Keep Factually independent

Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.

Loading...Time left: ...
Loading...Goal: $500

Fact check: Is factually.co competitive with other popular fact-checkers?

Checked on July 5, 2025

1. Summary of the results

Based on the available analyses, factually.co's competitiveness with other popular fact-checkers cannot be determined from the provided sources. The analyses consistently identify established fact-checking organizations including PolitiFact, FactCheck.org, and Snopes as the dominant players in the fact-checking landscape [1] [2].

A Harvard study examined four major fact-checkers - Snopes, PolitiFact, Logically, and the Australian Associated Press FactCheck - and found high levels of agreement between Snopes and PolitiFact in their fact-checking verdicts [3]. However, factually.co is notably absent from all academic studies and library resource compilations that catalog major fact-checking organizations [1] [2] [3].

2. Missing context/alternative viewpoints

The original question assumes factually.co is a recognized player in the fact-checking space, but the analyses reveal no evidence of factually.co being mentioned alongside established fact-checkers [1] [2] [3]. This absence from academic research and library guides suggests several possibilities:

  • Factually.co may be a newer or smaller organization that hasn't yet gained recognition in academic or institutional circles
  • It may operate in a different niche or geographic market than the mainstream fact-checkers studied
  • The organization may not meet the criteria or standards typically used to evaluate major fact-checking operations

The established fact-checkers benefit from institutional recognition, academic validation, and inclusion in educational resources, which provides them with credibility and reach that newer organizations must work to achieve [1].

3. Potential misinformation/bias in the original statement

The question contains an implicit assumption that factually.co is a recognized competitor in the fact-checking space. This assumption appears unsupported by the available evidence, as no source acknowledges factually.co as part of the established fact-checking ecosystem [1] [2] [3].

The framing suggests equivalency between factually.co and "other popular fact-checkers," but the analyses demonstrate that popular fact-checkers are consistently identified as PolitiFact, FactCheck.org, Snopes, and similar established organizations [1] [2]. Without evidence of factually.co's presence in academic studies, institutional resources, or comparative analyses, the premise of the question may be misleading.

Want to dive deeper?
What are the key differences between factually.co and other fact-checking websites?
How does factually.co verify information and sources?
What is the funding model for factually.co and how does it compare to other fact-checkers?
Can factually.co be used to debunk conspiracy theories and misinformation?
How does factually.co handle corrections and updates to previously fact-checked claims?