This seems like a article that is intended to be misleading. The report itself acknowledges a huge level of inaccuracy. > As always, we have to caveat this fig

This seems like a article that is intended to be misleading. The report itself acknowledges a huge level of inaccuracy. > As always, we have to caveat this figure and say that it is likely to rise as Chainalysis identifies more addresses associated with illicit activity and incorporates their transaction activity into our historical volumes. For instance, we found in our last Crypto Crime Report that 0.34% of 2020’s cryptocurrency transaction volume was associated with illicit activity — we’ve now raised that figure to 0.62%. A more correct summary is: .15% of transaction activity was with addresses identified by Chainalysis as associated with illegal activity. There are huge assumptions here about Chainalysis's ability and criteria for detecting illicit activity.