Your SVG blurs because it is not vector.

A real SVG cannot pixelate. If yours does, there is a raster image hiding inside it.

There is a base64 raster image inside the file, wrapped in vector packaging

A true SVG is a set of mathematical paths and it is physically incapable of blurring — you can scale it to a billboard and the curves are recomputed at every size. So if your file pixelates, it does not contain paths. What it contains is an `<image>` tag holding a PNG or JPEG encoded as base64 text, wrapped in an `<svg>` element. It opens in Illustrator, it has an .svg extension, and it is a photograph in a costume. This is far and away the most common thing sold as "vectorized" by cheap converters, because embedding a raster takes no work and produces a file that passes every superficial check.

How to confirm it

The ten-second test
Open the .svg in a plain text editor. Search for `<image`. If it is there, the file is raster.
File size
A real traced logo is usually 5–200 KB. A file of several MB is carrying a photo.
In Illustrator
Click the artwork. If it selects as one object with a bounding box and no anchor points, it is a placed image.
Zoom test
Zoom to 1600% in a browser. Real paths stay crisp; an embedded raster shows pixels.
What it is not
Not a rendering bug, not a browser issue, and not fixable by re-saving as SVG.

The fix

1
Confirm with the text-editor check

Search the file for `<image`. Finding it settles the question — nothing else needs testing.

2
Go back to the original raster

Use the highest-resolution PNG or JPG you have, not the fake SVG. Re-tracing the embedded copy inherits its limits.

3
Trace it into real paths

Upload it here. The preview shows the actual path count, so you can confirm you are getting geometry rather than a wrapper.

Image → SVG · free, no signup

Fix it here.

Upload the original image. The preview shows the real path count before you pay.

3 free previews left · no signup to try

FAQ

Can I convert the embedded image into real paths?

Not by re-saving. The SVG wrapper adds nothing to trace from — you have to trace the raster inside it, which means extracting that image or going back to the original. Starting from the original is always better, because the embedded copy has usually been resized and recompressed at least once.

Why do converters do this?

Because it is nearly free. Genuine tracing is computation; wrapping a PNG in an `<svg>` element is a string operation, and the output passes a file-extension check, opens in a vector editor, and looks correct until someone scales it. It is the cheapest way to answer a "convert to SVG" request.

How do I know your output is different?

The preview shows the path count before you pay. A traced piece of flat art is typically tens to a couple of hundred editable paths. A wrapper has zero paths and one image tag, and no path count to show.

Will it print correctly even though it is blurry on screen?

No — printing is where it gets worse, not better. A print RIP resamples at the physical size, so a raster that looked acceptable on a monitor becomes visibly soft at any real dimension. Cutting machines fail harder still, since there are no contours to follow.

Related problems