As for the pretender Warbeck, unless there is something left of his DNA to compare (which I highly doubt) nothing conclusive can be said about that.
I just find it very hard to believe that Richard III would allow his nephews to go wandering about abroad where they would be obvious targets for armed opposition to him as Henry VII would shortly find out. Richard was careful to place another nephew with a strong claim to the throne, one probably better than his, under confinement in the household of his legal guardian, the Marquis of Dorset ( a stepson of Edward IV) who happened to be Constable of the Tower. This was Edward, Earl of Warwick, son of Richard's older brother, the attainted Duke of Clarence whose attainder was used as an excuse for debarring his son from rights of succession. The Earl, the last surviving male Plantagenet, was later executed by Henry VII along with Warbeck for attenpting to escape from the Tower of London which was declared a treasonous act. The fact that, unlike the Earl, Warbeck was publicly hanged like a common criminal suggests that Henry VII scorned his claim to be the younger of the princes and was confident in that belief or he would not have treated him thus.
Lastly, no-one seems to comment on what was the attitude of Edward IV's surving daughters, the eldest of whom was Henry VII's wife, to Warbeck's claim? If he was indeed their brother, surely they would have recognised this and forced Henry to at least treat him with the respect he deserved?
Until this is performed, nothing is conclusive: it's all a matter of speculation and conjecture. And unless the British monarchy is abolished, I don't see any authorization for DNA testing: His Majesty King Charles III does not appear anymore inclined than his mother, Queen Elizabeth II, to probe into the matter.
Unless I'm mistaken ... we can only wait and see ...
298