Sure, but that was not the claim by the parent. It's a bit unintuitive the way the parent wrote the claim, but the parent said the currency lost its value by 25

Sure, but that was not the claim by the parent. It's a bit unintuitive the way the parent wrote the claim, but the parent said the currency lost its value by 250% which is not really possible. What I think the parent means is that it became 2,5 times less worth. That is, what before could buy 100 apples can now buy 40 apples since 100/1=100 and 100/2,5=40, and as you say it, that means the value is down by 60% - same thing. At least that is how I understand what the parent claimed.