← WazirX (India)reviewed 2026-09-07 · 34 claims checked
Fact-check findings
What an automated fact-checker found when it re-read WazirX (India) 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.
disputed 1unverifiable 1link rot 1partially supported 3confirmed 282 corrections pending · 0 applied
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.
- #17[disputed][awaiting moderator]in section: Attribution Dispute: WazirX vs. Liminal Custody
“On August 14, 2024, WazirX ended its custody relationship with Liminal and migrated remaining funds to new multisig wallets managed under institutional custodian BitGo.”
reviewerOn August 14, 2024, WazirX ended its custody relationship with Liminal and migrated remaining funds to new multisig wallets managed under institutional custodian BitGoThe Aug 14, 2024 fund migration was to self-managed multisig wallets, not to BitGo. BitGo only became WazirX's custodian around mid-2025 (after an interim Zodia Custody arrangement from March 2025), ahead of the October 2025 relaunch. The page's own timeline entry for Oct 24, 2025 correctly ties BitGo to the relaunch; this sentence incorrectly backdates BitGo's involvement by roughly a year.Proposed correction (not yet applied)On August 14, 2024, WazirX ended its custody relationship with Liminal and migrated remaining funds to new multisig wallets.
unverifiable
1 claimNo source the reviewer could reach confirms or contradicts the claim.
- #19[unverifiable][awaiting moderator]in section: Indian Regulatory and Enforcement Actions
“alleging the platform was used to launder proceeds of crime by 16 fintech firms under separate ED investigation”
reviewerThe ED's probe alleged WazirX was used to launder proceeds of crime specifically by '16 fintech firms' under separate investigationThe general allegation is well documented, but the specific figure of 16 fintech firms could not be located in any source checked; treated as a discrete unverifiable sub-claim distinct from the well-confirmed core notice.
link rot
1 claimA cited source no longer resolves or no longer says what the page attributes to it.
- #25[link rot][awaiting moderator]in the timeline
“https://wazirx.com/blog/wazirx-moratorium-application-filed/”
reviewerThe Singapore High Court's Sept 26, 2024 four-month moratorium grant, as cited in the timeline entryThe timeline entry's date and content are correct, but the source_url points to a page about the initial filing, not the court's later grant of the specific relief described -- it does not support the claim it is attached to.Proposed correction (not yet applied)https://www.blockhead.co/2024/09/27/singapore-court-grants-wazirx-a-four-month-moratorium/
partially supported
3 claimsThe cited evidence supports part of the claim but not all of it.
- #3[partially supported][awaiting moderator]in section: Overview and Corporate Structure
“By January 2022 WazirX claimed 60–70% of Indian crypto exchange market share and approximately 16 million users.”
reviewerBy January 2022 WazirX claimed 60-70% of Indian crypto exchange market share and approximately 16 million usersThe 16-million user figure is broadly plausible but attached to the wrong date, and no source located (including the one cited) supports the specific 60-70% market-share figure; could not verify it independently. - #23[partially supported][awaiting moderator]in section: Indian Regulatory and Enforcement Actions
“the Supreme Court of India registered but subsequently dismissed (April 16, 2025) a petition by over 50 hack victims seeking a criminal probe against Nischal Shetty, with the court noting the absence of a comprehensive crypto regulatory framework in India.”
reviewerIndia's Supreme Court dismissed a petition by over 50 hack victims on April 16, 2025, citing the absence of a comprehensive crypto regulatory frameworkThe underlying claim is accurate and corroborated by other sources, but the specific URL cited (dated April 15, titled 'to hear') describes the pending hearing rather than the dismissal itself and could not be confirmed to have been updated with the outcome; a same-outlet article published the next day directly documents the dismissal. - #32[partially supported][awaiting moderator]in section: Operational Security and Custody Failures
“WazirX migrated to BitGo as custodian and implemented strengthened custody measures as part of the post-hack restructuring.”
reviewerWazirX migrated to BitGo as custodian and implemented strengthened custody measures as part of the post-hack restructuringThe end state (BitGo as custodian) is accurate, but the sentence skips an intermediate custody arrangement with Zodia Custody, understating how many times custody actually changed hands post-hack.
confirmed
28 claimsThe cited evidence supports the claim as written.
- #1[confirmed][no action needed]in section: Overview and Corporate Structure
“WazirX was founded in March 2018 by Nischal Shetty, Sameer Mhatre, and Siddharth Menon.”
reviewerWazirX was founded in March 2018 by Nischal Shetty, Sameer Mhatre, and Siddharth MenonFounding date and founder names are widely and consistently reported. - #2[confirmed][no action needed]in section: Overview and Corporate Structure
“The exchange operates through two corporate entities: Zanmai Labs Pvt Ltd, incorporated in India in 2017, which runs the domestic exchange; and Zettai Pte Ltd, incorporated in Singapore in January 2019, which serves as the parent entity and handled crypto trading operations after the Reserve Bank of India restricted crypto transactions.”
reviewerZanmai Labs Pvt Ltd, which runs the WazirX domestic exchange, was incorporated in India in 2017Both incorporation facts check out against independent corporate-registry data, though neither is in the page's own source list. - #4[confirmed][no action needed]in section: Overview and Corporate Structure
“WRX, its native token, briefly reached a billion-dollar valuation in April 2021.”
reviewerWRX briefly reached a billion-dollar valuation in April 2021Confirmed via independent price/market-cap data. - #5[confirmed][no action needed]in section: Overview and Corporate Structure
“The exchange listed 350+ tokens and offered WRX holders a 50% trading fee discount.”
reviewerThe exchange listed 350+ tokens and offered WRX holders a 50% trading fee discountBoth figures are consistent with independent exchange-tracking sources. - #6[confirmed][no action needed]in section: Binance Ownership Dispute
“In 2019 Binance announced an acquisition of WazirX and agreed to purchase certain assets and intellectual property from Nischal Shetty, including the WazirX brand, to launch fiat-to-crypto gateways in India. No equity stake in Zanmai Labs was ever transferred.”
reviewerIn 2019 Binance announced an acquisition of WazirX, purchasing certain assets/IP including the brand, with no equity in Zanmai Labs transferredBoth the 2019 announcement and the no-equity-transferred characterization are well corroborated. - #7[confirmed][no action needed]in section: Binance Ownership Dispute
“A public dispute over ultimate ownership and control surfaced in August 2022 after the Enforcement Directorate froze WazirX bank deposits (see Regulatory Actions section).”
reviewerA public dispute over ultimate ownership surfaced in August 2022 after the ED froze WazirX bank depositsConfirmed by an independent tier-1 report matching the same date and causal sequence. - #8[confirmed][no action needed]in section: Binance Ownership Dispute
“Binance terminated its crypto wallet services to WazirX in February 2023 and subsequently stated publicly that it had never owned, controlled, or operated WazirX.”
reviewerBinance terminated crypto wallet services to WazirX in February 2023 and stated it never owned, controlled, or operated WazirXConfirmed. - #9[confirmed][no action needed]in section: Binance Ownership Dispute
“After the July 2024 hack, Binance reiterated that it bore no responsibility for user losses, pointing to Zettai as the sole operator, and called on WazirX's management to compensate affected users.”
reviewerAfter the July 2024 hack, Binance reiterated it bore no responsibility, pointed to Zettai as sole operator, and called on WazirX management to compensate usersConfirmed by both cited sources' own headlines/content as retrieved via search. - #10[confirmed][no action needed]in section: July 2024 Hack — Incident and Attribution
“On July 18, 2024, approximately $234.9 million in digital assets were drained from a Gnosis Safe multisig Ethereum wallet.”
reviewerOn July 18, 2024, approximately $234.9 million was drained from a Gnosis Safe multisig walletAmount and date are consistently reported across independent sources (note some outlets round to $230-235M, which is not a material discrepancy). - #11[confirmed][no action needed]in section: July 2024 Hack — Incident and Attribution
“The wallet used a 4-of-6 signature scheme in which five keys were held by WazirX personnel and the sixth by Liminal Custody, the exchange's third-party custodian.”
reviewerThe wallet used a 4-of-6 signature scheme with five WazirX keys and one Liminal keyConfirmed by independent security-research write-ups. - #12[confirmed][no action needed]in section: July 2024 Hack — Incident and Attribution
“On January 14, 2025, the governments of the United States, Japan, and South Korea issued a joint public statement attributing the attack to North Korea's Lazarus Group — a state-sponsored threat actor — as part of a broader campaign responsible for more than $659 million in crypto thefts across 2024.”
reviewerOn January 14, 2025, the US, Japan, and South Korea attributed the hack to North Korea's Lazarus Group as part of a $659M+ 2024 campaignConfirmed by two independent tier-1 sources. - #13[confirmed][no action needed]in section: July 2024 Hack — Incident and Attribution
“WazirX was one of several exchanges named in that statement alongside DMM Bitcoin, Upbit, and others.”
reviewerWazirX was named in the joint statement alongside DMM Bitcoin, Upbit, and othersConfirmed; page's 'and others' is accurate shorthand for the additional named victims (Rain Management, Radiant Capital). - #14[confirmed][no action needed]in section: Attribution Dispute: WazirX vs. Liminal Custody
“WazirX stated that a forensic investigation by Mandiant (a Google subsidiary) found no evidence of compromise on the three WazirX employee laptops used for signing transactions, and that findings 'largely indicated the cyberattack originated from Liminal.'”
reviewerMandiant's forensic investigation found no compromise on WazirX's three signing laptops and 'largely indicated the cyberattack originated from Liminal'Direct quote verified against the cited article's own text. - #15[confirmed][no action needed]in section: Attribution Dispute: WazirX vs. Liminal Custody
“Liminal contested this, stating its own investigations and forensic reports indicated that three compromised devices at WazirX were the genesis of the breach.”
reviewerLiminal contested this, stating three compromised devices at WazirX were the genesis of the breachConfirmed. - #16[confirmed][no action needed]in section: Attribution Dispute: WazirX vs. Liminal Custody
“An independent audit by Grant Thornton, commissioned in this context, found no evidence that Liminal's systems were compromised, clearing the custodian of direct involvement.”
reviewerAn independent audit by Grant Thornton found no evidence Liminal's systems were compromisedConfirmed. - #18[confirmed][no action needed]in section: Indian Regulatory and Enforcement Actions
“In June 2021 the ED issued a show-cause notice to WazirX and directors Nischal Shetty and Sameer Mhatre for transactions totalling Rs 2,790.74 crore, alleging the platform was used to launder proceeds of crime by 16 fintech firms under separate ED investigation, and that WazirX had lax AML norms that enabled transfers to unknown foreign wallets.”
reviewerIn June 2021 the ED issued a show-cause notice to WazirX and directors Nischal Shetty and Sameer Mhatre for Rs 2,790.74 crore in transactionsCore figures, date, and named parties confirmed by an independent tier-1 source. Could not independently verify the specific '16 fintech firms' detail; that sub-detail is treated separately below. - #20[confirmed][no action needed]in section: Indian Regulatory and Enforcement Actions
“In August 2022 the ED froze Rs 64.67 crore in WazirX bank deposits as part of this money-laundering probe.”
reviewerIn August 2022 the ED froze Rs 64.67 crore in WazirX bank depositsFigure and date match the cited source's own headline as returned by search; source could not be re-fetched directly (marked unarchivable) but the headline is corroborated by multiple aggregators. - #21[confirmed][no action needed]in section: Indian Regulatory and Enforcement Actions
“In a separate action the ED seized approximately Rs 90 crore in cryptocurrency wallet funds held across Binance, ZebPay, and WazirX wallets in connection with an online gaming application investigation.”
reviewerThe ED seized approximately Rs 90 crore in crypto wallet funds across Binance, ZebPay, and WazirX in an online gaming app investigationConfirmed. - #22[confirmed][no action needed]in section: Indian Regulatory and Enforcement Actions
“WazirX was not among the nine offshore exchanges that received FIU show-cause notices for AML non-compliance in December 2023.”
reviewerWazirX was not among the nine offshore exchanges that received FIU show-cause notices for AML non-compliance in December 2023Confirmed by an independent tier-1 source; consistent with WazirX's registered domestic-entity status. - #24[confirmed][no action needed]in section: Singapore Moratorium, Restructuring, and Recovery
“The Singapore High Court issued a four-month moratorium on September 26, 2024, protecting the company from creditor actions during restructuring.”
reviewerThe Singapore High Court issued a four-month moratorium to Zettai on September 26, 2024Claim itself is accurate; see separate finding on the timeline entry's specific citation for this same event. - #26[confirmed][no action needed]in section: Singapore Moratorium, Restructuring, and Recovery
“A first restructuring scheme was declined by the Singapore High Court in June 2025.”
reviewerA first restructuring scheme was declined by the Singapore High Court in June 2025Confirmed. - #27[confirmed][no action needed]in section: Singapore Moratorium, Restructuring, and Recovery
“A revised Scheme of Arrangement was subsequently put to creditors; 95.7% of voting creditors representing 94.6% of total creditor value voted in favour.”
reviewerA revised Scheme of Arrangement was approved by 95.7% of voting creditors representing 94.6% of creditor valueConfirmed by an independent source with matching figures. - #28[confirmed][no action needed]in section: Singapore Moratorium, Restructuring, and Recovery
“The Singapore High Court sanctioned the revised scheme on October 13, 2025 (HC/SUM 940/2025), and the scheme became effective on October 15, 2025 upon lodgement with the Accounting and Corporate Regulatory Authority of Singapore.”
reviewerThe Singapore High Court sanctioned the revised scheme on October 13, 2025 (HC/SUM 940/2025), effective October 15, 2025 upon ACRA lodgementDates confirmed by independent reporting; case number not independently verified against a court record but not contradicted by anything found. - #29[confirmed][no action needed]in section: Singapore Moratorium, Restructuring, and Recovery
“WazirX restarted trading on October 24, 2025 — approximately 16 months after the hack — with zero-fee trading and custody migrated to BitGo.”
reviewerWazirX restarted trading on October 24, 2025 with zero-fee trading and custody migrated to BitGoConfirmed -- and correctly places the BitGo custody arrangement at the October 2025 relaunch, unlike the erroneous Aug 2024 reference elsewhere on the page (see disputed finding above). - #30[confirmed][no action needed]in section: Singapore Moratorium, Restructuring, and Recovery
“Under the scheme, eligible pre-hack users received an initial distribution covering approximately 85% of approved claims, which became withdrawable.”
reviewerEligible pre-hack users received an initial distribution covering approximately 85% of approved claimsConfirmed. - #31[confirmed][no action needed]in section: Singapore Moratorium, Restructuring, and Recovery
“On January 9, 2026, Recovery Tokens were credited to users' accounts representing the remaining approximately 15% of claims.”
reviewerOn January 9, 2026, Recovery Tokens were credited representing the remaining approximately 15% of claimsConfirmed. - #33[confirmed][no action needed]in section: Law Enforcement Response and Hack Investigation
“Delhi Police arrested an individual identified as SK Masud Alam, accused of opening a fraudulent 'mule' account under the alias Souvik Mondal that was used to facilitate the hack, though this arrest pertained to the facilitation infrastructure rather than the core attackers.”
reviewerDelhi Police arrested SK Masud Alam, accused of opening a fraudulent mule account under the alias Souvik Mondal used to facilitate the hackConfirmed by an independent report matching name, alias, and characterization. - #34[confirmed][no action needed]in section: Law Enforcement Response and Hack Investigation
“After the hack, WazirX contacted India's FIU-IND and the FBI to assist in recovering stolen funds.”
reviewerAfter the hack, WazirX contacted India's FIU-IND and the FBI to assist in recovering stolen fundsClaim matches the cited source's own headline as returned via search; article itself could not be re-fetched (marked unarchivable in sources_used) but the headline/content is corroborated by multiple aggregator mentions of the same event.
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.