PAX Gold

Verifier note: WARNING: evidence class mismatch; substance and goal-fit review required | panel 1/2 confirmed (sourceDomains=1) | gpt: unsupported — goal-fit: The fetched General Terms support only that Paxos describes PAX Gold as an “allocated gold stablecoin” and that the page was last modified December 12, 2025. They do not establish that PAX G | anthropic: confirmed — Goal-fit: the claim directly addresses the slot question by characterizing the underlying (allocated gold) and asserting the absence of any maturity/credit-quality/concentration profile disclosure. Bo

Verifier note: panel 0/2 confirmed (sourceDomains=1) | gpt: unsupported — goal-fit: The archived page contains a footer link labeled “Transparency Reports,” which supports only that Paxos links to such a resource. It does not identify a key document’s type, date, and origin | anthropic: unsupported — goal-fit: The slot question demands, per key document, a type (prospectus/terms/attestation/audit/fact-sheet), a date, and the URL at the original source. The fetched page only contains the footer nav

Verifier note: panel 1/2 confirmed (sourceDomains=1) | gpt: unsupported — goal-fit: The source confirms an AML/KYC disclosure dated December 12, 2025, but the claimed value calls it a “compliance policy,” which the page does not state, and the value omits the required origi | anthropic: confirmed — The cited Paxos AML/KYC page is titled 'Anti-Money Laundering/Know Your Customer (AML/KYC) Disclosure' and explicitly states 'Last Modified: December 12, 2025', matching the claimed type (AML/KYC disc

Verifier note: panel 1/2 confirmed (sourceDomains=1) | gpt: unsupported — goal-fit: The source confirms the document is Paxos’s General Terms and Conditions, describes it as an agreement governing the Paxos Platform, and states “Last Modified: December 12, 2025.” However, t | anthropic: confirmed — The archived source shows the header 'General Terms and Conditions' with 'Last Modified: December 12, 2025', and the Introduction confirms it is a platform agreement ('Your agreement with Paxos consis

Verifier note: panel 1/2 confirmed (sourceDomains=1) | gpt: unsupported — goal-fit: The cited RWA.xyz page only labels an item under “Terms” as “Paxos Gold Whitepaper.” It does not provide the whitepaper’s publication date or the document URL at the original issuer source, | anthropic: confirmed — The archived rwa.xyz PAXG page lists under the 'Terms' heading the document 'Paxos Gold Whitepaper', supporting both the document's existence and its characterization as a listed terms / product white

Verifier note: lost head-to-head to incumbent d9b983ba-c2bd-4923-9b4c-9caa86372200: The incumbent is more specific and fully supported by its own evidence: it includes beneficial-owner details and requested identification documents in addition to identity, address, birth date, and tax information. Both address KYC/KYB requirements, but the new claim omits supported requirements.

Verifier note: panel 1/2 confirmed (sourceDomains=1) | gpt: unsupported — The sources support withdrawal limits and potentially extended processing times only for U.S.-dollar withdrawals under the USD Stablecoin Terms, not specifically for PAXG redemptions. The PAXG source | anthropic: confirmed — All three material claims are supported by the fetched sources. (1) Withdrawal limits: Stablecoin T&C 2.3.2 and 2.5.7 state 'Paxos may impose withdrawal limits on your Account as per the Paxos User Gu

Verifier note: panel 1/3 confirmed (sourceDomains=1) | gpt: unsupported — The source supports that legislative or regulatory actions may adversely affect PAXG’s use, transfer, and value, and that Paxos may lack equivalent financial-institution regulation in a holder’s juris | anthropic: confirmed — goal-fit: The slot asks about registration status, restricted investors, and plausible regulatory actions and their impact on holders. The claim addresses regulatory actions that may adversely affect | gpt: unsupported — goal-fit: The cited terms directly support that legislative or regulatory actions may adversely affect the value of crypto assets, and the document expressly includes PAX Gold within that category. Th

Verifier note: panel 0/2 confirmed (sourceDomains=1) | gpt: unsupported — goal-fit: The cited issuer terms support generic risks that compromised or lost private keys can cause unrecoverable loss and that Paxos technological difficulties may prevent access to crypto assets, | anthropic: unsupported — goal-fit: The quotes are accurately supported by the source — 5.3(h) states private key compromise/loss can render crypto assets 'stolen or lost and otherwise unrecoverable', and 5.3(l) states technol

Verifier note: panel 1/2 confirmed (sourceDomains=1) | gpt: unsupported — goal-fit: The source confirms Clearing Bank credit and operational risk for Unallocated Gold balances and disclaims Paxos responsibility for associated losses. However, this exposure applies to third- | anthropic: confirmed — Section 9.2 of the archived PAXG terms states verbatim that Unallocated Gold balances are issued by a third-party Clearing Bank, are subject to the Clearing Bank's solvency, and that 'Paxos is not res

Verifier note: panel 0/2 confirmed (sourceDomains=1) | gpt: unsupported — goal-fit: The cited issuer terms support general crypto-asset price volatility and possible liquidation difficulty, and expressly include PAX Gold within the covered risk discussion. However, the slot | anthropic: unsupported — goal-fit: The slot question asks specifically about the token losing value because its underlying business or YIELD SOURCE deteriorates — rate moves, funding-rate flips, loan losses. The claim and its

Verifier note: panel 1/2 confirmed (sourceDomains=1) | gpt: unsupported — goal-fit: The sources confirm that Paxos account holders may convert PAXG into Unallocated Gold sent to a disclosed Loco London account. However, “completion may take several business days” is broader | anthropic: confirmed — Both cited quotes appear verbatim in the archived source material. The whitepaper (Page 9, 'Using PAX Gold') states: 'Paxos account holders can convert PAX Gold into U.S. Dollars or unallocated gold i

Verifier note: lost head-to-head to incumbent b9b239ec-41d6-4956-bfb0-abebf441edba: The claims are substantively equivalent and cite identical evidence. Neither fully covers all requested path fields, but both identify the U.S.-dollar conversion method and several-business-day timing. With quality tied, the incumbent wins.

Verifier note: panel 1/2 confirmed (sourceDomains=2) | gpt: unsupported — goal-fit: The sources support Ethereum as the original/native PAXG deployment and identify its ERC-20 contract as 0x45804880De22913dAFE09f4980848ECE6EcbAf78. However, they only list a Solana token add | anthropic: confirmed — The canonical deployment is directly supported. Paxos issuer docs (docs.paxos.com/guides/stablecoin/paxg/mainnet) list 'Ethereum Mainnet 0x45804880De22913dAFE09f4980848ECE6EcbAf78' as the token addres

Verifier note: panel 1/2 confirmed (sourceDomains=1) | gpt: unsupported — The issuer document confirms that Paxos charges 0.02% for on-chain Ethereum PAXG transfers and that Ethereum gas fees also apply. However, it does not establish that users themselves always pay gas se | anthropic: confirmed — The whitepaper states verbatim: 'For transactions that occur on-chain (transferred via Ethereum), there is a low Paxos transaction fee (0.02%) as well as the usual Ethereum gas fees.' This directly su

Verifier note: lost head-to-head to incumbent 14cdcdc2-9a6a-4036-8851-dd6b50a8fb7b: Both claims identify Paxos as able to upgrade all PAXG tokens regardless of custody location, but the incumbent more directly addresses the full slot by also stating that the cited evidence specifies no approval process or execution delay.

Verifier note: lost head-to-head to incumbent 34c2de76-6cbc-4995-90d9-d26bc7dc7021: The incumbent more directly and comprehensively identifies Paxos as the power holder and specifies the gating conditions for freezing: formal legal directives, contractual partner notifications, or Paxos’s sole discretion. Its cited evidence also supports creation, destruction, aggregate freezing, and upgrades. The new claim adds seizure segregation and an example freeze, but its evidence does not clearly support the asserted power to freeze specific addresses or explain governance gates such as a multisig, timelock, or committee.

Verifier note: panel 1/2 confirmed (sourceDomains=1) | gpt: unsupported — goal-fit: The issuer sources support both dependencies: Chainlink provides on-chain PAXG price feeds for DeFi smart contracts, while StoneX streaming London-gold prices underpin Paxos’s mint/redemptio | anthropic: confirmed — Both material claims are supported by the union of fetched sources. The Chainlink press release states "the launch of Chainlink-powered decentralized Price Feeds for both the PAX and PAXG tokens" prov

Verifier note: lost head-to-head to incumbent 84b54074-6726-4d54-980b-cd35427c4f6b: The claims are substantively tied: both directly list Ethereum Mainnet and Solana Mainnet Beta and cite identical issuer documentation with the same token addresses. Per the tie-break rule, the incumbent wins.

Verifier note: panel 1/2 confirmed (sourceDomains=1) | gpt: unsupported — goal-fit: The sources support month-end AICPA-standard attestation procedures comparing PAXG supply with gold held by UK third-party custodians, but they do not provide a specific examination date or | anthropic: confirmed — The PAX Gold newsroom source directly states Paxos engaged Withum to independently verify that the entire supply of PAX Gold tokens is consistent with troy ounces of gold held within the custody of th

Verifier note: lost head-to-head to incumbent 20c5b420-e3c0-4b03-bcc4-22a3ef22ef00: Both claims directly answer the slot and cite identical evidence. The new claim's 'examines whether outstanding PAXG matches' is not materially more specific than the incumbent's 'compares PAXG supply,' so quality is tied and the incumbent wins.

Verifier note: panel 1/2 confirmed (sourceDomains=2) | gpt: unsupported — goal-fit: The sources identify Brink’s Global Services Ltd. as custodian and separately state that third parties hold the gold in the United Kingdom on behalf of Paxos; they do not explicitly establis | anthropic: confirmed — The custodians atomic value answers the core slot question (who holds the underlying). RWA.xyz names the custodian's legal identifier as 'Brink's Global Services Ltd.', and the Paxos newsroom confirms

Verifier note: lost head-to-head to incumbent ecd62fd7-49a8-4d71-9da6-dfc3361060d6: Both claims directly establish that Paxos can freeze PAXG globally or by address and cite the same freeze conditions and real-world FTX action. The incumbent is more specific and better supported by its own evidence because it additionally explains that seized tokens may be transferred to a segregated Paxos wallet pursuant to legal requirements; therefore the new claim does not supersede it.

Verifier note: panel 1/3 confirmed (sourceDomains=2) | gpt: unsupported — The claim answers the slot, but the fetched evidence does not satisfy the required regulator evidence class. Paxos explicitly states that NYDFS approved it to issue PAXG and that it was a New York Sta | anthropic: confirmed — The slot asks for the offering/regulatory regime and licenses held; this claim directly answers it. The Paxos press release states 'The New York State Department of Financial Services (NYDFS) has appr | gpt: unsupported — goal-fit: the target regulatory_regime value is blank. Although the sources state that NYDFS approved Paxos to issue PAX Gold and identify Paxos as a New York State-chartered trust company regulated b

Verifier note: panel 1/2 confirmed (sourceDomains=2) | gpt: unsupported — Issuer documentation supports Brink’s as a gold-storage provider, Withum as the independent month-end attestation firm, and INTL FCStone for gold sourcing and live pricing data. However, the exact cus | anthropic: confirmed — All four named service providers and their roles are directly supported by the cited sources. rwa.xyz/assets/PAXG lists Custodian 'Brink's Global Services Ltd.' and Auditor 'WithumSmith+Brown', matchi

Verifier note: lost head-to-head to incumbent 75f867be-f0b3-4bf1-9d17-c59e5d7d0a76: The claims and their cited evidence are identical, so quality is tied; per the tie-break rule, the incumbent wins.

Verifier note: lost head-to-head to incumbent c7911900-139c-4cb7-a42b-a8d887ec34ab: The incumbent more fully answers the slot by providing three specific, dated milestones, including a quantified scale indicator, and its cited evidence directly supports each event. The new claim supports only the PAXG launch date, while its separate 'over a decade' statement is vague and not integrated into the claim.

Verifier note: panel 1/2 confirmed (sourceDomains=1) | gpt: unsupported — goal-fit: The whitepaper supports that one PAXG represents one fine troy ounce of allocated London Good Delivery gold, including fractional ownership of serial-numbered bars. However, it provides no a | anthropic: confirmed — Both claimed quotes appear verbatim in the archived whitepaper. Page 8 ("THE DESIGN OF PAX GOLD / Basics") states: "PAX Gold is a digital asset where one token represents one fine troy ounce of a Lond

Verifier note: lost head-to-head to incumbent 788e6543-2af9-426a-9c4f-7e0e8777380a: The claims and their cited evidence are identical: both directly state 100% (1:1) backing and describe month-end independent verification plus on-chain Proof of Reserve feeds. Because quality is tied, the incumbent wins.

Verifier note: panel 0/3 confirmed (sourceDomains=1) | gpt: unsupported — evidence class mismatch | anthropic: unsupported — evidence class mismatch: the only assigned evidence (c1b13c3a, c3245588, f31df88c) is tier-2 aggregator content from rwa.xyz, which falls outside the required evidence classes for this slot (issuer-do | gpt: unsupported — evidence class mismatch

Verifier note: panel 0/2 confirmed (sourceDomains=2) | gpt: unsupported — evidence class mismatch | anthropic: unsupported — evidence class mismatch

Verifier note: panel 1/2 confirmed (sourceDomains=1) | gpt: unsupported — goal-fit: The sources support one reserve class—allocated physical London Good Delivery gold—at an implied 100%/1:1 share and support bar-level serial-number allocation. However, the narrative does no | anthropic: confirmed — The claim addresses the SLOT QUESTION's reserve composition dimension. Every material assertion is supported by the union of sources. (1) 'Allocated physical London Good Delivery gold represents 100%

Verifier note: WARNING: evidence class mismatch; trusted tier 1 evidence requires substance and goal-fit review | panel 1/2 confirmed (sourceDomains=1) | gpt: unsupported — goal-fit: The issuer materials repeatedly describe PAXG holders as owning allocated underlying gold, including pro rata shares of identified bars, but they are explanatory and promotional documents ra | anthropic: confirmed — The claim states holders have direct ownership of allocated physical gold, with pro rata ownership below one bar. This directly answers the slot question (what the holder legally owns = direct ownersh

Verifier note: lost head-to-head to incumbent 770ec783-e4ff-42d6-bc92-7a00f57a3978: Both claims directly address the token, holder claim, and backing, but the incumbent more specifically describes the physical backing as allocated to identifiable bars, and its own evidence expressly supports allocation down to each bar’s serial number. The new claim names the issuer and London vault location, but its assertion that the gold is allocated is not as directly supported by its cited excerpts.

Verifier note: panel 1/3 confirmed (sourceDomains=1) | gpt: confirmed — The whitepaper states that smaller PAXG amounts can be converted to physical gold through a network of gold retailers “all over the world.” The fetched content gives no retail-redemption settlement ti | anthropic: unsupported — The whitepaper confirms that Paxos.com allows redemption of full-sized London Good Delivery bars and states: 'Through a network of gold retailers, they can convert smaller amounts to physical gold all | gpt: unsupported — goal-fit: The source confirms the stated method—smaller PAXG amounts can be converted to physical gold through a worldwide network of gold retailers—but the value does not answer the full slot questio

Verifier note: panel 0/2 confirmed (sourceDomains=2) | gpt: contradicted — The physical-bar method, 430-PAXG minimum plus User Guide fee, Paxos Account requirement, and customer-arranged delivery service are supported. However, Paxos does disclose timing and gates: redemptio | anthropic: unsupported — goal-fit: While the fetched sources confirm most redemption mechanics (minimum 430 PAXG, Account Page submission, London Good Delivery bars, fee referenced in User Guide), they do NOT disclose standar

Verifier note: panel 1/2 confirmed (sourceDomains=2) | gpt: contradicted — The current issuer terms specify a minimum of 430 PAXG, not over 430 PAXG. They also limit direct redemption to fully verified Paxos customers with funded Paxos Accounts, provide delivery instructions | anthropic: confirmed — The claim answers the slot question (eligibility, minimum, location, fees, settlement). Eligibility: 'Verified users' redeem PAXG for physical gold (rwa.xyz) / 'fully verified Customers' (terms). Mini

Verifier note: lost head-to-head to incumbent b2e5392b-9aa7-4ec1-99ab-f95d03484feb: The incumbent more directly answers both parts of the slot by identifying the legal wrapper as a New York state-chartered trust company and specifying its jurisdiction. Its own evidence supports state-chartered trust status and U.S. domicile. The new claim identifies Paxos Trust Company, LLC as custodian but does not state a jurisdiction, while its UK reference concerns third-party custody location rather than the wrapper's jurisdiction.

Verifier note: lost head-to-head to incumbent 483cd9b8-f024-4f0a-a634-6431d48adc21: The incumbent directly documents a named enforcement settlement between Paxos and the NYDFS, with a precise date, historical compliance context involving Binance, and a specific $26.5 million penalty. Its own evidence fully supports these details. The new claim is also responsive and supported, but describes an investigation ending without enforcement, making it less notable and specific than the concluded regulatory action and monetary penalty.

Verifier note: panel 1/2 confirmed (sourceDomains=1) | gpt: unsupported — goal-fit: The sources support allocated London Good Delivery gold backing and one fine troy ounce per PAXG, but the value does not disclose a holding weight or an as-of date as required by the slot qu | anthropic: confirmed — Both cited quotes are reproduced verbatim in the archived source content and directly support the stated value. The whitepaper's 'THE DESIGN OF PAX GOLD / Basics' section states 'PAX Gold is a digital

Verifier note: lost head-to-head to incumbent ed4c8aa0-5f7c-4786-9edf-36015d8b8acf: Both claims directly classify the underlying asset as commodity-rwa, but the incumbent's own evidence is more specific and better supported: it explicitly identifies the asset class as Commodities and states that each PAX Gold token represents one fine troy ounce of a London Good Delivery gold bar stored in London vaults. The new evidence only calls PAX Gold an allocated gold stablecoin. Under the tie rule and stronger specificity, the incumbent wins.

Verifier note: panel 1/3 confirmed (sourceDomains=1) | gpt: unsupported — goal-fit: The cited terms confirm that Paxos selects only one Ethereum fork for PAXG support and provides services and backing only on that fork. However, this addresses blockchain-fork treatment, not | anthropic: unsupported — goal-fit: The quoted text (Section 13.1) is genuinely present in the source and accurately supports the claim that Paxos supports PAXG on one, and only one, fork, providing services and USD backing on | kimi: confirmed — Section 13.1 of the archived PAXG Terms verbatim supports both material claims: Paxos will 'support PAXG on one, and only one, of the Forks' and will 'provide Services for, support and hold US dollars

Verifier note: panel 0/3 confirmed (sourceDomains=1) | gpt: unsupported — goal-fit: The archived page supports the five quoted provisions and identifies itself as a PAXG Agreement forming part of the Paxos Contractual Documentation, but it does not establish the final legal | anthropic: unsupported — goal-fit: The slot question asks for the final legally effective terms including issuer, date, identifier, and original registry URL. All five claimed quotes are verbatim-verifiable in the archived co | kimi: unsupported — goal-fit: the archived content confirms the cited URL hosts the operative product-specific PAX Gold Terms and Conditions (a self-described 'PAXG Agreement' covering conversion, redemption, forks, and

Verifier note: panel 1/3 confirmed (sourceDomains=1) | gpt: unsupported — The source states a purchase minimum of 0.01 PAXG and describes its value only approximately as “~$15.” It does not support an exact minimum initial subscription/mint of 15; it also separately notes a | anthropic: confirmed — The whitepaper directly answers the slot question (minimum initial subscription/mint): it states the purchase minimum is 0.01 PAXG, described as 'a very low investment minimum (0.01 PAXG or ~$15)'. Th | kimi: unsupported — The source states the investment minimum as 0.01 PAXG, with '~$15' given only as an approximate USD equivalent tied to the gold price at the time of writing, not as a stated $15 minimum. The whitepape

Verifier note: panel 0/3 confirmed (sourceDomains=1) | gpt: unsupported — goal-fit: The source states only that an account balance may take up to several business days to reflect a conversion or redemption, depending on the method. This is a maximum, method-dependent accoun | anthropic: unsupported — The quoted text is verbatim-accurate to Section 11.5 of the archived Paxos PAXG terms. However, the source states settlement may take "up to several business days," framed as a maximum ceiling qualifi | kimi: unsupported — goal-fit: the source states only an upper bound — 'it may take up to several business days for your Account balance to reflect the conversion or redemption' — hedged with 'commercially reasonable effo

Verifier note: panel 1/3 confirmed (sourceDomains=1) | gpt: unsupported — goal-fit: The issuer whitepaper supports a smaller-amount physical-gold conversion path through participating gold retailers worldwide, but the claim does not provide the required settlement timing, m | anthropic: confirmed — The whitepaper (issuer-docs, the assigned evidence class) states verbatim under 'Redeemable': 'Through a network of gold retailers, they can convert smaller amounts to physical gold all over the world | kimi: unsupported — goal-fit: the archived whitepaper does support that Paxos identifies a network of gold retailers for converting smaller PAXG amounts to physical gold worldwide ('Through a network of gold retailers, t