By Key Points
- Andrei Jikh questions XRP’s real-world use after 13 years
- Ripple CTO admits to slow on-chain adoption and key barriers
- Stablecoins and CBDCs intensify relevance debate for XRP
- XRP’s utility vs hype becomes a central issue in a viral thread
The XRP community is once again in the spotlight, and not for the reasons it might prefer. A viral Twitter thread by finance influencer Andrei Jikh, known for breaking down complex topics for his 2.5 million+ YouTube followers, reignited debate over XRP utility, or the lack of it.
Jikh didn’t hold back. He questioned why, after 13 years, the XRP Ledger (XRPL) doesn’t show billions in daily on-chain volume. He raised a critical point: if XRP is meant to be a bridge currency, why is its use still so minimal compared to the rise of stablecoins and central bank digital currencies (CBDCs) like USDM Stablecoin?
“Why would any institution hold a volatile asset like XRP for payments?” he asked. That single tweet triggered a wave of reactions, including a direct response from Ripple CTO David Schwartz.
I know people are VERY opinionated about this but I’ve been following XRP since 2014 and I still have not found the answers to these questions. Genuinely looking for thoughtful responses:
– Ripple has 300+ bank partnerships, but after 13 years, shouldn’t there be billions in…
— Andrei Jikh (@andreijikh) July 30, 2025
Schwartz admitted what many suspected: XRP’s on-chain adoption has been slow. He pointed to regulatory concerns, compliance roadblocks, and liquidity risks as key obstacles.
Surprisingly, he revealed that Ripple itself cannot currently utilize XRPL’s decentralized exchange (DEX) due to the potential for bad actors to provide liquidity, something that could put regulated institutions at risk of legal trouble.
Ripple CTO Defends XRP Amid Growing Criticism
David Schwartz didn’t deny the challenges. He was candid, saying that the lack of permission controls on XRPL’s DEX makes it risky for regulated financial institutions. A feature like permissioned domains, currently in development, might fix this.
On the issue of volatility, Schwartz defended XRP’s design, claiming that its transaction speed reduces risk exposure. “A bridge currency only works if someone is holding it so you can get it exactly when you need it,” he said.
Still, institutions remain hesitant. The lack of on-chain privacy, ironically in a blockchain built for financial transactions, continues to be a deal-breaker. Schwartz mentioned Ripple is exploring ways to protect sensitive data on-chain to ease adoption.
Ripple CTO Talks About XRP Utility
The debate then took a bigger turn: if stablecoins and CBDCs are already solving cross-border payments efficiently, why is XRP still needed?
Schwartz argued that no single stablecoin can win globally. Jurisdictional constraints and peg stability issues mean XRP still has a role as a neutral bridge asset. But Jikh challenged this too, saying that local stablecoins or CBDCs could fill the same role—without exposing users to XRP’s volatility.
RippleNet Isn’t XRPL—And That’s a Problem
Former Ripple Director Matt Hamilton chimed in to add clarity, and perhaps unintentionally fueled more skepticism. Most of Ripple’s 300+ bank partnerships don’t use the public XRPL. They operate on RippleNet, a private off-chain network.
This means even with all the enterprise traction Ripple touts, on-chain XRP utility remains minimal. That’s not lost on critics.
Some have noted that XRP currently ranks 48th in Total Value Locked (TVL), a key metric that indicates the amount of real money tied up in a blockchain’s smart contracts and applications. Others pointed out that XRPL lacks smart contract capabilities, uses a centralized validator system, and hasn’t delivered on tokenization promises.
I know people are VERY opinionated about this but I’ve been following XRP since 2014 and I still have not found the answers to these questions. Genuinely looking for thoughtful responses:
– Ripple has 300+ bank partnerships, but after 13 years, shouldn’t there be billions in…
— Andrei Jikh (@andreijikh) July 30, 2025
One comment in the thread summed up the growing frustration:
“XRP is just a gas token now. Why would BlackRock or Robinhood use XRPL when they can build on Ethereum or even Arbitrum?”
Ethereum’s momentum is undeniable. The network recently surpassed $10 billion in reserve growth, as covered in our post on Ethereum Reserve 10B Growth, showing growing trust in its ecosystem from institutions and developers alike.
Ripple’s strategy is facing tough competition from projects building faster, more composable systems. Platforms like Arbitrum and altcoin-ETH pairs are seeing a surge in usage—raising real concerns about XRP’s place in this evolving market.
Even broader adoption trends, like the growing interest in crypto investment vehicles after the Crypto ETF Altcoin Rule, make the lack of on-chain traction for XRP more glaring. As the industry matures, institutions are looking for tech that works, not just branding.
Adding to the industry’s momentum, Kraken’s upcoming $15B IPO signals the level of institutional confidence building around more transparent and widely used platforms.
Schwartz pushed back with a comparison to Circle, the company behind USDC, which doesn’t operate its chain either. He argued that multi-chain deployment and interoperability matter more than who controls the blockchain.
But that didn’t stop the conversation from boiling over.
Ripple is now at a crossroads. Its on-chain strategy for XRP has lagged, even as enterprise products expand. And with stablecoins and CBDCs gaining ground fast, the window for XRP to prove its utility is narrowing.
The viral thread laid bare a key issue: you can have enterprise partners, but if they don’t use your token, does it matter?
Ripple’s response shows they’re aware of the gap. The question is: Can they close it before the market moves on?
What's your reaction?
