforcement, Regulatory Status and Fund Recovery
“Law enforcement reports are alleged, according to secondary reporting, to have been filed in Singapore and South Korea”
reviewerLaw enforcement reports filed in Singapore and South Korea; no regulatory action as of May 2026A search found no reporting of law enforcement filings, arrests or recovery. The page already hedges the claim as alleged.
confirmed
4 claimsThe cited evidence supports the claim as written.
- #3[confirmed][no action needed]in the summary
“approximately 752 ETH was routed into Tornado Cash”
reviewerRoughly $3.6M drained; ~752 ETH to Tornado Cash; PeckShield flagged on Sept 26Confirmed. The Block paraphrases PeckShield rather than quoting it, so the quoted 'abnormal withdrawal' wording is not verified there. - #4[confirmed][no action needed]in section: Exit Scam and Fund Drainage
“(631.59 ETH)”
reviewerPrimary exploit, funder and Ethereum landing addresses with ETH amountsAddresses and amounts match Rekt. Rekt gives a $4.64M total and 1,126.72 ETH bridged, which the page discloses. - #5[confirmed][no action needed]in section: Alleged Operator Identity and Prior Projects
“The same alleged network is linked to at least three prior projects — ZinoFinance, Zero-G Finance and PerfectSwap”
reviewerAlleged operator Nick Olsson/Olsen (0xNyck) from Sweden; prior projects ZinoFinance, Zero-G, PerfectSwap on NjallaSupported and properly hedged as alleged. The page leads with the spelling 'Olsson' while Rekt uses 'Olsen'; the page notes both. - #6[confirmed][no action needed]in section: Yield Promises, Deposits and Ignored Warning
“TVL was then approximately $700,000”
reviewerHypingBull warned on Sept 4 with TVL about $700k; Pashov replied 'First time I hear the project with this name'Confirmed via Rekt; the X post itself was not independently read.