Fact-check findings
What an automated fact-checker found when it re-read Meerkat 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
1 claimThe reviewer could not reconcile the claim with the evidence it cited. This is a lead, not a ruling that the claim is false.
- #2[disputed][awaiting moderator]in the timeline
“2021-03-05”
reviewerJamboo posted in the Meerkatrefunds Telegram channel on 2021-03-05Cointelegraph's article is dated March 6 and the search summary places the channel on March 6. The page's March 5 appears one day early. Moderate confidence.Proposed correction (not yet applied)2021-03-06
unverifiable
3 claimsNo source the reviewer could reach confirms or contradicts the claim.
- #6[unverifiable][awaiting moderator]in section: Binance Involvement and Fund Recovery
“Binance coordinated with blockchain security firms PeckShield, SlowMist, and CertiK during the post-incident investigation.”
reviewerBinance suspended the Binance.org Bridge and coordinated with PeckShield, SlowMist, and CertiKThe cited recovery article says nothing about these items. Other cited sources were not exhaustively checked. - #8[unverifiable][awaiting moderator]in the timeline
“Meerkat Finance launches on Binance Smart Chain at approximately 19:00 UTC.”
reviewerMeerkat launched at about 19:00 UTC on March 3, 2021Launch on March 3 is consistent with sources; the specific hour was not found. - #9[unverifiable][awaiting moderator]in section: Exit Scam Indicators
“Third, the project launched with no independent smart contract audit from a recognized firm.”
reviewerThe project launched with no independent auditRekt is silent on audits. Other cited sources were not checked, so this is a weak finding.
link rot
1 claimA cited source no longer resolves or no longer says what the page attributes to it.
- #4[link rot][awaiting moderator]in section: Binance Involvement and Fund Recovery
“https://www.binance.com/en/blog/421499824684901829/How-Binance-Security-team-helped-recover-$30M-funds-from-Meerkat-Finance-Hack”
reviewerBinance blog post supports the recovery narrativePrimary Binance URL returns 404. The republished copy on cryptohopper is already cited in the same section.
partially supported
1 claimThe cited evidence supports part of the claim but not all of it.
- #7[partially supported][awaiting moderator]in the timeline
“Approximately 95% of user funds (~$30 million) are reported as recovered, with ongoing distributions to remaining victims. Binance describes the outcome as the largest fund recovery it has participated in.”
reviewerApproximately 95% of funds recovered on 2021-03-07The figure is supported, but the earliest source found for it is dated March 23, so the 2021-03-07 date and the refund contract date of 2021-03-06 are unsupported. Timeline entries also carry empty source fields.
confirmed
3 claimsThe cited evidence supports the claim as written.
- #1[confirmed][no action needed]in section: The Exploit: Technical Analysis
“At 08:53:10 UTC, the WBNB Vault was upgraded to a malicious contract (0x9d3a4c3acee56dce2392fb75dd274a249aee7d57).”
reviewerExploit steps occurred at 08:53:10, 08:53:31, 08:54:31 and 08:54:55 UTC on March 4, 2021, with 13,968,039 BUSD and 73,635 WBNB drained by the deployerRekt confirms timings, amounts, and that the deployer upgraded the vaults. - #3[confirmed][no action needed]in section: The 'Test' Claim and Developer Response
“Jamboo further stated the team had 'invited a third party (hacker) to attack the vulnerability through the verify proxy contract' and promised a full post-mortem report.”
reviewerJamboo called the exploit a trial, said a third-party hacker was invited, sent a transaction from the deployer, and promised refundsMatches Cointelegraph, which also notes the account is unverified. - #5[confirmed][no action needed]in section: Binance Involvement and Fund Recovery
“Approximately 95% of user losses (~$30 million) were recovered, with ongoing distributions to remaining victims.”
reviewerAbout 95% (~$30M) of user losses recovered, with ongoing distributions; largest recovery Binance has participated in; victims must interact with a new contractSupported by the republished Binance article, though one search result cites a much smaller $345K frozen figure, so the single-source nature is worth noting.