Five-year price · 20 complete calendar quarters · BTC-relative

Privacy Crypto Coins

Is Privacy outperforming Bitcoin, and is leadership broad?

Bottom line

Railgun ranks first for research priority in Privacy crypto at 39.9/100, and its native activity evidence clears the coverage gate. The theme's 13-week excess versus Bitcoin is +15.3% on 9% breadth, which is what decides whether that lead is isolated or broad. 3 of the 27 assets here carry enough native evidence to move past a tape-led label.

These Privacy coins are part of the cryptocurrency universe this site tracks daily — 894 of the top 1,000 crypto currency assets by market cap, priced from exchange closes and matched to protocol fees and revenue where a protocol publishes them.

The theme itself · before any single company

How has Privacy moved against Bitcoin?

The line below covers 5 years. Over the most recent two of them this theme is 88% ahead of Bitcoin. Protocol revenue across its protocols grew 12% on average over the last four reported quarters. It has been ahead of Bitcoin on a rolling three-month view for 11 weeks running.

FADING · −1 in 4w✓Price and the fundamentals both up11 of 24 coins ahead of Bitcoin by 5% or more over three months

RS ↑11w · 3/24 >200d (+0) · 11/24 lead (−1) · EPS 2/3↑

Privacy, equal-weighted, based at 200 Bitcoin, same base, same start trailing 12-month protocol revenue rising falling

Strength anatomy MixedHow much of the theme is participating, how recently, and whether the movers score well.

Together11 of 24 coins moving

Fresh1 crossed in the last 4 weeks

Down the cap ladder — bar is now, tick is four weeks ago

Large 3/50

Mid 4/90

Small 4/10−1

Participation is not spreading downward this month; the larger companies are still carrying most of it.

Both lines start at 200 in the same week, so the distance between them is the whole story: the theme line is an equal-weighted index of its 24 coins. The bars underneath are trailing 12-month protocol revenue, one bar per reported quarter, each member rebased to 100 at the start and the theme taking the median — so a price line pulling away from flat bars is a re-rating, not earnings. A bar turns red when that figure is lower than the quarter before. Rules are fixed and applied identically everywhere on this site: ahead by 5% or more over three months, or behind by 20% or more over a year while protocol revenue grew 20% or more. Hover any point to read both values and the gap. This is a description of what the numbers did, not advice.

RISK OFF market context

Privacy vs Bitcoin — Relative Strength & Breadth

Privacy crypto has outperformed Bitcoin by 86.1% over 52 weeks on an equal-weight index of current members. Over 13 weeks the figure is +15.3%. 2 of 23 covered assets are above their own 200-day average. Zama leads Bitcoin-relative strength at +103.6%. Price readings are as of 2026-07-24.

+15%13w vs BTC

+86%52w vs BTC

2/23Above 200-DMA

ZAMARS leader · +104%

Assets

canonical functional membership

Activity-covered

3/27

enough native evidence

Top score

39.9/100

Railgun

Calendar quarters

complete; missing stays missing

Global asset selection · top 20 shown

Showing 20 of 27 assets

00 · exact additive research priority

4-Factor Crypto Evidence Score

A within-theme research-priority score for the 27 assets in Privacy, out of 100. The four displayed point contributions add exactly to the total, and the market regime changes the action label, never the arithmetic. Railgun is highest at 39.9/100 on 87% evidence. It ranks research attention, not portfolio action.

Market leadership · 35Network & economic traction · 30Value capture · 20Liquidity & downside risk · 15

Railgun leads the current research queue at 39.9/100 with 87% evidence.

3/27 assets have enough native activity evidence to move beyond a tape-led label.

Missing native metrics are not scored as zero and are not silently reweighted. They pull only the affected factor toward neutral and lower its visible evidence percentage.

1. Railgun · RAIL

39.9/100 · Illiquid · research only · 87% evidence

Exact sum: 17.4 + 11.3 + 8.3 + 2.9 = 39.9

Decision use: Evidence is mixed. Keep normal research priority and wait for two pillars to agree.

17.4/35Market leadership

RS-BTC 24.5 pp · RS-sector -21.7 pp · 200-DMA below

100% evidence

11.3/30Network & economic traction

Fees -6.2% · revenue -6.2% · users —

70% evidence

8.3/20Value capture

Fee yield 3.88% · revenue yield 3.88%

80% evidence

2.9/15Liquidity & downside risk

30d median volume $115,071 · vol 109.9%

100% evidence

2. Tezos · XTZ

37.2/100 · Lagging · market gate closed · 87% evidence

Exact sum: 9.0 + 14.0 + 4.3 + 9.9 = 37.2

Decision use: Evidence is mixed. Keep normal research priority and wait for two pillars to agree.

9.0/35Market leadership

RS-BTC -20.7 pp · RS-sector 9.4 pp · 200-DMA below

100% evidence

14.0/30Network & economic traction

Fees 10.5% · revenue 11.8% · users —

70% evidence

4.3/20Value capture

Fee yield 0.19% · revenue yield 0.17%

80% evidence

9.9/15Liquidity & downside risk

30d median volume $9,722,684 · vol 71%

100% evidence

3. Zcash · ZEC

70.6/100 · Tape-led · on-chain proof incomplete · 50% evidence

Exact sum: 34.0 + 15.0 + 10.0 + 11.6 = 70.6

Decision use: Treat this as a tape-led lead. Require native activity confirmation before upgrading research priority.

34.0/35Market leadership

RS-BTC 53.5 pp · RS-sector 20.8 pp · 200-DMA above

100% evidence

15.0/30Network & economic traction

Fees — · revenue — · users —

0% evidence

10.0/20Value capture

Fee yield — · revenue yield —

0% evidence

11.6/15Liquidity & downside risk

30d median volume $440,702,277 · vol 89.6%

100% evidence

4. Zama · ZAMA

68.0/100 · Tape-led · on-chain proof incomplete · 43% evidence

Exact sum: 31.3 + 15.0 + 10.0 + 11.7 = 68.0

Decision use: Treat this as a tape-led lead. Require native activity confirmation before upgrading research priority.

31.3/35Market leadership

RS-BTC 103.6 pp · RS-sector 75.9 pp · 200-DMA —

80% evidence

15.0/30Network & economic traction

Fees — · revenue — · users —

0% evidence

10.0/20Value capture

Fee yield — · revenue yield —

0% evidence

11.7/15Liquidity & downside risk

30d median volume $24,606,270 · vol 94%

100% evidence

5. Anoma · XAN

63.4/100 · Illiquid · research only · 50% evidence

Exact sum: 29.7 + 15.0 + 10.0 + 8.7 = 63.4

Decision use: Treat this as a tape-led lead. Require native activity confirmation before upgrading research priority.

29.7/35Market leadership

RS-BTC 46.7 pp · RS-sector 14.7 pp · 200-DMA above

100% evidence

15.0/30Network & economic traction

Fees — · revenue — · users —

0% evidence

10.0/20Value capture

Fee yield — · revenue yield —

0% evidence

8.7/15Liquidity & downside risk

30d median volume $4,893,734 · vol 132.7%

100% evidence

6. Monero · XMR

62.4/100 · Tape-led · on-chain proof incomplete · 50% evidence

Exact sum: 23.6 + 15.0 + 10.0 + 13.8 = 62.4

Decision use: Treat this as a tape-led lead. Require native activity confirmation before upgrading research priority.

23.6/35Market leadership

RS-BTC 15 pp · RS-sector 19 pp · 200-DMA below

100% evidence

15.0/30Network & economic traction

Fees — · revenue — · users —

0% evidence

10.0/20Value capture

Fee yield — · revenue yield —

0% evidence

13.8/15Liquidity & downside risk

30d median volume $98,290,287 · vol 45%

100% evidence

7. Canton · CC

61.5/100 · Constructive watch · market gate closed · 32% evidence

Exact sum: 17.5 + 23.0 + 13.5 + 7.5 = 61.5

Decision use: Evidence is mixed. Keep normal research priority and wait for two pillars to agree.

17.5/35Market leadership

RS-BTC — · RS-sector — · 200-DMA —

0% evidence

23.0/30Network & economic traction

Fees 3907.2% · revenue 3907.2% · users —

53% evidence

13.5/20Value capture

Fee yield 8.98% · revenue yield 8.98%

80% evidence

7.5/15Liquidity & downside risk

30d median volume — · vol —

0% evidence

8. Litecoin · LTC

55.0/100 · Tape-led · on-chain proof incomplete · 55% evidence

Exact sum: 17.6 + 13.3 + 10.0 + 14.1 = 55.0

Decision use: Treat this as a tape-led lead. Require native activity confirmation before upgrading research priority.

17.6/35Market leadership

RS-BTC 0.1 pp · RS-sector 16.2 pp · 200-DMA below

100% evidence

13.3/30Network & economic traction

Fees — · revenue — · users —

17% evidence

10.0/20Value capture

Fee yield — · revenue yield —

0% evidence

14.1/15Liquidity & downside risk

30d median volume $226,698,139 · vol 33.6%

100% evidence

9. MimbleWimbleCoin · MWC

54.2/100 · Illiquid · research only · 50% evidence

Exact sum: 27.4 + 15.0 + 10.0 + 1.8 = 54.2

Decision use: Treat this as a tape-led lead. Require native activity confirmation before upgrading research priority.

27.4/35Market leadership

RS-BTC 61.2 pp · RS-sector 119.5 pp · 200-DMA below

100% evidence

15.0/30Network & economic traction

Fees — · revenue — · users —

0% evidence

10.0/20Value capture

Fee yield — · revenue yield —

0% evidence

1.8/15Liquidity & downside risk

30d median volume $1,479 · vol 106.9%

100% evidence

10. Dash · DASH

53.5/100 · Tape-led · on-chain proof incomplete · 55% evidence

Exact sum: 16.0 + 14.8 + 10.0 + 12.7 = 53.5

Decision use: Treat this as a tape-led lead. Require native activity confirmation before upgrading research priority.

16.0/35Market leadership

RS-BTC 6.3 pp · RS-sector -1.3 pp · 200-DMA below

100% evidence

14.8/30Network & economic traction

Fees — · revenue — · users —

17% evidence

10.0/20Value capture

Fee yield — · revenue yield —

0% evidence

12.7/15Liquidity & downside risk

30d median volume $47,919,205 · vol 47.1%

100% evidence

11. ZEROBASE · ZBT

52.2/100 · Illiquid · research only · 17% evidence

Exact sum: 17.5 + 17.3 + 10.0 + 7.4 = 52.2

Decision use: Treat this as a tape-led lead. Require native activity confirmation before upgrading research priority.

17.5/35Market leadership

RS-BTC — · RS-sector — · 200-DMA —

0% evidence

17.3/30Network & economic traction

Fees — · revenue — · users —

17% evidence

10.0/20Value capture

Fee yield — · revenue yield —

0% evidence

7.4/15Liquidity & downside risk

30d median volume $1,525,046 · vol —

80% evidence

12. Octra · OCT

50.0/100 · Tape-led · on-chain proof incomplete · 0% evidence

Exact sum: 17.5 + 15.0 + 10.0 + 7.5 = 50.0

Decision use: Treat this as a tape-led lead. Require native activity confirmation before upgrading research priority.

17.5/35Market leadership

RS-BTC — · RS-sector — · 200-DMA —

0% evidence

15.0/30Network & economic traction

Fees — · revenue — · users —

0% evidence

10.0/20Value capture

Fee yield — · revenue yield —

0% evidence

7.5/15Liquidity & downside risk

30d median volume — · vol —

0% evidence

13. Zano · ZANO

48.3/100 · Illiquid · research only · 50% evidence

Exact sum: 16.1 + 15.0 + 10.0 + 7.2 = 48.3

Decision use: Treat this as a tape-led lead. Require native activity confirmation before upgrading research priority.

16.1/35Market leadership

RS-BTC 11.3 pp · RS-sector -6.2 pp · 200-DMA below

100% evidence

15.0/30Network & economic traction

Fees — · revenue — · users —

0% evidence

10.0/20Value capture

Fee yield — · revenue yield —

0% evidence

7.2/15Liquidity & downside risk

30d median volume $1,313,387 · vol 68.4%

100% evidence

14. Pirate Chain · ARRR

47.4/100 · Illiquid · research only · 50% evidence

Exact sum: 19.0 + 15.0 + 10.0 + 3.4 = 47.4

Decision use: Treat this as a tape-led lead. Require native activity confirmation before upgrading research priority.

19.0/35Market leadership

RS-BTC 20.1 pp · RS-sector -5.3 pp · 200-DMA below

100% evidence

15.0/30Network & economic traction

Fees — · revenue — · users —

0% evidence

10.0/20Value capture

Fee yield — · revenue yield —

0% evidence

3.4/15Liquidity & downside risk

30d median volume $82,652 · vol 85%

100% evidence

15. Mina Protocol · MINA

47.3/100 · Illiquid · research only · 50% evidence

Exact sum: 13.9 + 15.0 + 10.0 + 8.4 = 47.3

Decision use: Treat this as a tape-led lead. Require native activity confirmation before upgrading research priority.

13.9/35Market leadership

RS-BTC -11.9 pp · RS-sector 15 pp · 200-DMA below

100% evidence

15.0/30Network & economic traction

Fees — · revenue — · users —

0% evidence

10.0/20Value capture

Fee yield — · revenue yield —

0% evidence

8.4/15Liquidity & downside risk

30d median volume $4,425,422 · vol 76.3%

100% evidence

16. Tornado Cash · TORN

46.0/100 · Illiquid · research only · 63% evidence

Exact sum: 11.9 + 15.3 + 14.0 + 4.8 = 46.0

Decision use: Treat this as a tape-led lead. Require native activity confirmation before upgrading research priority.

11.9/35Market leadership

RS-BTC -15.7 pp · RS-sector 14.7 pp · 200-DMA below

100% evidence

15.3/30Network & economic traction

Fees — · revenue — · users —

17% evidence

14.0/20Value capture

Fee yield 26.3% · revenue yield —

40% evidence

4.8/15Liquidity & downside risk

30d median volume $58,663 · vol 62.9%

100% evidence

17. Nockchain · NOCK

44.5/100 · Illiquid · research only · 50% evidence

Exact sum: 16.8 + 15.0 + 10.0 + 2.7 = 44.5

Decision use: Treat this as a tape-led lead. Require native activity confirmation before upgrading research priority.

16.8/35Market leadership

RS-BTC 39.5 pp · RS-sector -52.4 pp · 200-DMA below

100% evidence

15.0/30Network & economic traction

Fees — · revenue — · users —

0% evidence

10.0/20Value capture

Fee yield — · revenue yield —

0% evidence

2.7/15Liquidity & downside risk

30d median volume $1,042,982 · vol 208.9%

100% evidence

18. Horizen · ZEN

41.8/100 · Tape-led · on-chain proof incomplete · 55% evidence

Exact sum: 7.4 + 12.5 + 10.0 + 11.9 = 41.8

Decision use: Treat this as a tape-led lead. Require native activity confirmation before upgrading research priority.

7.4/35Market leadership

RS-BTC -16.2 pp · RS-sector -0.1 pp · 200-DMA below

100% evidence

12.5/30Network & economic traction

Fees — · revenue — · users —

17% evidence

10.0/20Value capture

Fee yield — · revenue yield —

0% evidence

11.9/15Liquidity & downside risk

30d median volume $10,658,455 · vol 39.9%

100% evidence

19. Arcium · ARX

39.8/100 · Illiquid · research only · 50% evidence

Exact sum: 10.0 + 15.0 + 10.0 + 4.8 = 39.8

Decision use: Treat this as a tape-led lead. Require native activity confirmation before upgrading research priority.

10.0/35Market leadership

RS-BTC -7.5 pp · RS-sector -2.4 pp · 200-DMA below

100% evidence

15.0/30Network & economic traction

Fees — · revenue — · users —

0% evidence

10.0/20Value capture

Fee yield — · revenue yield —

0% evidence

4.8/15Liquidity & downside risk

30d median volume $197,548 · vol 26.8%

100% evidence

20. Ergo · ERG

38.6/100 · Illiquid · research only · 55% evidence

Exact sum: 9.7 + 13.1 + 10.0 + 5.8 = 38.6

Decision use: Treat this as a tape-led lead. Require native activity confirmation before upgrading research priority.

9.7/35Market leadership

RS-BTC -14.1 pp · RS-sector 2.1 pp · 200-DMA below

100% evidence

13.1/30Network & economic traction

Fees — · revenue — · users —

17% evidence

10.0/20Value capture

Fee yield — · revenue yield —

0% evidence

5.8/15Liquidity & downside risk

30d median volume $114,129 · vol 46.8%

100% evidence

Showing 20 of 27 ranked assets

01 · complete calendar-quarter evidence

Which projects are generating the most network fees?

LeaderCanton · $485.4M

Gap8694% versus #2

Persistence3 assets have positive comparable growth

Coverage4/27 assets

Investor read: Use this as a network-economics research lead, not token-holder earnings. Verify whether the measured activity accrues to the token before treating scale as value capture.

This conclusion weakens if: fee growth turns negative across two complete calendar quarters or fee coverage falls below the stated threshold.

Trailing 12-month fees is the sum of the latest four complete calendar quarters. Growth compares that sum with the prior four-quarter sum.

Trailing 12-month feestop five

1Canton CC$485.4M

2Tornado Cash TORN$5.5M

3Railgun RAIL$4.6M

4Tezos XTZ$500.4K

Fee growthtop five

1Canton CC+3,907%

2Tezos XTZ+11%

3Litecoin LTC+5.5%

4Railgun RAIL-6.2%

Network fees · asset comparison

4/27 level · 4/27 change

Latest comparable data · top 20 shown first

Asset	Trailing 12-month fees	Fee growth
railgun	$1.0M	-6.2%
tezos	$26.1K	+11%
zcash	—	—
zama	—	—
anoma	—	—
monero	—	—
canton-network	$190.4M	+3,907%
litecoin	$39.6K	+5.5%
mimblewimblecoin	—	—
dash	—	—
zerobase	—	—
octra	—	—
zano	—	—
pirate-chain	—	—
mina-protocol	—	—
tornado-cash	$806.2K	—
nockchain	—	—
zencash	—	—
arcium	—	—
ergo	—	—
humanity	—	—
verge	—	—
decred	—	—
midnight-3	—	—
oasis-network	—	—
verus-coin	—	—
aleo	—	—

Showing 20 of 27 assets

02 · complete calendar-quarter evidence

Which projects convert activity into protocol revenue?

LeaderCanton · $485.4M

Gap10526% versus #2

Persistence2 assets have positive comparable growth

Coverage3/27 assets

Investor read: Use this as a network-economics research lead, not token-holder earnings. Verify whether the measured activity accrues to the token before treating scale as value capture.

This conclusion weakens if: revenue growth turns negative or the revenue-to-fees take rate falls for two complete calendar quarters.

Trailing 12-month revenue is the sum of the latest four complete calendar quarters. Growth compares that sum with the prior four-quarter sum.

Trailing 12-month revenuetop five

1Canton CC$485.4M

2Railgun RAIL$4.6M

3Tezos XTZ$461.6K

Revenue growthtop five

1Canton CC+3,907%

2Tezos XTZ+12%

3Railgun RAIL-6.2%

Protocol revenue · asset comparison

3/27 level · 3/27 change

Latest comparable data · top 20 shown first

Asset	Trailing 12-month revenue	Revenue growth
railgun	$1.0M	-6.2%
tezos	$21.7K	+12%
zcash	—	—
zama	—	—
anoma	—	—
monero	—	—
canton-network	$190.4M	+3,907%
litecoin	—	—
mimblewimblecoin	—	—
dash	—	—
zerobase	—	—
octra	—	—
zano	—	—
pirate-chain	—	—
mina-protocol	—	—
tornado-cash	$0	—
nockchain	—	—
zencash	—	—
arcium	—	—
ergo	—	—
humanity	—	—
verge	—	—
decred	—	—
midnight-3	—	—
oasis-network	—	—
verus-coin	—	—
aleo	—	—

Showing 20 of 27 assets

03 · complete calendar-quarter evidence

Where is capital actually committed on-chain?

LeaderTornado Cash · $428.5M

Gap449% versus #2

Persistence2 assets have positive comparable growth

Coverage13/27 assets

Investor read: Use this as a network-economics research lead, not token-holder earnings. Verify whether the measured activity accrues to the token before treating scale as value capture.

This conclusion weakens if: TVL rises while fees and users fall; that pattern can be incentive-funded mercenary liquidity.

Quarter-end TVL uses protocol TVL first for protocol assets and exact-ID chain TVL for chain assets or where protocol TVL is unavailable. A blank is unavailable, not zero. Growth compares with the same complete quarter one year earlier.

Quarter-end TVLtop five

1Tornado Cash TORN$428.5M

2Railgun RAIL$78.0M

3ZEROBASE ZBT$55.9M

4Zama ZAMA$32.0M

5Tezos XTZ$21.1M

TVL growthtop five

1ZEROBASE ZBT+60%

2Railgun RAIL+29%

3Tornado Cash TORN-7.2%

4Dash DASH-18%

5Oasis ROSE-19%

Total value locked · asset comparison

13/27 level · 10/27 change

Latest comparable data · top 20 shown first

Asset	Quarter-end TVL	TVL growth
railgun	$78.0M	+29%
tezos	$21.1M	-44%
zcash	$1.7M	—
zama	$32.0M	—
anoma	—	—
monero	—	—
canton-network	$335.1K	—
litecoin	$654.8K	-73%
mimblewimblecoin	—	—
dash	$75.9K	-18%
zerobase	$55.9M	+60%
octra	—	—
zano	—	—
pirate-chain	—	—
mina-protocol	—	—
tornado-cash	$428.5M	-7.2%
nockchain	—	—
zencash	$0	-100%
arcium	—	—
ergo	$832.5K	-79%
humanity	—	—
verge	—	—
decred	—	—
midnight-3	—	—
oasis-network	$184.9K	-19%
verus-coin	$5.9M	-88%
aleo	—	—

Showing 20 of 27 assets

04 · let price answer last

Which assets lead on price and relative strength?

Zama leads the Privacy tape on Bitcoin-relative strength at +104% over 90 days. 2 of 23 covered assets are above their own 200-day average. Price shows what happened; BTC-relative strength shows whether the asset beat crypto’s opportunity-cost benchmark. Both lines run through 2026-07-24.

Complete set · no silent drops

Which assets are in Privacy?

27 priced assets are assigned to Privacy, listed below by rank with every one visible — including tape-only names that publish no protocol activity. Each asset has exactly one canonical functional theme, chosen by a specific-to-general first match on its categories. Pegged, wrapped, liquid-staking receipt and tokenized-asset instruments are excluded because they have no independent price discovery.

Rank	Asset	Price	90d	RS-BTC	200-DMA	30d vol	Median volume	Price quality	Activity source	Score	Evidence
1	Railgun RAIL	$1.63	+7.1%	+24%	Below	110%	$115.1K	usable	protocol	39.9	87%
2	Tezos XTZ	$0.2281	-38%	-21%	Below	71%	$9.7M	usable	protocol + chain TVL	37.2	87%
3	Zcash ZEC	$488.46	+36%	+53%	Above	90%	$440.7M	usable	chain TVL	70.6	50%
4	Zama ZAMA	$0.0534	+86%	+104%	—	94%	$24.6M	usable	protocol	68.0	43%
5	Anoma XAN	$0.0110	+29%	+47%	Above	133%	$4.9M	usable	tape only	63.4	50%
6	Monero XMR	$363.67	-2.4%	+15%	Below	45%	$98.3M	usable	tape only	62.4	50%
7	Canton CC	—	—	—	—	—	—	usable	protocol + chain TVL	61.5	32%
8	Litecoin LTC	$46.33	-17%	+0.1%	Below	34%	$226.7M	usable	protocol + chain TVL	55.0	55%
9	MimbleWimbleCoin MWC	$9.86	+44%	+61%	Below	107%	$1.5K	usable	tape only	54.2	50%
10	Dash DASH	$32.11	-11%	+6.3%	Below	47%	$47.9M	usable	chain TVL	53.5	55%
11	ZEROBASE ZBT	$0.1027	—	—	—	—	$1.5M	usable	protocol	52.2	17%
12	Octra OCT	—	—	—	—	—	—	usable	tape only	50.0	0%
13	Zano ZANO	$9.18	-6.1%	+11%	Below	68%	$1.3M	usable	tape only	48.3	50%
14	Pirate Chain ARRR	$0.2111	+2.7%	+20%	Below	85%	$82.7K	usable	tape only	47.4	50%
15	Mina Protocol MINA	$0.0442	-29%	-12%	Below	76%	$4.4M	usable	tape only	47.3	50%
16	Tornado Cash TORN	$5.50	-33%	-16%	Below	63%	$58.7K	usable	protocol	46.0	63%
17	Nockchain NOCK	$0.0160	+22%	+39%	Below	209%	$1.0M	usable	tape only	44.5	50%
18	Horizen ZEN	$4.01	-34%	-16%	Below	40%	$10.7M	usable	chain TVL	41.8	55%
19	Arcium ARX	$0.0112	-25%	-7.5%	Below	27%	$197.5K	usable	tape only	39.8	50%
20	Ergo ERG	$0.2166	-32%	-14%	Below	47%	$114.1K	usable	chain TVL	38.6	55%
21	Humanity H	$0.0623	-59%	-41%	Below	154%	$10.3M	usable	tape only	38.6	50%
22	Verge XVG	$0.0021	-36%	-19%	Below	51%	$2.5M	usable	tape only	38.4	50%
23	Decred DCR	$11.63	-41%	-24%	Below	70%	$1.6M	usable	tape only	38.0	50%
24	Midnight NIGHT	$0.0202	-44%	-26%	Below	173%	$475.9K	usable	tape only	35.1	50%
25	Oasis ROSE	$0.0053	-48%	-31%	Below	46%	$1.6M	usable	chain TVL	33.4	55%
26	Verus VRSC	$0.3873	-50%	-33%	Below	317%	$0	usable	chain TVL	32.2	55%
27	ALEO ALEO	$0.0184	-59%	-42%	Below	75%	$1.8M	usable	tape only	31.0	50%

Showing 20 of 27 assets

Methodology · boundaries make the answer useful

What can make this comparison misleading?

This Privacy comparison names 5 ways its own evidence can mislead, all listed below. The largest is that crypto network activity is not company earnings: protocol revenue does not automatically accrue to token holders. Coverage is also uneven — 3 of 27 assets carry enough native evidence to rank on more than price.

Crypto network activity is not company earnings. Protocol revenue does not automatically accrue to token holders.
Market-cap values are a dated universe snapshot, not point-in-time historical supply data.
Current category labels are applied to historical prices; this creates survivorship and taxonomy hindsight.
Funding rates, open interest, liquidations, exchange flows, unlock schedules, historical circulating supply and developer activity are not held and are not inferred.
Equal weighting is used for sector history because true historical market-cap weights are unavailable.

Price and technicalsThrough 2026-07-24. Five-year weekly observations benchmarked to Bitcoin.

Protocol activityThrough 2026-07-24. Fees, revenue, protocol TVL and DEX volume.

Chain activityUsers and transactions through unavailable; separately sourced chain TVL through 2026-07-24.

Market capSnapshot dated 2026-07-04; no historical supply series is implied.

Questions the page should answer directly

Crypto analysis FAQs

These 18 answers cover the questions this page can settle from data it holds — what the category is, how the score is built, what the coverage gaps are, and what would change the read. Every answer below is also present in the page’s FAQ schema and in its plain-text rendition. None of them is a recommendation.

What is Privacy crypto?

Privacy crypto refers to cryptocurrency projects grouped by what they actually do rather than by market fashion. This page tracks 27 such coins by market cap, price and Bitcoin-relative strength, with protocol fees and revenue where a project publishes them. Readings are as of 2026-07-24.

What is the total market cap of Privacy crypto coins?

The Privacy coins on this page are tracked against a universe of 894 of the top 1,000 crypto currency assets by market cap. Market-cap metadata is dated 2026-07-04, separately from the price series, and each coin's own figure is in the table on this page.

Are Privacy crypto coins outperforming Bitcoin?

Privacy has returned +86.1% versus Bitcoin over 52 weeks and +15.3% over 13 weeks on an equal-weight current-member index. 2/23 covered assets are above their 200-day averages as of 2026-07-24.

Which Privacy asset has the strongest research score?

Railgun ranks first at 39.9/100: 17.4 + 11.3 + 8.3 + 2.9 = 39.9. It is labelled “Illiquid · research only” with 87% overall evidence and 74% native-economics evidence.

How is the Privacy 4-factor score calculated?

The exact sum is Market leadership /35 + Network and economic traction /30 + Value capture /20 + Liquidity and downside risk /15. Missing data pulls only the affected factor toward neutral and lowers evidence; it is never silently reweighted.

Why can a Privacy asset be labelled tape-led?

Tape-led means price and relative-strength evidence exists but less than half of the native traction and value-capture evidence is available. Such assets remain visible but rank below fully evidenced assets.

Does protocol revenue accrue to the token?

Not necessarily. Protocol fees and revenue measure network economics; token-holder value depends on the protocol’s burn, buyback, staking, distribution and governance rules. This page never assumes accrual merely because revenue exists.

Does crypto have a P/E or PEG ratio?

No comparable company-style P/E or PEG is used. Where coverage permits, the page shows network fee yield and protocol-revenue yield against a dated market-cap snapshot, with an explicit token-accrual caveat.

How much history is shown for Privacy?

The page shows five years of weekly price and relative-strength history and 20 complete calendar quarters of on-chain activity where available. Missing periods remain gaps.

Why do the crypto data dates differ?

Prices and technical metrics run through 2026-07-24; protocol activity through 2026-07-24; chain users and transactions through the latest available chain date; chain TVL through 2026-07-24; market capitalisation is a separate snapshot dated 2026-07-04.

Are stablecoins and wrapped tokens included in Privacy?

No. Pegged, wrapped, liquid-staking receipt and tokenized-asset instruments are excluded because they do not have independent price discovery.

Can one token appear in multiple raw crypto categories?

Yes, but public MLA pages assign each asset to exactly one functional theme using a specific-to-general first-match taxonomy. Privacy therefore has one canonical membership list.

What would invalidate the current Privacy theme read?

The read weakens if the sector’s 13-week relative return versus Bitcoin falls below zero, fewer than one-third of covered assets remain above the 200-day average, and the leading asset’s native activity also contracts.

Does this page include funding rates, open interest or token unlocks?

No. Those datasets are not held in the current research store, so the page names them as unavailable rather than inferring them from price.

Which projects are generating the most network fees?

Canton leads Privacy crypto on Trailing 12-month fees at $485.4M, 8694% ahead of Tornado Cash. 3 of 4 assets with comparable change data are growing. Coverage is 4 of the 27 assets in this theme, through the Q2 2026 calendar quarter. Where a project publishes nothing, the cell stays blank rather than being read as zero. Investor read: Use this as a network-economics research lead, not token-holder earnings. Verify whether the measured activity accrues to the token before treating scale as value capture. This conclusion weakens if fee growth turns negative across two complete calendar quarters or fee coverage falls below the stated threshold.

Which projects convert activity into protocol revenue?

Canton leads Privacy crypto on Trailing 12-month revenue at $485.4M, 10526% ahead of Railgun. 2 of 3 assets with comparable change data are growing. Coverage is 3 of the 27 assets in this theme, through the Q2 2026 calendar quarter. Where a project publishes nothing, the cell stays blank rather than being read as zero. Investor read: Use this as a network-economics research lead, not token-holder earnings. Verify whether the measured activity accrues to the token before treating scale as value capture. This conclusion weakens if revenue growth turns negative or the revenue-to-fees take rate falls for two complete calendar quarters.

Where is capital actually committed on-chain?

Tornado Cash leads Privacy crypto on Quarter-end TVL at $428.5M, 449% ahead of Railgun. 2 of 10 assets with comparable change data are growing, fastest at ZEROBASE. Coverage is 13 of the 27 assets in this theme, through the Q2 2026 calendar quarter. Where a project publishes nothing, the cell stays blank rather than being read as zero. Investor read: Use this as a network-economics research lead, not token-holder earnings. Verify whether the measured activity accrues to the token before treating scale as value capture. This conclusion weakens if TVL rises while fees and users fall; that pattern can be incentive-funded mercenary liquidity.

Which Privacy project has the largest fee base?

Canton leads covered trailing-12-month fees at $485.4M. Coverage is 4/27; this is network activity, not automatically token-holder income.