Maybe ChatGPT is bullshit (I mean that) but this is what I read about it. So I’m not being biased I want to be informed
Short answer: they aren’t directly comparable as “privacy stacks,” because they solve different problems. Bitcoin with Lightning Network (LN) focuses on scalable, low-fee, fast off-chain payments for Bitcoin, whereas Monero is a privacy-centric on-chain cryptocurrency. If your metric is privacy by default and on-chain unlinkability, Monero has stronger built-in privacy. If your metric is scalable payments for Bitcoin with reasonable privacy protections, Lightning offers different trade-offs.
Key dimensions to compare
Privacy model
Monero: On-chain privacy by default. RingCT, stealth addresses, and ring signatures hide amounts, senders, and recipients on-chain. Strong unlinkability between transactions.
Bitcoin + LN: Privacy is not default. LN enhances efficiency but reveals more network-level metadata. Payments traverse channels and hops; there can be metadata leaks about transaction graph and user activity unless additional privacy tactics are used (e.g., onion routing, privacy-preserving routing, avoiding reuse of channels). On-chain Bitcoin remains public.
Layering and scope
Monero: Pure on-chain privacy. No separate layer required.
LN: A second-layer solution on top of Bitcoin. It offloads many transactions from the main chain, enabling micropayments but adding complexity and different privacy considerations (channel opening/closing on-chain, liquidity management, routing). Privacy is affected by how channels are opened/closed and how nodes observe traffic.
Fungibility and auditability
Monero: High fungibility due to hidden amounts and addresses. Hard to trace or blacklist funds.
Bitcoin + LN: Fungibility is not as strong. On-chain UTXOs are traceable; LN payments can be subject to network-level analysis, though it’s less transparent than on-chain Bitcoin. Some privacy-enhancing research and implementations exist but aren’t as robust as Monero’s default privacy.
Security model and trust
Monero: Privacy is cryptographic and protocol-driven. Security rests on ring signatures, RingCT, stealth addresses; no trusted setup.
LN: Security depends on channel state, liquidity, routing integrity, and eventual on-chain settlement. User needs to manage channel state, opening/closing costs, and potential liquidity risk.
Adoption and ecosystem readiness
Monero: Strong privacy feature set; narrower merchant/integration adoption due to regulatory concerns and fungibility debates.
LN: Growing ecosystem for Bitcoin payments, wallets, and services. More scalable for merchant adoption and everyday payments; mais awareness of privacy trade-offs is increasing.
Concrete privacy considerations for LN
Channel creation: Opening a payment channel requires a transaction on-chain (on Bitcoin) that is visible. This can leak some timing and counterparty information.
Route privacy: LN uses onion routing (Sphinx-like). In practice, adversaries with network visibility and global topology knowledge could infer payment paths or correlate payments, especially if many hops share the same nodes.
Channel topology: Reusing channels and clustering payments through the same route can create fingerprinting opportunities.
Watchtowers: To protect against invalid states, users may rely on watchtowers; this adds trust and complexity.
Liquidity and liquidity-based privacy: Limited liquidity can reveal user preferences (where funds are moving), potentially reducing privacy.
Practical guidance
If your primary goal is strong, default privacy for value transfers, Monero remains the better option for on-chain privacy.
If you want Bitcoin-level settlement with scalable microtransactions and are willing to accept less-than-default privacy, LN is compelling and widely deployed.
For privacy-conscious Bitcoin users, consider:
Using LN with privacy practices: avoid reusing channels, use different routing peers, and consider privacy-focused wallets that minimize metadata leakage.
Keeping a mix of on-chain and off-chain activity to reduce linkability, while understanding that on-chain privacy remains lower than Monero.
Being aware of regulatory and exchange implications, as LN usage can still be observed by operators and network observers.
Bottom line
Bitcoin LN and Monero target different problems: LN aims to scale and speed up Bitcoin payments with an added privacy layer that is not as strong or default as Monero’s on-chain privacy.
If privacy is your core requirement, Monero offers stronger, default privacy; LN can complement Bitcoin’s scalability but does not reach Monero’s level of on-chain confidentiality.
For practical use, evaluate your threat model: if you must transact privately and fungibly, Monero is superior; if you need Bitcoin-like settlement with high throughput, LN is valuable but accept the privacy trade-offs.
If you want, tell me your specific use-case (on-chain vs off-chain, regulatory constraints, transaction sizes, target audience), and I can tailor a privacy-oriented comparison and recommendations.