This article is unfortunately typical of the low quality of reporting on Bitcoin in the popular media. It provides no independently-verifiable evidence of the

This article is unfortunately typical of the low quality of reporting on Bitcoin in the popular media. It provides no independently-verifiable evidence of the claim in the title, nor does it even make a small effort to explain the analysis supposedly done by Cryptocompite, a service whose website consists of nothing more than an email capture. FWIW, determining the nature of Bitcoin transactions is not trivial. The disposable pseudonym privacy model, coupled with CoinJoin transactions and now increasingly Lightning Network gives users a great deal of privacy power if they choose to use it. Many analyses I've seen are based on transactions whose users throw that privacy stuff out the window, re-using pseudonyms and posting them to social media.