Nope, incorrect...it would seem given that someone else also corrected you on mistaking economic divisibility for fungibility so either you do not understand fungbility or you don't understand what you wrote:

That is not what fungibility means. It means that one item of such currency is indivisible from another in the sense that one coin cannot be distinguished from another.

An example would be two 100 dollar bills. One was used in the transaction of illegal drugs, the other in the purchase of a chair. You cannot see just by looking at them which was used for which. [...] And then certain companies can say, we will not touch coins that were part of an illicit transaction. Even if this was not done by you, but by a different owner of that coin. -dazbog835

However it seems dazbog835 doesn't quite understand traceability or linkability. Most coins are not fungible, they fail what I will call the 'WannaCry Test'. Let's say I have an address known to be associated with a WannaCry hacker which we will refer to as a WannaCry Address. The question then for the test is, can I tell if coin is being sent from the WannaCry address to say, an exchange (miners can also refuse to accept such transactions in their block as well by the way). BitCoin the answer is yes it fails the test as ShapeShift and other exchanges have announced they blacklisted the BitCoin WannaCry addresses.

Verge's ledger follows the same set of protocols as BitCoin, it does not hide the true sender and true receiver from anyone viewing the blockchain. Thus, if WannaCry used Verge instead, exchanges and miners would still successfully blacklist the Verge-based coin because they only need a wallet address, not an IP address.