Privacy narratives are still present, but funds only recognize "liquidity"

Many people are confused: privacy needs have not disappeared, so why do privacy coin trends diverge so severely? The answer is actually simple—funds are not denying privacy, but are re-evaluating "whether they can smoothly enter and exit."

In the current market environment, the attitude of exchanges toward privacy coins is amplified infinitely. Some privacy coins are restricted in deposits and withdrawals, leverage is reduced, and contracts are canceled due to compliance pressures, directly weakening their trading attributes. For funds, no matter how advanced the concept, if liquidity is limited, the risk premium will be infinitely magnified, and prices will naturally be under pressure.

Conversely, privacy coins with relatively resilient trends often share several characteristics: high support from mainstream exchanges, well-developed derivatives, and decent order book depth. This does not mean they are "safer," but rather that they are easier for funds to manipulate. In a weak market environment, "good trading" is often more important than "good ideology."

Additionally, differences in technical routes within privacy coins are also amplifying divergence. Some projects continuously update protocols and expand ecosystems, while others have seen no significant progress for years, relying solely on their historical halo to support valuation. When market risk appetite declines, funds naturally move away from "stagnant privacy coins."

Therefore, the current trend in privacy coins is not a collective decline but an entry into a filtering stage centered on trading attributes and activity levels. For investors, understanding this is more important than simply being bullish or bearish. #隐私币行情分化