This paper does not re-argue either view. Part 2 showed that crypto assets, in general, are mal under the Maliki, Shafi’i, and Hanbali schools, referred to together as the Jumhur. [1] Part 3 showed the same conclusion under the Hanafi school, reached through a different structure. [2] This paper places the two findings side by side and asks one question: does the difference in structure change anything in practice? As a quick recap, the Jumhur include permissibility of benefit directly into the definition of mal, so asking whether something is mal already includes asking whether it is lawful (halal). The Hanafi school splits this into two separate steps instead. First, is it mal at all using it as a general term. Second, is it a valid or valuable asset in Shari’ah (mal mutaqawwam).