The funding filter failed.
All 27 companies that passed the gate have evidence against the workflow’s “latest round Series A” requirement. Finding a deliverable email does not repair that mismatch.
Audit conducted 26 October 2026. Historical cutoff: 23 September 2026. Original workflow ↗
passed rows with funding disqualifications*
Each square represents one company, not an email.
*Aha!’s self-funded status relies partly on an undated current company statement. No archived cutoff snapshot was retrieved.
Later-stage companies passed a Series A filter.
The public workflow asks its company-search step for “Latest round Series A.” Yet 26 of the 27 retained companies had announced a Series B or Series B extension before the run. The remaining company, Aha!, says it is 100 percent self-funded, consistent with its 2023 bootstrap history.
These are qualification failures under the implemented filter, not companies that simply became ineligible after the run.
PermitFlow
Series B · 2 December 2025
Announced more than nine months before the run.
Gamma
Series B · 10 November 2025
Its own founder announcement identifies the round.
Flam
Series B · 18 September 2026
Five days before the workflow’s cutoff.
Email deliverability is a different test.
The published CSV supports the reported funnel counts. It records 27 retained companies, 21 emails found, and 20 verifier-positive results. That is internally consistent, but it does not establish that those 20 are qualified prospects.
companies passed the fit gate
emails reported found
emails labelled valid by the verifier
correct people and mailbox ownership independently confirmed
Names, titles, and addresses are redacted from the public export. We cannot independently check the requested decision-maker, mailbox ownership, or the verifier’s verdict. Nor should an “unknown” verification result be counted as deliverable.
The advertised $0.12 figure is approximately $2.33 divided by 20 verifier-positive emails. It is not a demonstrated cost per fully qualified lead.
A consistent receipt, an unsupported qualification claim.
The run demonstrates an enrichment pipeline with reported deliverable emails. It does not demonstrate a lead list that met its own latest-funding filter.
A stronger evaluation would independently check company eligibility before enrichment, keep verifier-positive emails separate from qualified prospects, and publish dated evidence for each qualification decision.
Use Strawberry to check the work.
Strawberry read the published CSV, checked all 27 companies against dated sources, and kept missing evidence separate from confirmed mistakes. It then built this page, with each finding linked to its source.
You can do the same with your own lead lists: check them against your actual criteria before anyone sends an email.
What this audit can support.
The audit covers all 27 rows marked “pass” in the public CSV. A dated pre-cutoff Series B is sufficient to reject “latest round Series A”; the table does not claim that Series B was each company’s final round.
Historical employee counts were mostly unverified. Current headcounts were not projected backward. US headquarters, dual headquarters, and broad sales/marketing use also involve interpretation. Those questions do not change the documented funding contradictions.
Aha! is the exception to the dated-round evidence: its current official self-funded statement supports exclusion, but is not an archived September 23 snapshot. This audit does not establish that any email was invalid, that spending was fabricated, or that the failure was intentional.
Inspect all 27 funding findings
| Company | Disqualifying evidence | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Orum | Series B · Nov 2022 | Read evidence ↗ |
| Aligned | Series B · Jul 2026 | Read evidence ↗ |
| PermitFlow | Series B · Dec 2025 | Read evidence ↗ |
| Defense Unicorns | Series B · Jan 2026 | Read evidence ↗ |
| RemotePass | Series B · May 2026 | Read evidence ↗ |
| Gamma | Series B · Nov 2025 | Read evidence ↗ |
| AppCard | Series B · Feb 2016 | Read evidence ↗ |
| Jones Software | Series B · Jan 2025 | Read evidence ↗ |
| Prophecy | Series B · Jan 2025 · B extension | Read evidence ↗ |
| RudderStack | Series B · Feb 2022 | Read evidence ↗ |
| Triomics | Series B · May 2026 | Read evidence ↗ |
| Gigs | Series B · Dec 2024 | Read evidence ↗ |
| Higgsfield AI | Series B · Aug 2026 | Read evidence ↗ |
| Certa.ai | Series B · Sep 2023 | Read evidence ↗ |
| Mighty Networks | Series B · Apr 2021 | Read evidence ↗ |
| ChurnZero | Series B · Mar 2021 | Read evidence ↗ |
| gnani.ai | Series B · Mar 2026 | Read evidence ↗ |
| Cypress.io | Series B · Dec 2020 | Read evidence ↗ |
| Aha! | Self-funded · temporal caveat | Read evidence ↗ |
| Hebbia | Series B · Jul 2024 | Read evidence ↗ |
| Doxel | Series B · Aug 2021 | Read evidence ↗ |
| Hypersonix | Series B · Jul 2021 reported | Read evidence ↗ |
| Entropik | Series B · Feb 2023 | Read evidence ↗ |
| Wispr Flow | Series B · Aug 2026 | Read evidence ↗ |
| Krea | Series B · Apr 2025 | Read evidence ↗ |
| Flam | Series B · 18 Sep 2026 | Read evidence ↗ |
| Hiver | Series B · Mar 2022 | Read evidence ↗ |
Primary reference: workflow prompt, receipt and stated limitations. Source prices and provider outcomes are self-reported by treg. This is an independent evidence review, not a controlled rerun.