Checked a site's DR on two different tools, got completely different numbers - which one do you actually trust?

Had a weird one recently. A site I was evaluating showed a solid DR on the sheet/source I was working from - good enough that it would've cleared my usual threshold without a second look. Ran it through an independent checker out of habit, and the number came back nowhere close. Not a small gap either - the kind of difference that changes whether a site qualifies or not.

Content-wise the site looked fine, genuinely on-topic, nothing spammy about it. So it wasn't a case of "obviously fake site, obviously fake metrics" - it just had two very different authority scores depending on where you looked.

Made me realize I'd been trusting whatever number came attached to a listing without re-checking it myself, which in hindsight is a bit backwards - the whole point of using DR/DA as a filter is that it's supposed to be objective, but apparently it depends a lot on which tool/database is behind the number and how recently it was crawled.

Now I re-verify anything that's about to clear or fail a threshold on the margin, rather than trusting whatever figure came with the source. Slower, but I'd rather catch it before it affects a decision than after.

Anyone else factor in which tool a DR/DA number came from, or is cross-checking overkill for most use cases?

Always cross check if the numbers look questionable. DR is just an estimate anyway, so don't rely on a single tool.

I'd rather spend an extra minute verifying than make a decision based on outdated data.