← Mori Financereviewed 2026-10-27 · 10 claims checked
Fact-check findings
What an automated fact-checker found when it re-read Mori Finance 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
4 claimsNo source the reviewer could reach confirms or contradicts the claim.
- #4[unverifiable][awaiting moderator]in section: Token Sales and Fundraising
“While the project publicly stated it had no VC or team allocations”
reviewerProject publicly stated it had no VC or team allocationsMedium blocked. The page's framing of a contradiction hinges on this statement. Holder.io lists a 25% core team allocation. The wording may refer to the sale ('no VC presale') rather than total tokenomics. - #5[unverifiable][awaiting moderator]in section: Security Audits
“The project's Medium publication stated that Mori Finance had partnered with PeckShield, a blockchain security firm, for a comprehensive security audit.”
reviewerPeckShield partnership claimed for audit; no report foundCould not read the Medium post. Holder.io and the GitBook page do not mention PeckShield. - #7[unverifiable][awaiting moderator]in section: Protocol Description
“users who ve-lock MORI receive a non-transferable escrowed governance token called xMORI, which entitles them to a portion of mint and redeem fee revenue”
reviewerxMORI ve-lock and fee-share mechanicsThe cited GitBook page does not contain this. It may be on another GitBook page that I did not fetch. - #8[unverifiable][awaiting moderator]in section: Project Activity and Current Status
“As of September 2026, DeFiLlama reports the Mori Protocol's total value locked (TVL) at approximately $233”
reviewerDeFiLlama TVL about $233; last X post 2023-12-18DeFiLlama and X were blocked. The ranking (#5890, zero market cap) is confirmed by Holder.io. Zerion shows no price tracking, consistent with dormancy.
partially supported
3 claimsThe cited evidence supports part of the claim but not all of it.
- #1[partially supported][awaiting moderator]in section: Token Sales and Fundraising
“The first sale on July 20, 2023 sold out in under two minutes, raising approximately 150 ETH.”
reviewerFirst sale on July 20, 2023 sold out in under two minutesThe one readable cited source says under 5 minutes, not under two. The primary Medium post was blocked, so the correction is tentative. Same figure appears in timeline[1]. - #9[partially supported][awaiting moderator]in the timeline
“Mori Finance Goerli testnet launched; approximately 500 transactions recorded in first 24 hours.”
reviewerTimeline: Goerli testnet 2023-06-20, alpha mainnet 2023-08-13Dates are confirmed. The 500 transactions figure is not found in any readable source, and the cited GitBook page does not mention it. - #10[partially supported][awaiting moderator]in the timeline
“First public MORI token offering event: sold out in under two minutes, raising 150 ETH.”
reviewerFirst sale duration in timelineSame discrepancy as in sections[1]. Tentative, since the primary source was blocked.
confirmed
3 claimsThe cited evidence supports the claim as written.
- #2[confirmed][no action needed]in section: Token Sales and Fundraising
“The second sale on August 10, 2023 raised 174 ETH within approximately 35 seconds.”
reviewerSecond sale Aug 10, 2023 raised 174 ETH in ~35 secondsHolder.io matches date, amount and duration. - #3[confirmed][no action needed]in section: Token Sales and Fundraising
“core team (25% with a 2.78% initial unlock), treasury (10% with 4.17% initial unlock), marketing (7% with 10% initial unlock), public sale (6%), initial liquidity provision (1.2%), and airdrop (0.8%)”
reviewerTokenomics: team 25% (2.78% initial unlock), treasury 10% (4.17%), marketing 7% (10%), public sale 6%, LP 1.2%, airdrop 0.8%Matches Holder.io. - #6[confirmed][no action needed]in section: Protocol Description
“the protocol accepts liquid staking derivative (LSD) tokens—initially stETH from Lido Finance—as collateral”
reviewerProtocol uses stETH, ETHS and ETHC per GitBookThe cited GitBook page does not mention xMORI, ve-locking or LayerZero. Those details must come from other pages or Medium, which I could not verify.
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.