Privacy coins have recently surged dramatically, causing the community to boil over. Various KOLs are touting "anonymity as a necessity," as if regulation has already been defeated and decentralization is within reach. But taking a step back and looking at the macro environment and on-chain liquidity, I’ve come to a harsh conclusion: this might not be a value return, but rather a final gamble of fooling around.

**The more it rises, the more dangerous it becomes**

The superficial logic sounds smooth—stricter regulation means greater demand for privacy. But from an investment perspective, it’s entirely different. The true enemy of privacy coins isn’t technology, but the tightening of liquidity channels. Just look at the actions of top global exchanges. The EU’s MiCA regulation is about to be implemented, South Korea and Japan are gradually delisting privacy coins, cutting off deposit and withdrawal channels one after another. The current surge in price is less about a value return and more about a "scarcity panic," or called a "liquidity squeeze." Market depth is so poor that a small buy order can push prices higher, looking unstoppable, but in reality, it’s very fragile.

**Who will take your order?**

What exactly are you buying privacy coins for? If it’s for making money, then you have to face a brutal question: who will buy your position in the future? Institutions? Absolutely not. Compliance is the lifeline for institutions—they’d rather buy air MEME tokens than touch privacy coins that are flagged by regulators. Retail investors? In this era of transparency and ETF adoption, retail enthusiasm and capacity to take on positions are declining. Without fresh inflows of capital, only fools pushing prices higher among themselves, and when liquidity truly dries up, it will be the moment of divergence between the bagholders and smart money.