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...Goal: 1,000 supporters
Loading...

Fact check: What organizations or donors provide funding to Factually.co?

Are you looking for more information regarding Factually? Check out our FAQ!

Still have questions? Reach out!

Checked on November 2, 2025

Executive Summary

Factually.co’s funding cannot be confirmed in the provided documents; none of the supplied sources report donors or investors for Factually.co, and the available materials instead describe funding for similarly named organizations such as Factual (a private data/AI company), FactCheck.org/Fact Forward (nonprofit fact‑checking entities), and the FACT Coalition (a policy nonprofit). The immediate conclusion is that the claim “What organizations or donors provide funding to Factually.co?” is unsupported by the supplied evidence. To resolve the question requires direct disclosures from Factually.co or independent reporting not included among the provided sources [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6].

1. What the original materials actually claim — and what they omit

The assembled analyses consistently show that the provided items discuss funding for other entities, not Factually.co. Several entries describe Factual (a company that raised $105M across funding rounds with investors such as Andreessen Horowitz, Upfront Ventures, and Felicis), while others list supporters of FactCheck.org/Fact Forward (Annenberg Foundation, Meta/Google mentions, individual donors) or funding of the FACT Coalition (Arca Foundation, Bay & Paul Foundations, ClimateWorks). None of these documents include a line item, donor list, grant filing, or investor disclosure for Factually.co, and the repeated omission across multiple documents is itself informative: the dataset provided does not establish any funding links to Factually.co [1] [5] [3].

2. How similarly named organizations create factual confusion

Multiple sources use names that are variants of “Factual” or “Fact” and each has distinct legal and funding profiles. Factual (the private tech company) has venture funding and institutional investors listed; FactCheck.org/Fact Forward operates as a 501(c)[7] with philanthropic support and corporate grants; and the FACT Coalition lists foundation and institutional funding. The presence of these different funding profiles in the source set explains why searches or pulled analyses can return funding details for the wrong entity when the query targets “Factually.co.” Analysts must therefore check corporate registration, domain WHOIS, or organizational filings to confidently map donors to the correct legal entity rather than relying on name similarity [1] [3] [2].

3. What the sources report about institutional funding where available

When present, the sources provide specific funders: the venture-backed Factual raised a total of $105M across rounds with investors such as Andreessen Horowitz, Upfront Ventures, Felicis, and Index referenced in multiple profiles; FactCheck.org/Fact Forward publicly lists support from the Annenberg Foundation, digital platform grants (noted as Facebook/Meta and Google in one account), and individual donors; the FACT Coalition cites foundation funders such as Arca Foundation, Bay & Paul, and ClimateWorks. These funding disclosures are dated in the analyses mostly to 2024–2025 and appear repeatedly across the source set, underscoring that the available evidence documents other organizations’ funding rather than Factually.co’s [1] [3] [2].

4. Timeline and source reliability — why dates and context matter

The documents provided carry publication timestamps mainly from 2024–2025, with specific dates like April 25 and April 28, 2025 for funding profiles and financial pages. Those dates matter because funding statuses can change quickly and because the sources explicitly state which organization they cover. The profiles of Factual with $105M and the FactCheck.org disclosures are contemporaneous in 2025 and likely accurate for those entities as of those dates; however, the absence of any mention of Factually.co across these contemporaneous records is a strong indicator that either Factually.co has no public funders to report or that its funding information was not captured by these sources [1] [3].

5. Conclusion: what can be said and the next steps to verify

Based on the supplied analyses, no credible, sourced funding information for Factually.co is present; the materials instead document funders for Factual, FactCheck.org/Fact Forward, and the FACT Coalition. To answer the original question authoritatively, request direct disclosure from Factually.co (e.g., an “About,” donor list, or Form 990 if a nonprofit), consult corporate registry filings and domain records, or search independent reporting specifically naming “Factually.co.” The current evidence set shows clear name‑based conflation and provides verifiable funding data only for other organizations, not for Factually.co [4] [1] [6].

Want to dive deeper?
Who founded Factually.co and what are their backgrounds?
Does Factually.co disclose its donors or funding on its website?
Has Factually.co received funding from major philanthropic foundations (e.g., Gates, Omidyar) in 2022 or 2023?
Are there corporate advertisers or sponsors that financially support Factually.co?
Has Factually.co published a transparency or funding report detailing grants and donors in 2024?