Unclear when we are talking about someone who has played 10 classical games in the last 2.5 years with a performance clearly above his rating in the only competition he was in (last month).
His live rating takes his performance into account. And it's more likely that the high performance was luck, since every player has good and bad streaks around their rating. A few wins does not magically make one a solid 2800 player.
As such, since Nak's current rating fully accounts for his last performance, and even with that (which even he says was simply good luck, not some fundamental new mastery of chess), Nak is currently live rated at 6th of 8 candidates (assuming Ding is the last one, which seems likely)).
So, given that it's more likely for a player to have random ups and downs (as borne out by millions of games of chess evidence across all players, including Nak), Naks performance last month is most likely above his rating.
You can argue all you want about what you feel. The ratings are a much more solid prediction of performance than all the good feelings in the world, especially since most of the Candidates have performed at the current level of ratings for years and years and years, including Nak.
Then his rating would be higher.