There are some funds that show up as "liquidated" when googled, which implies that it closed due to a bad performance. Some funds that show up as "acquired by XYZ (ticker of another stock that's being traded)"?
What are the difference?
If a company or fund winds down (this is not always because of bad performance), it can sell its assets, pay off any debts, and distribute the net proceeds. This is liquidation.
The other situation is when one of your holdings is acquired by another company (again, not always because of bad or good performance). You may receive cash or stock in the other company or both, depending on how the deal was structured.
In either case if you received cash, then the result (for you) is almost identical: you received cash and no longer owning something that no longer exists independently.
Speculating here, to answer questions in the comments: if a fund manager acquires their own fund, this may mean that they could not operate the fund profitably at whatever AUM the fund had (likely because they had high fixed costs related to the fund), and they saw no realistic prospects of growing the AUM to the point where it would be profitable. There would likely be no discernible difference to you as the investor between liquidation and acquisition, and how exactly they chose to wind it down would probably be the result of an analysis of what would be cheaper overall for the fund managers, including any tax consequences, etc. but there might also be legal or regulatory requirements they are complying with. Assuming there was no non-cash component of the distribution to the investors, there is likely no meaningful difference from the investors' point of view.