al-Jawzī in al-ʿIlal al-Mutanāhiyah, who said (2/371):

“Al-Dāraquṭnī said: ‘Abū al-Rabīʿ was mistaken. Rather, Hishām narrated it from Ḥafṣah bint Sīrīn, from Abū al-ʿĀliyah as his own statement.’”

The more appropriate course is to deem it defective on account of his father, Dāwūd, because of his unknown status, as mentioned above.

Moreover, I do not know whether the phrase, “as his own statement,” is accurate. For I found in Fatḥ al-Bārī by Ibn Ḥajar al-ʿAsqalānī (13/77):

“In Abū al-ʿĀliyah’s mursal report: ‘All the signs will occur within six months.’”

Its apparent sense is that it is attributed to the Prophet, but it is mursal. Allah knows best.

It has a corroborating report attributed to the Companion, from the hadith of Ḥudhayfah, who said:

“When you see the first of the signs, they will follow one another in succession.”

Ibn Abī Shaybah recorded it (15/63) through Mujālid, from al-Shaʿbī, from Ṣilah, from him.

This is a sound chain for corroborative evidence, and it effectively has the status of a report attributed to the Prophet—particularly since it is from the hadith of Ḥudhayfah, the keeper of the Messenger of Allah’s secret, peace and blessings be upon him.

He also has another corroborating report from the hadith of Ibn ʿAmr, whose documentation has already preceded under no. 1762. There I also mentioned a corroborating report for it from the hadith of Anas.

In sum, the hadith is undoubtedly authentic on the strength of these corroborating reports. Perhaps this is why al-Ḥāfiẓ affirmed it in Fatḥ al-Bārī (13/77).

As for the hadith, “The signs will come after two hundred,” it is fabricated. I have documented it in al-Ḍaʿīfah (1966).