Stolen crypto now moves faster than it did two years ago. Conversion into liquid assets frequently happens within hours, and cross-chain hops are used to break naive tracing heuristics before funds reach an off-ramp.
Speed is not the same as invisibility
Chain-hopping raises the cost of analysis; it does not eliminate the trail. Clustering across bridges is now standard practice at the major forensic firms, and the constraint on recovery is usually jurisdictional cooperation rather than attribution.
Where compliance actually binds
The choke point remains the fiat off-ramp. Exchanges with real transaction monitoring freeze a meaningful share of inbound tainted flow; those without simply pass it through. That variance, not the technology, explains most of the difference in recovery rates.
For ordinary users the practical implication is dull but real: the venue you choose is a compliance decision as much as a fee one.
Attribution and its limits
Blockchain analytics can trace flows convincingly and attribute them only probabilistically. Public reporting often blurs that distinction.
The policy response, tighter screening at fiat off-ramps, targets the point where anonymity actually breaks. That is the right pressure point.
