- Ripple CTO David Schwartz responded to finance influencer Andrei Jikh’s skepticism about XRP’s real-world usage.
- Schwartz defended XRP’s role as a bridge currency, arguing it offers benefits over stablecoins in certain cases due to its neutrality.
- The exchange highlighted broader concerns about trust and adoption, with Schwartz distinguishing Ripple from the decentralized XRPL.
In a rare direct exchange on X (formerly Twitter), personal finance influencer Andrei Jikh posed a series of pointed questions about the long-term viability of XRP, prompting an in-depth response from Ripple CTO David Schwartz.
Jikh, who said he’s been following XRP since 2014, expressed skepticism over key issues, ranging from XRP’s real-world usage and volatility to its role as a bridge currency and its attractiveness to institutions. The post quickly gained traction, sparking a broader discussion in the crypto community.
Key Questions Around XRP Adoption and Use Cases
Jikh opened his post by asking why, despite Ripple’s more than 300 bank partnerships and over a decade of development, XRP still doesn’t see billions in daily on-chain volume.
Schwartz acknowledged the slow pace of adoption but emphasized that institutions have historically preferred using digital assets off-chain due to concerns about compliance and regulation.
He added, “Even Ripple can’t use the XRPL DEX for payments yet because we can’t be sure a terrorist won’t provide the liquidity for a payment.” He pointed to upcoming features, such as permissioned domains, as a potential solution.
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
Also Read: XRP Trapped in High-Risk Zone as $30 Million in Leveraged Bets Threaten Volatility
Volatility: Liability or Strategic Advantage?
Another pressing concern Jikh raised was XRP’s volatility, questioning why it would be used over stablecoins for transfers.
Schwartz responded that volatility isn’t always a downside. “There are use cases where volatility isn’t a minus, or is even a plus,” he said, adding that many in the digital asset space consider the upside potential worth the risk, especially for those who aren’t extremely risk-averse.
When it comes to holding XRP, Schwartz noted that bridge currencies still need holders to maintain liquidity. “If you don’t know what asset you’ll need to hold next, you may hold the dominant bridge currency,” he explained, arguing that it can reduce conversion friction across various digital assets.
Are Bridge Currencies Becoming Obsolete?
Jikh also questioned whether bridge currencies like XRP are necessary in a future dominated by stablecoins. Schwartz said this outcome is unlikely.
“A stablecoin can only be stable relative to one particular fiat currency and will always have jurisdictional ties,” he said. In a multi-stablecoin world, XRP or similar assets could still serve as a neutral bridge, especially when dealing with less commonly traded tokenized assets such as loan portfolios or securities.
“Ripple has 300+ bank partnerships, but after 13 years, shouldn’t there be billions in daily on-chain volume?”
I think there are a number of reasons why institutions have historically preferred to use digital assets off chain rather than on chain. I think we’re close to changing…
— David ‘JoelKatz’ Schwartz (@JoelKatz) July 30, 2025
Why Use XRPL Instead of Building a Proprietary Blockchain?
Citing examples like Robinhood’s use of Arbitrum and plans to develop its own blockchain, Jikh asked why major players like BlackRock would choose XRPL for tokenization.
Schwartz responded by drawing a comparison to Circle, the company behind USDC. “Why don’t they launch USDC only on their own blockchain? You can see why that’s obviously silly,” he said, suggesting that interoperability and asset portability are more important than platform ownership in the tokenization space.
Addressing Geopolitical Concerns and Trust
The final point Jikh raised involved geopolitical risk: why should foreign countries trust a U.S.-based private company like Ripple?
Schwartz distinguished between Ripple as a company and the XRP Ledger (XRPL) as a decentralized protocol. “XRPL has never discriminated against any participant,” he said.
As for Ripple’s enterprise solutions, Schwartz highlighted that the company operates through separately licensed entities worldwide. However, he conceded that Ripple’s U.S. base could create friction in certain geopolitical contexts.
Community Reactions and What Comes Next
The thoughtful exchange between Jikh and Schwartz underscores the ongoing tension between crypto’s ideals and its real-world implementation. While XRP’s supporters tout its potential as a global liquidity solution, critics remain cautious about its pace of adoption, regulatory hurdles, and competitive positioning.
Still, Schwartz’s candid responses show that Ripple remains committed to evolving its technology and making its case to institutions and the broader crypto community.
Also Read: $25,000,000 XRP Ahead of White House Crypto Report – What’s Happening?
