Fact-check findings
What an automated fact-checker found when it re-read Spectral Labs 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.
unverifiable
3 claimsNo source the reviewer could reach confirms or contradicts the claim.
- #3[unverifiable][awaiting moderator]in section: SPEC Token: Tokenomics and Price Collapse
“Bybit further delisted SPEC perpetual futures contracts on October 1, 2025.”
reviewerBybit delisted SPEC perpetual futures on October 1, 2025.Searches found a MEXC perpetual delisting on Oct 6, 2025 but no Bybit perpetual delisting. The page may have confused the exchanges. The cited Bybit URL slug names a spot delisting. The same claim appears in the summary and timeline[9]. - #4[unverifiable][awaiting moderator]in the timeline
“Bybit delists SPEC perpetual futures contracts, further reducing exchange coverage and liquidity.”
reviewerTimeline: Bybit delists SPEC perpetual futures in October 2025.Same underlying uncertainty as sections[2]; the exchange attribution may be wrong. The timeline entry has no source. - #5[unverifiable][awaiting moderator]in section: SPEC Token: Tokenomics and Price Collapse
“Bybit cited 'consistently low trading volumes and poor liquidity scores' when delisting the SPEC/USDT spot pair on January 21, 2025.”
reviewerBybit delisted the SPEC/USDT spot pair on January 21, 2025, citing low volumes and poor liquidity.A spot delisting including SPEC exists, but secondary reports give conflicting dates (Jan 13 vs Jan 21, 2025). I could not read the primary announcement.
stale
1 claimThe claim was accurate when written but events since have overtaken it.
- #2[stale][awaiting moderator]in section: SPEC Token: Tokenomics and Price Collapse
“trading at approximately $0.075 as of May 2026, with a market capitalization of approximately $1.55 million”
reviewerSPEC trades at about $0.075 with market cap about $1.55M (May 2026).Price has fallen roughly 93% further since the May 2026 snapshot. The fully diluted valuation figure in the same sentence (about $7.5M) is also outdated (about $0.55M at current price) but is not included in the quote. The ATH of $18.48 and 100M supply are confirmed.Proposed correction (not yet applied)trading at approximately $0.0055 as of November 2026, with a market capitalization of approximately $0.29 million
partially supported
1 claimThe cited evidence supports part of the claim but not all of it.
- #6[partially supported][awaiting moderator]in the summary
“with Bybit delisting the token from both spot and futures markets”
reviewerSummary says Bybit delisted the token from both spot and futures markets.The spot delisting is plausible; the futures delisting by Bybit is not verified.
confirmed
1 claimThe cited evidence supports the claim as written.
- #1[confirmed][no action needed]in section: Funding and Investor Base
“The largest disclosed raise was a $23 million Series A in August 2022, led by General Catalyst and Social Capital.”
reviewerSpectral raised a $23M Series A in August 2022 led by General Catalyst and Social Capital, with Samsung, Gradient Ventures, Section 32, Franklin Templeton, Circle Ventures and Jump Capital participating; about $30M total raised.Funding figures and investor list match the TechCrunch article.