Introduction: Since the US presidential elections in 2016 the topic of fake news has gained increasing importance in the news media as well as in research. This growing interest is due to the potential of fake news to bias beliefs and opinions, thus, putatively also political attitudes and voting decisions. Recent work has investigated individual characteristics in the context of susceptibility versus resilience to believing fake news. Thereby, the protective role of cognitive factors such as analytic thinking has been emphasized. However, much less is known about non-ability related factors such as personality. In addition to the investigation of underlying factors of susceptibility (versus resilience) to believing fake news, it is important to understand susceptibility to misclassifying true news as fake. Misclassifying true news as fake is equally threatening for a fact-based and informed evaluation of a situation and belief formation.Methods: Against this background, with the present study we investigated the associations between fluid and crystallized intelligence as well as the Big Five personality traits, and susceptibilities to misclassifying both fake and true news. A total of N = 530 (n = 396 men) participants took part in an online study and provided data in tests assessing fluid and crystallized intelligence. Moreover, all participants filled in the Big Five Inventory and participated in a Fake and True News Test.Results: Results show that, overall, participants were quite accurate in classifying both fake and true news. Regarding personality, only Extraversion was negatively associated with discerning fake from true news. Importantly, fluid intelligence was negatively associated with susceptibility to believing fake news, while crystallized intelligence was negatively associated with susceptibility to misclassifying true news as fake.Conclusion: Taken together, the present findings reveal differences in the underlying factors of susceptibilities to believing fake news and misclassifying true news as fake. Thereby, the results underline the importance of separating these susceptibilities. Moreover, based on these results, protective measures are discussed, which might help to improve the abilities to identify both fake and true news.