I'm not an anarcho-capitalist but I think it's pretty funny how many left-anarchists go out of their way to claim it's "not real anarchism" just because the name upsets them.
For instance, the Center for a Stateless Society describes itself as "freed market anti-capitalism" and despite espousing views that are 99% identical to anarcho-capitalism - to the point where they both refer to Trump-style far-right nationalists as "authoritarian communists" - left-anarchists still see them as a legitimate part of anarchism.
The biggest difference between the C4SS crowd and ancaps is that the former uses the word 'capitalism' to refer to modern-day corporate cronyism and 'market anarchism' to refer to a pure free-market system, while the latter uses the word 'socialism' to refer to modern-day corporate cronyism and 'capitalism' to refer to a pure free-market system. The former also uses the term 'freed markets' as opposed to 'free markets' to emphasize the fact that markets under the current system can't truly be free due to the lasting effects of aristocratic privilege, which is the same point that ancap theorist Murray Rothbard made decades ago.
It's literally a semantic difference yet the groups act like they're diametrically opposed to each other, and C4SS acts like it's part of the anarcho-socialist crowd when it's actually way further from that than from anarcho-capitalism.
Of course I also realized that anarchy wasn't viable in the modern age, so I guess the fact that anarchist groups will have long and protracted conflicts between themselves over fairly minor distinctions is just proof of that.