This past week, U.S.-based news publication The Wall Street Journal released a scathing report on the prominence of money laundering throughout cryptocurrency exchanges. The report specifically calls out ShapeShift as the top spot for cyber criminals to launder their illegally-obtained funds. However, ShapeShift CEO Erik Voorhees is calling out the claims for being “factually incorrect and deceptive.”

In a ShapeShift blog post publicly responding to the money laundering claims, Voorhees calls the Wall Street Journal’s report an “attack on ShapeShift and crypto” as a whole. In Voorhees’ public statement, the ShapeShift CEO says that he worked closely with journalists for five months “under false pretenses” and says that not only did the Wall Street Journal “omit relevant information,” they don’t have a sufficient understanding of blockchain nor how the ShapeShift platform works.

The Wall Street Journal’s report claims that over $88 million was laundered through a total of 46 different cryptocurrency exchanges, with ShapeShift accounting for over 10% of that, for a total of $9 million laundered through ShapeShift alone. Voorhees denies the claim, and explains that “even if it was true” the $9 million would only amount to 0.15% of the exchanges trading volume.

Voorhees added that ShapeShift has an “industry-leading compliance and AML program” and has a “strong record of complying with law-enforcement requests, providing valuable assistance in over 30 investigations in 13 different countries all over the world.”

Most importantly, Voorhees brings attention to the fact that ShapeShift doesn’t offer any fiat offramps, and only transacts between crypto-to-crypto, therefore, no fiat currencies have ever been laundered on the platform.

Voorhees summed up his thoughts about the situation:

“WSJ erroneously attributed vast sums of allegedly illicit transactions to ShapeShift in a way that exhibits a profound failure to grasp how blockchains, in general, and our system in particular, really work.”

ShapeShift’s blog post closed with a suggestion for Wall Street Journal: “be more accurate and objective.”