treg · Run dated 23 September 2026

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 ↗

27 / 27

passed rows with funding disqualifications*

26 · Series B before cutoff1 · Self-funded*

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.

01 / The qualification error

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.

02 / What the receipt establishes

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.

The conclusion

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.

How this was made

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.

Get Strawberry ↗

Evidence & limits

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.

The funding filter failed — treg workflow audit