XDC vs XRP: A Comprehensive Comparison

The cryptocurrency landscape is populated by a multitude of projects, each vying for adoption and market share by offering unique technological propositions and targeting specific use cases. Among these, XDC Network (XinFin) and XRP Ledger (Ripple) frequently emerge in discussions, particularly concerning enterprise solutions and financial applications. Investors and developers often ponder: Is XDC a better alternative to XRP, or do they serve fundamentally different purposes?

This report provides an in-depth comparative analysis of XDC and XRP, examining their core technology, performance metrics, real-world adoption, tokenomics, regulatory standing, investment potential, and future development trajectories. The objective is to equip readers with a comprehensive understanding to navigate the complexities of these two prominent digital assets and make informed decisions aligned with their specific goals.

Understanding the Contenders: XDC Network (XinFin) and XRP Ledger (Ripple)

To fully appreciate the nuances of XDC and XRP, it is essential to understand their origins, missions, and the primary audiences they aim to serve.

XDC Network (XinFin): Enterprise-Focused Hybrid Blockchain

The XDC Network, formerly XinFin Network, launched in 2019 as an enterprise-grade, open-source, and EVM-compatible Layer 1 blockchain platform. It is designed as a hybrid blockchain, combining the transparency of public blockchains with the speed and security of private networks. This architecture is specifically optimized for applications in global trade and finance, with a strong emphasis on the tokenization of real-world assets (RWAs) and financial instruments. The XDC Network aims to revolutionize and decentralize the trade finance industry, addressing inefficiencies and improving liquidity, particularly for Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs). It also prioritizes compliance with international financial messaging standards like ISO 20022.
The primary target audience for XDC Network includes enterprises, financial institutions, governments, and SMEs that require dedicated blockchain environments with enhanced permissions and control for applications like trade finance, supply chain management, and RWA tokenization.

XRP Ledger (Ripple): Facilitating Global Payments

The XRP Ledger (XRPL) was developed by David Schwartz, Jed McCaleb, and Arthur Britto, with Ripple Labs (initially OpenCoin, founded in 2012) significantly contributing to its ecosystem. XRP, the native digital asset of the XRPL, was specifically designed for the financial industry to serve as a bridge currency, facilitating fast, cost-effective cross-border payments. Ripple’s flagship product, RippleNet, leverages the XRPL and XRP to offer a network for institutional payment providers, including banks and money services businesses, to streamline global money movement. The core mission is to enable secure, instant, and nearly free global financial transactions of any size.

Core Technology and Architecture: A Deep Dive

The underlying technology of any blockchain protocol dictates its capabilities, performance, and suitability for various applications. XDC and XRP employ distinct consensus mechanisms, blockchain architectures, and approaches to smart contract functionality and security.

Consensus Mechanisms: XDPoS vs. RPCA

XDC Network: XinFin Delegated Proof of Stake (XDPoS)

The XDC Network utilizes a delegated proof-of-stake consensus mechanism, specifically XinFin Delegated Proof of Stake (XDPoS). This system is designed for high energy efficiency, low transaction costs, and scalability.

In XDPoS:

Validator Selection: XDC holders stake their tokens to elect a group of validators responsible for confirming transactions. Validators are chosen based on reputation, staked amount, and performance. Becoming a validator masternode requires staking 10 million XDC and undergoing KYC procedures.
Transaction Validation: Validators process transactions and secure the network by reaching consensus through this delegated system.
Block Rewards: Validators are rewarded with XDC tokens for their role in securing the network and confirming transactions. The XDC 2.0 upgrade, rolled out in Q4 2024, incorporated a Byzantine Fault Tolerant (BFT) consensus protocol based on Chained HotStuff, further enhancing security and providing faster block finality. This advanced BFT consensus aims for theoretical maximum Byzantine fault tolerance.

XRP Ledger: Ripple Protocol Consensus Algorithm (RPCA)

The XRP Ledger employs the Ripple Protocol Consensus Algorithm (RPCA), a unique federated consensus mechanism that does not rely on Proof of Work or Proof of Stake.

Key features of RPCA include:

Unique Node Lists (UNLs): Each server on the network maintains a UNL, a list of trusted validators it queries to determine consensus.
Iterative Process: Validators share candidate transaction sets and iteratively update proposals until a supermajority (at least 80%) of trusted validators agree on the same set of transactions for the next ledger.
Speed and Efficiency: This process allows the XRPL to confirm transactions rapidly and efficiently, without the energy consumption of mining.

The choice of consensus mechanism reflects the primary goals of each network. XDC’s XDPoS, particularly with the BFT enhancements in XDC 2.0, is geared towards providing a secure, scalable, and efficient platform suitable for enterprise applications that may require governance participation through staking and delegation. XRP’s RPCA, on the other hand, is highly optimized for speed, low cost, and reliability in payment processing, achieving consensus among a set of trusted validators to ensure rapid settlement finality, a critical feature for financial institutions.

Blockchain Architecture: Hybrid vs. Specialized L1 with L2 Expansion

XDC Network: Hybrid and EVM-Native

XDC Network is a Layer 1 blockchain that features a hybrid architecture, integrating the transparency of public blockchains with the control and privacy features of private networks. A key characteristic is its Ethereum Virtual Machine (EVM) compatibility, allowing developers to easily deploy Ethereum-based smart contracts and dApps on the XDC Network. The architecture also supports subnets, which are essentially Layer 2 solutions or sidechains that can be customized for specific needs. These subnets can be permissioned (private) or gasless, inheriting security from the XDC mainnet while offering tailored environments for enterprises or applications requiring specific controls or cost structures.

XRP Ledger: Decentralized Public Ledger with EVM Sidechain

The XRP Ledger is a decentralized, public Layer 1 blockchain. Historically, its L1 was not EVM-compatible. However, to expand its capabilities beyond payments and into the broader DeFi and smart contract ecosystem, an XRPL EVM Sidechain is under development and scheduled for mainnet launch in Q2 2025. This sidechain, built with Cosmos SDK and evmOS, will offer full EVM compatibility, allowing Ethereum smart contracts to be deployed on a chain linked to the XRPL.

XDC’s integrated hybrid model with native EVM compatibility on its mainnet and customizable subnets provides a versatile platform for enterprises seeking both public interaction and private control. This can be particularly attractive for use cases like trade finance where data privacy and regulatory compliance are paramount. XRP’s approach involves maintaining its highly optimized L1 for payments and core functions while adding EVM capabilities through a sidechain. This strategy aims to leverage the XRPL’s existing strengths in speed and reliability while tapping into the vast Ethereum developer ecosystem and dApp landscape. The success of this approach will depend on the seamlessness of the bridge between the mainnet and the EVM sidechain and the adoption it garners from developers.

Smart Contract Capabilities

XDC Network: Native Solidity Support

Leveraging its EVM compatibility, the XDC Network natively supports smart contracts written in Solidity, the primary language for Ethereum development. This allows for the straightforward porting of existing Ethereum dApps and facilitates the development of new applications, particularly those focused on trade finance, RWA tokenization, and DeFi.

XRP Ledger: Evolving Smart Contract Functionality

Historically, the XRP Ledger had limited native smart contract capabilities on its Layer 1, focusing instead on specialized transaction types for payments and its built-in decentralized exchange (DEX). However, this is rapidly evolving:

XRPL EVM Sidechain: As mentioned, this will provide full EVM smart contract functionality.
Hooks: These are small, efficient WebAssembly modules designed for the XRPL L1, enabling lightweight, specialized smart contract logic directly on the main ledger.
Extensions: A newer concept allowing developers to attach new code to existing XRPL smart contracts/primitives (like escrows or AMMs) to enhance functionality without full-scale smart contract deployment. “Smart Escrows” are a planned example.

XDC’s direct, native EVM compatibility offers a simpler path for developers already familiar with the Ethereum ecosystem to build and deploy complex applications directly on its Layer 1. XRP is taking a multi-pronged approach to smart contracts: Hooks for specific L1 logic, Extensions for enhancing existing features, and a full EVM sidechain for broader dApp development. This provides flexibility but may also introduce complexity for developers deciding which toolset is appropriate for their needs. The EVM sidechain is particularly significant as it aims to bridge the XRPL to the largest smart contract ecosystem.

Security Model and Audits

XDC Network Security

XDC Network’s security is anchored by its XDPoS consensus, upgraded to XDC 2.0 with BFT properties. Key security aspects include:

Masternode Requirements: Validators must stake a significant amount of XDC (10 million) and undergo KYC , creating an economic and identity-based disincentive for malicious behavior.
Slashing Mechanisms: Penalties for masternode misbehavior or underperformance.
Double Validation: A feature in earlier XDPoS versions designed to enhance security against forks and malicious blocks.
Forensics Monitoring: Introduced with XDC 2.0 to hold validators accountable.
Compliance Integrations: Collaboration with third-party providers for AML/FATF compliance checks, sanction screenings, and KYC protocols.
Audits: The XDC 2.0 protocol, including its HotStuff-based consensus, node election, and reward mechanism, was audited by Sayfer. CertiK has also audited XDC. The network emphasizes its enterprise-grade security and its suitability for regulated industries.

XRP Ledger Security

The XRP Ledger’s security relies on its RPCA consensus and other built-in features:

Fault Tolerance: Designed to operate correctly even if up to 20% of trusted validators are faulty. Confirming an invalid transaction would require collusion among over 80% of trusted validators.
Invariant Checking: Code that runs automatically after each transaction to verify that key system properties are not violated before results are committed to the ledger.
Anti-Spam Measures: Account reserve requirements (10 XRP base, 2 XRP per item) and nominal transaction fees (0.00001 XRP) prevent network flooding.
Audits of rippled (Core Server Software): Ripple has a history of conducting security reviews of rippled. A 2018 audit by Guido Vranken helped improve input data handling. Ripple stated in 2019 its intention to have future comprehensive assessments publicly released.
Component Audits: More recently, specific new components have undergone public audits:
- The XRPL EVM Sidechain was audited by Informal Systems in February 2025, identifying one critical issue related to the crisis module (consistent with a broader Cosmos SDK advisory, now addressed) and confirming strong safeguards for its Proof-of-Authority consensus.
- The Multi-Purpose Token (MPT) standard on XRPL was audited by softstack, deeming it secure and efficient.
Library Vulnerabilities: It’s important to note a critical vulnerability was found in the xrpl.js JavaScript library (versions 4.2.1–4.2.4 and 2.14.2) in April 2025, which could expose private keys. This was a supply-chain attack on a widely used developer tool, not a flaw in the core XRPL protocol itself. The issue was identified, and safe NPM packages were released.

XDC Network emphasizes a security model built around vetted masternodes, compliance tools, and its advanced XDC 2.0 consensus, tailored for enterprise and trade finance requirements where regulatory adherence and data integrity are crucial. The XRP Ledger boasts over a decade of reliable operation for its core ledger, with ongoing security practices for its reference server software and public audits for significant new components like the EVM sidechain and token standards. The xrpl.js incident underscores the importance of security across the entire ecosystem, including developer libraries, not just the core protocol. Both networks demonstrate a commitment to security, though their approaches and the types of audits highlighted reflect their different architectures and development focuses.

Performance and Scalability: XDC vs. XRP

Performance metrics such as transaction speed, finality, cost, and overall scalability are crucial for user experience and the ability of a blockchain to handle widespread adoption.

Transaction Speed (TPS) and Finality

XDC Network:

The XDC Network is engineered for high throughput, reportedly capable of up to 2000+ transactions per second (TPS). Transaction finality is also rapid. XDC 1.0 offered a 2-second block finality. With the XDC 2.0 upgrade, which includes a new BFT consensus mechanism, transactions are stated to be finalized within six seconds after being included in a block, with a new block generated every two seconds.

XRP Ledger:

The XRP Ledger is renowned for its speed, typically processing around 1500 TPS, with claims of capacity up to 3400 TPS. Transaction finality on the XRPL is exceptionally fast, usually occurring within 3 to 5 seconds.

Both XDC and XRP offer impressive transaction speeds and quick finality, far exceeding many older blockchain networks. XDC’s reported 2000+ TPS and the 6-second finality of XDC 2.0 position it well for enterprise applications requiring rapid processing. XRP’s 1500 TPS and 3–5 second finality have long been a cornerstone of its value proposition for payments. For most of their targeted use cases, these performance levels are more than adequate. The practical significance of the TPS difference might be less about the raw number and more about sustained performance under heavy load and the specific needs of the applications built upon them.

Transaction Costs

XDC Network:

Transactions on the XDC Network are characterized by near-zero or extremely low gas fees. Figures cited include around $0.00001 or $0.00000646 per transaction. Furthermore, the XDC Network architecture includes the concept of gasless subnets, designed to allow users to transact without needing to hold cryptocurrency for fees in specific dApp environments, using alternative fee systems like fiat payments.

XRP Ledger:

The XRP Ledger is also known for its minimal transaction costs. Fees are typically fractions of a U.S. cent, often cited around $0.0002 per transaction. These fees are primarily an anti-spam measure rather than a significant revenue source for validators.

Both networks offer exceptionally low transaction costs, making them highly attractive for high-volume transaction environments and micropayments. XDC’s exploration of gasless subnets represents an innovative approach to further reduce friction for end-users in certain applications, potentially broadening accessibility for non-crypto natives.

Scalability and Network Capacity

XDC Network:

The XDPoS consensus mechanism is inherently designed for scalability. The introduction of subnets (Layer 2 solutions) further enhances the XDC Network’s ability to scale by offloading transactions from the mainnet while inheriting its security, allowing for specialized, high-throughput environments tailored to specific enterprise needs.

XRP Ledger:

The XRP Ledger has demonstrated proven reliability and scalability over more than a decade of continuous operation, processing billions of transactions. Its architecture was designed from the ground up to handle a large volume of payments efficiently.

Both XDC and XRP are built with scalability in mind. XDC’s hybrid architecture, combining a scalable L1 with the potential for specialized L2 subnets, offers a flexible approach to handling diverse enterprise workloads. XRP’s L1 has a long track record of robust performance and is designed to accommodate significant transaction volumes, a key requirement for its focus on global payments. The introduction of its EVM sidechain will test its ability to scale horizontally for smart contract applications.

Use Cases and Real-World Adoption

The true measure of a blockchain’s value lies in its real-world utility and adoption. Both XDC Network and XRP Ledger have cultivated ecosystems around their core technologies, targeting distinct yet increasingly overlapping market segments.

XDC Network: Trade Finance, RWA Tokenization, and Enterprise Solutions

The XDC Network has carved a niche by focusing on enterprise solutions, particularly in global trade finance and the tokenization of Real-World Assets (RWAs).

Primary Use Cases:
- Trade Finance: XDC aims to digitize and streamline trade finance processes, which are often paper-intensive and inefficient. This includes tokenizing trade documents like invoices and bills of lading, facilitating faster settlements, and improving access to finance for SMEs. Platforms like TradeFinex, built on XDC, provide a decentralized marketplace for buyers, sellers, and financiers.
- RWA Tokenization: The network is a proponent of tokenizing real-world assets, making them more liquid and accessible. Examples include tokenized U.S. Treasuries (USTY, representing shares in a BlackRock-managed ETF via Tradeteq and Securitize), private credit, and invoices.
Other Applications: Cross-border payments, supply chain management, decentralized finance (DeFi) applications leveraging its EVM compatibility, and ISO 20022-compliant financial messaging are also key areas.
Key Partnerships and Ecosystem: XDC Network has strategically aligned with major trade finance organizations and technology providers. It is the first blockchain to join the Trade Finance Distribution Initiative (TFDi), a consortium of major banks like ABN AMRO and Santander. It’s also part of the ITFA’s Digital Negotiable Instruments (DNI) Initiative and collaborates with Singapore’s Infocomm Media Development Authority (IMDA) on the TradeTrust framework for electronic trade documents. Other notable partners include SBI Group (for APAC expansion), Tradeteq, Securitize (for RWA tokenization), Plug and Play (accelerator), Ankr (infrastructure), and a growing list of dApps such as Razor Network (oracles), Swiftcourt (escrow), ComTech Gold (gold tokenization), and Impel (ISO 20022 messaging).
Developer Community and Support: The XDC Foundation plays a significant role in supporting ecosystem growth. Resources for developers include forums, GitHub repositories, Telegram channels, documentation, and bounty/grant programs to incentivize building on the network.

XRP Ledger: Payments, Liquidity, and Expanding into DeFi/RWA

The XRP Ledger’s primary historical focus has been on revolutionizing cross-border payments and providing liquidity solutions for financial institutions.

Primary Use Cases:
- Cross-Border Payments: XRP is designed to act as a bridge currency within RippleNet’s On-Demand Liquidity (ODL) service, enabling financial institutions to source liquidity in real-time for international payments, reducing the need for pre-funded nostro accounts.
- Liquidity Provision: The XRPL’s native decentralized exchange (DEX) and fast settlement facilitate efficient liquidity management.
Other Applications: The XRPL ecosystem is expanding to include banking services, remittances, micropayments, and increasingly, DeFi functionalities like Automated Market Makers (AMMs) and lending protocols. RWA tokenization is also a growing area, exemplified by the Dubai Land Department launching a real estate tokenization platform on XRPL and the development of the Multi-Purpose Token (MPT) standard. The XRPL is also being explored for Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs) and supports stablecoins like RLUSD (Ripple USD) and the MiCA-compliant EURØP.
Key Partnerships and Ecosystem: Ripple has historically forged numerous partnerships with financial institutions and payment providers globally through RippleNet. More recent collaborations include Tranglo (payment services), the Dubai Land Department (real estate tokenization), a pilot program with WËIA and Mercy Corps Ventures in Colombia for agricultural finance, BDACS in South Korea for institutional custody, and ongoing work with SBI Ripple Asia and HashKey DX in Japan.
Developer Community and Support: The XRPL boasts a mature and active global developer community. Support initiatives include comprehensive documentation on XRPL.org, extensive developer tools, code samples, learning portals, the XRPL Grants program (over $15M awarded to 140+ teams globally as of May 2021), the XRPL Accelerator program, hackathons, a Dev Blog, Discord channels, and the RippleX Bug Bounty program.

XDC’s adoption strategy is deeply rooted in the specific, complex needs of trade finance and RWA tokenization, requiring close collaboration with industry bodies and regulated entities. Its success is tied to digitizing traditionally cumbersome processes. XRP, while historically dominant in the cross-border payment messaging space with RippleNet, is now seeing the XRPL itself gain traction for a wider array of financial applications, including DeFi and RWA tokenization, driven by both Ripple and the broader community. The development of its EVM sidechain is a clear indicator of its ambition to attract a wider developer base and diversify its use cases beyond payments. Both networks understand the importance of a strong developer community and are investing in resources and programs to foster innovation.

Tokenomics: XDC vs. XRP

Tokenomics, the economic model of a cryptocurrency, plays a vital role in its utility, scarcity, and potential long-term value. This includes aspects like total supply, circulating supply, token generation, network incentives, and any mechanisms for burning or distributing tokens.

Table 1: Tokenomics at a Glance: XDC vs. XRP


Metric	XDC Network	XRP Ledger
Max/Total Supply	Approx. 37.7 billion - 37.99 billion XDC	100 billion XRP (pre-mined)
Circulating Supply (Approx.)	Approx. 14.9 billion - 16.2 billion XDC (as of early-mid 2025)	Approx. 57 billion - 59 billion XRP (as of Dec 2024/early-mid 2025)
Token Generation/Initial Distribution	Founders/core team (40%), ecosystem development (27%), pre-placement (27%), XDC Foundation treasury (6%)	All 100 billion XRP pre-mined at launch in 2012. 20% to founders, 80% gifted to Ripple Inc.
Primary Network Incentive	Masternode operation and staking rewards (e.g., validators ~10% APY, standby ~8% APY based on staked amount)	Network utility, transaction processing for validators. Validators are not directly rewarded with new XRP by the protocol.
Burn Mechanism	XDC 2.0 introduced periodic token burning mechanisms to address inflation	Transaction fees paid in XRP are burned (destroyed), reducing the total supply over time
Inflationary/Deflationary Tendency	Aims for deflation with token burns, but masternode rewards add to supply. Net effect depends on the balance of these factors.	Deflationary due to the burning of transaction fees. Ripple's periodic escrow releases add to circulating supply but not total supply.

Token Utility and Demand Drivers

XDC Network:
The XDC token is the native utility token of the XDC Network and serves multiple purposes:

Gas Fees: Used to pay for transaction fees on the network.
Staking & Masternodes: Required for staking by XDC holders to participate in validator elections and for masternode operators to secure the network and validate transactions, with 10 million XDC needed to run a validator masternode.
Settlement: Acts as a settlement mechanism for dApps built on the XDC Network, particularly in trade finance and RWA applications.

Demand for XDC is driven by the growth of its ecosystem, the adoption of its trade finance and RWA solutions by enterprises, and the need for staking by masternodes and delegators.

XRP Ledger:

Transaction Fees: A small amount of XRP is destroyed as a transaction fee for every transaction, protecting the ledger from spam and denial-of-service attacks.
Account Reserves: Each account on the XRP Ledger must hold a minimum reserve of XRP (currently 10 XRP for a base reserve, plus 2 XRP for each item owned on the ledger like trust lines or offers), which also helps prevent ledger spam.
Bridge Currency: A primary use case is as a bridge currency in Ripple’s ODL service, facilitating rapid conversion between different fiat currencies.
Collateral in DeFi: With the growth of DeFi on the XRPL, XRP can be used as collateral in applications like lending protocols.

Demand for XRP is influenced by its adoption by financial institutions for cross-border payments and liquidity, its use within the growing XRPL DeFi ecosystem, and its role in paying network transaction fees and maintaining account reserves.

Inflationary/Deflationary Aspects

XDC Network:

The XDC Network’s tokenomics include elements that can be both inflationary (new token issuance) and deflationary (token burning). Masternode rewards, which incentivize network participation and security, introduce new XDC tokens into circulation. However, the XDC 2.0 upgrade introduced token-burning mechanisms designed to address inflation by periodically removing tokens from circulation, with the goal of preserving token value over time. The research indicates these burns are intended to create a sustainable economic model. The specifics of how much is burned, the exact triggers, or the frequency are not detailed in the provided materials beyond “periodically”. The net effect on XDC’s supply (whether it’s ultimately inflationary or deflationary) will depend on the rate of new token issuance through rewards versus the rate and volume of tokens burned.

XRP Ledger:

XRP is designed to be deflationary. All 100 billion XRP tokens were pre-mined at its inception. The primary deflationary mechanism is the burning of transaction fees; every transaction on the XRPL destroys a small amount of XRP, permanently reducing the total supply. While Ripple Labs holds a significant portion of XRP in escrow and releases a certain amount monthly (up to 1 billion XRP, though often less is sold and the remainder is re-escrowed), these releases increase the circulating supply but do not increase the total supply of XRP. Over time, as more transactions occur, the total supply of XRP will gradually decrease.

The tokenomic models of XDC and XRP present different approaches to supply management and network incentivization. XRP’s fixed, pre-mined supply with a fee-burn mechanism creates a clear deflationary pressure over the long term. XDC’s model, with ongoing masternode rewards and the introduction of token burns in XDC 2.0, aims for a balanced and sustainable ecosystem. The effectiveness of XDC’s burn mechanism in countering the inflation from rewards will be a key factor in its long-term value proposition. Investors often favor deflationary assets due to the principle of scarcity potentially driving up value, assuming consistent or growing demand. However, the utility and adoption of the network remain the most critical drivers of demand for either token.

Regulatory Landscape and Compliance

The regulatory environment for cryptocurrencies is a critical factor influencing their adoption, market perception, and long-term viability. XDC Network and XRP have navigated this landscape with different approaches and have faced distinct challenges and opportunities.

XDC Network: Proactive Compliance for Enterprise and Trade Finance

The XDC Network has adopted a strategy of proactive compliance, particularly focusing on the requirements of enterprise users and the heavily regulated trade finance sector.

Architectural Design for Compliance: Its hybrid architecture allows for a balance between public transparency and private, permissioned environments, which can be crucial for enterprises handling sensitive data.
Adherence to Standards: XDC emphasizes compatibility with international financial standards like ISO 20022 for financial messaging and alignment with legal frameworks such as the UNCITRAL Model Law on Electronic Transferable Records (MLETR) for digital trade documents. This is vital for its integration into existing financial systems and for facilitating legally recognized digital trade.
Compliance Mechanisms: The network supports robust compliance through third-party integrations for sanction screenings, Know Your Customer (KYC) protocols, and Anti-Money Laundering (AML) / Financial Action Task Force (FATF) standards. Regulated onboarding of participants via digital custodians is another key aspect.
Key Markets and Partnerships: XDC Network’s focus on trade finance has led to significant engagement in key international trade hubs. It collaborates with Singapore’s IMDA on the TradeTrust framework and is the first blockchain to join the global Trade Finance Distribution (TFD) Initiative, a consortium including major banks. Partnerships with entities like SBI Group aim to expand its reach in the Asia-Pacific region, including Japan. In Europe, the XDC Network has joined the MiCA (Markets in Crypto-Assets) alliance, signaling its commitment to aligning with the EU’s regulatory framework. The UK’s Electronic Trade Documents Act (ETDA), which gives legal status to digital trade documents, is also seen as a positive development for XDC’s adoption.

XRP (Ripple): Navigating the SEC Lawsuit and Seeking Global Clarity

XRP’s regulatory journey has been dominated by a high-profile lawsuit from the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), which has had significant implications for its standing, particularly in the United States.

The SEC Lawsuit: Filed in December 2020, the SEC alleged that Ripple Labs conducted an unregistered securities offering through its sales of XRP.
- Key Court Ruling (Judge Analisa Torres, July 2023): A landmark ruling determined that Ripple’s programmatic sales of XRP to retail investors on exchanges did not constitute investment contracts (and thus were not securities sales). However, direct institutional sales of XRP were deemed to be sales of securities.
- Partial Settlement & Ongoing Issues (as of May 2025): Ripple agreed to a $50 million fine in a partial settlement in 2024. However, as of May 2025, Ripple and the SEC were reportedly at an impasse over remedies related to institutional sales, and the SEC’s potential appeal of the programmatic sales ruling was pending the resolution of penalties for institutional sales. Judge Torres had denied an SEC request to modify the final ruling regarding institutional sales and fines.
Global Regulatory Standing:
- United States: The SEC lawsuit creates ongoing uncertainty. While the retail sales ruling was a significant win for Ripple, the institutional sales aspect and potential appeals mean regulatory risk persists. The outcome will heavily influence XRP’s ability to operate freely and be adopted by regulated financial institutions in the U.S.
- Europe (MiCA Framework): The Markets in Crypto-Assets (MiCA) regulation provides a comprehensive framework for crypto assets in the EU. LCX voluntarily filed a MiCA-compliant whitepaper for XRP to enhance transparency and regulatory clarity. In May 2025, Schuman Financial launched EURØP, the first MiCA-compliant Euro-backed stablecoin, on the XRP Ledger, issued under regulation by the French Prudential Supervision and Resolution Authority (ACPR). This indicates growing acceptance and utility for XRPL within the MiCA framework. Ripple also has a partnership with DZ Bank in Germany for institutional crypto custody. The UK’s Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) has acknowledged cryptocurrencies, with ongoing efforts to establish a regulatory framework for crypto payments.
- Asia: XRP has a strong presence and generally more favorable regulatory outlook in several key Asian markets.
  - Japan: Considered a crypto-forward nation with clear regulations. SBI Ripple Asia, a joint venture with SBI Holdings, has been instrumental in promoting Ripple’s payment solutions. There are reports of the Bank of Japan planning to integrate XRP for payment systems across all domestic banks by the end of 2025. Ripple also launched the XRPL Japan and Korea Fund to spur innovation.
  - South Korea: Ripple has partnered with BDACS, a digital asset custody provider, to offer institutional-grade custody for XRP and RLUSD, aligning with the Financial Services Commission’s (FSC) roadmap for institutional crypto adoption.
  - Singapore: While a key hub for XDC’s TradeTrust collaboration, Ripple also engages in the Singaporean market.

XDC’s regulatory strategy appears to be one of embedding compliance within its core offerings for specific industries, thereby aiming for smoother adoption by regulated entities. This has allowed it to gain traction with trade finance bodies and in jurisdictions actively promoting digital trade. XRP’s journey has been more tumultuous due to the SEC lawsuit, which has cast a long shadow over its U.S. operations. However, outside the U.S., particularly in Europe under MiCA and in several Asian countries with proactive crypto regulations, XRP and the XRP Ledger are finding clearer paths for adoption and integration into the financial system. The resolution of the SEC case remains a pivotal factor for XRP’s future in the U.S. market and its global perception.

Investment Analysis: XDC vs. XRP

Evaluating XDC and XRP as potential investments requires an examination of their market performance, expert opinions, growth potential, inherent risks, and suitability for different investor profiles.

Market Performance and Metrics

As of late May 2025, based on available data. Cryptocurrency markets are highly volatile, and these figures are subject to rapid change. Readers should consult real-time sources for the latest data.

XDC Network (XDC):

Market Capitalization: Approximately $1.07 billion to $1.1 billion.
24h Trading Volume: Ranged from approximately $23 million to $48 million.
Circulating Supply: Approximately 16.2 billion XDC out of a total supply of around 37.99 billion.
Price History: All-time high (ATH) of $0.1939 in August 2021. Recent trading (May 2025) around $0.07 – $0.075.

XRP Ledger (XRP):

Market Capitalization: Approximately $135 billion to $140 billion.
24h Trading Volume: Approximately $1.96 billion to $2.14 billion.
Circulating Supply: Approximately 58.7 billion to 59 billion XRP out of a total pre-mined supply of 100 billion.
Price History: All-time high (ATH) of $3.84. Recent trading (May 2025) around $2.30 – $2.35. Ranked #4 by popularity on Coinbase.

These metrics illustrate a significant difference in scale. XRP is a much larger, more established cryptocurrency by market capitalization and trading volume, reflecting its longer history and broader (though historically payment-focused) adoption. XDC, while smaller, has a dedicated focus and is building its presence in the trade finance and RWA sectors.

Expert Opinions and Analyst Perspectives

Analyst opinions on both XDC and XRP vary widely, reflecting the inherent volatility and speculative nature of the cryptocurrency market.

XDC Network:

Bullish Views: Some analysts, like Egrag Crypto (an XRP analyst), are notably bullish on XDC, predicting potential rallies to $1-$2 and even a 3,350% gain based on technical indicators (RGB, SRSI) and fundamental strengths like its MiCA alliance membership and applications in RWA/trade finance. Mitrade/NewsBTC analysis in February 2025 confirmed an uptrend with potential recovery, viewing XDC as a good investment due to its architecture and finance focus.
Mixed/Cautious Views: CCN.com offered a more cautious short-term prediction, suggesting a potential fall to $0.031 in 2025 and $0.020 in 2026, though projecting $0.200 by the end of 2030 based on its historical daily rate of increase. The same source noted a high TVL ratio in January 2025, suggesting overvaluation at that time. TokenMetrics.com provided scenario-based predictions: an optimistic $0.11 (if total crypto market cap reaches $3 trillion) and a bullish $0.38 (if $10 trillion market cap), but a bearish scenario could see it struggle between $0.058 and $0.19. Coincodex, AMBcrypto, and BitcoinWisdom offer varied long-term positive outlooks, with price targets for 2025 and 2030 generally ranging from $0.057 to $0.208. TradingView ideas show mixed sentiment, with some bullish in specific price ranges and others noting bearish technical divergences.

XRP Ledger:

Bullish Views: Cryptoinsight predicts a rally to $12 soon, citing fundamental developments like the Dubai Land Department’s use of XRPL for real estate tokenization, Ripple’s acquisition of Hidden Road, its payments license in Dubai, potential for a Circle acquisition, and the increasing odds of XRP ETFs, alongside bullish technical chart patterns. Markets.com compiles analyst predictions for 2025, suggesting a bullish case of $5-$10, contingent on a favorable SEC lawsuit resolution and strong ODL adoption.
Mixed/Cautious Views: CasiTrades noted XRP was on the verge of a local low (around May 2025), with key support at $2.25-$2.26; holding this could lead to $2.70, while a break could see it fall to $1.90 or $1.55. LiteFinance.org, compiling various analyst views, shows a range of predictions for 2025-2026, with CoinCodex expecting volatility and a high of $2.37 in May 2025 before falling, while Cryptomus projects significant gains to over $6 by December 2026 due to institutional adoption. The Motley Fool (via Nasdaq.com) expressed a more skeptical view, stating XRP’s long-term future looks murky post-SEC lawsuit due to its limitations in mining and native dApp development, deeming it a risky investment that might struggle to outshine Bitcoin or Ethereum, though potential catalysts like spot ETFs or a Ripple IPO exist.

The divergence in expert opinions for both assets is a crucial takeaway. Price predictions in crypto are often influenced by short-term technical analysis or tied to specific anticipated events (like lawsuit outcomes or major partnership announcements). This highlights the speculative component of the market. Investors should view such predictions with caution and focus on the underlying fundamentals, adoption trends, and risk factors rather than relying solely on price targets. The wide range of opinions itself signals the high degree of uncertainty inherent in these assets.

Growth Potential and Risk Factors

Table 2: Summary of Advantages and Disadvantages: XDC vs. XRP


Feature Category	XDC Network	XRP Ledger
Key Advantages	- Hybrid architecture (public/private) - Native EVM compatibility - Strong focus on Trade Finance & RWA tokenization - Very low fees & high TPS (2000+) - ISO 20022 alignment - XDC 2.0 security/performance enhancements	- Exceptional speed & extremely low cost for payments - Proven scalability & reliability over 10+ years - Strong institutional focus & established network (RippleNet) - Native DEX - Energy efficient consensus - Expanding DeFi/RWA capabilities (EVM sidechain, MPTs)
Key Disadvantages/Risks	- Enterprise adoption cycles can be slow - Competition from other L1s/L2s in enterprise/RWA space - Potential centralization concerns with masternode model (though KYC aims to mitigate) - Lower overall market awareness & liquidity compared to XRP	- Ongoing SEC lawsuit & U.S. regulatory uncertainty - Centralization concerns regarding Ripple's XRP holdings & influence - Competition in the payments space (other cryptos, SWIFT Go) - Price volatility impacting its use as a stable bridge currency

XDC Network Growth Drivers:

The primary growth drivers for XDC include the burgeoning RWA tokenization market, the ongoing digitization of the multi-trillion dollar trade finance industry, and the increasing demand from enterprises for compliant and efficient hybrid blockchain solutions. Its native EVM compatibility is attractive for developers, and the XDC 2.0 upgrades aim to enhance its core performance and security. Alignment with standards like ISO 20022 is also a significant factor for institutional adoption.

XDC Network Risks:

Risks include the inherent slowness of enterprise adoption cycles, strong competition from other blockchains targeting enterprise and RWA use cases, and the challenge of building broader market awareness and liquidity comparable to more established cryptocurrencies. While the masternode system with KYC aims for security, some may perceive it as a point of centralization compared to fully permissionless systems.

XRP Ledger Growth Drivers:

A favorable resolution to the SEC lawsuit is arguably the biggest potential catalyst for XRP, as it could unlock significant institutional adoption in the U.S. and improve market sentiment. Increased adoption of Ripple’s ODL service by banks and payment providers, the potential launch of XRP-spot ETFs, and a possible Ripple IPO are also major growth drivers. The expansion of DeFi and RWA tokenization capabilities on the XRPL through its EVM sidechain and new token standards like MPTs could also broaden its utility and demand.

XRP Ledger Risks:

The primary risk remains the SEC lawsuit; an unfavorable outcome could severely hamper its U.S. operations and global standing. Persistent regulatory uncertainty, even post-lawsuit, could deter institutional adoption. Concerns about the centralization of XRP holdings by Ripple and its influence over the ecosystem persist in some quarters. Competition in the fast-evolving payments landscape and XRP’s inherent price volatility (which can affect its utility as a bridge asset) are also notable risks.

The risk-reward profiles for XDC and XRP are shaped by these distinct factors. XRP, being more mature and having a larger market presence, faces a significant, binary-outcome regulatory risk in the US. A positive resolution could lead to a substantial re-rating, while a negative one could be severely detrimental. Its established partnerships and network effect provide a certain foundation. XDC, with its smaller market capitalization, offers the potential for higher percentage growth if its focused strategy in trade finance and RWA tokenization gains widespread traction. Its regulatory journey appears to be smoother due to its proactive compliance approach within its chosen niches.

Considerations for Different Investor Profiles

The “better” investment between XDC and XRP is highly subjective and depends on an individual’s risk tolerance, investment horizon, and specific goals.

Risk-Averse Investors: Might find XRP’s unresolved SEC lawsuit and the associated regulatory uncertainty too high-risk. Similarly, XDC’s smaller market capitalization and the less proven nature of its new token burn mechanisms might be a concern for those prioritizing capital preservation.
Growth-Oriented Investors: May see XDC’s specialized focus on the vast and underserved trade finance and RWA tokenization markets, coupled with its lower market cap, as offering higher growth potential. XRP also offers significant growth potential if regulatory hurdles are cleared and institutional adoption accelerates, particularly with new products like ETFs.
Technology-Focused Investors: Might be drawn to XDC’s hybrid architecture and native EVM compatibility for enterprise solutions. Alternatively, they might prefer the XRP Ledger’s highly optimized payment protocol and its upcoming multi-faceted approach to smart contracts (EVM sidechain, Hooks, Extensions).
Long-Term vs. Short-Term Horizon: XDC is often positioned by proponents as a long-term investment, with its value accruing as enterprise adoption in trade finance and RWA tokenization matures. XRP’s short-term price action is heavily influenced by news related to the SEC lawsuit and other event-driven catalysts like potential ETF approvals or major partnership announcements.

Ultimately, there is no universally “better” choice. Many investors in the crypto space opt for diversification, potentially holding both assets to balance different risk/reward profiles and capture upside from different market segments.

Future Roadmap and Development Trajectory

Both XDC Network and XRP Ledger have ambitious development roadmaps aimed at enhancing their capabilities, expanding their ecosystems, and solidifying their competitive positions.

XDC Network: Key Upcoming Upgrades and Strategic Focus (2025 and beyond)

The XDC Network’s future development is centered on strengthening its core infrastructure, expanding its enterprise use cases, and fostering its ecosystem.

XDC 2.0 Enhancements: Continued optimization of the XDC 2.0 consensus mechanism, which features Byzantine Fault Tolerance (BFT), forensics monitoring for validator accountability, and aims for very fast transaction finality (around 6 seconds). The XDC 2.0 upgrade also includes staking, rewards, and token burning mechanisms designed for a sustainable economic model.
Ecosystem and dApp Growth: A strong focus remains on expanding the suite of decentralized applications (dApps) in its core areas of trade finance, RWA tokenization, and DeFi. Support for this growth comes from the XDC Foundation and the community-driven XDCDAO, which facilitates protocol upgrades and ecosystem funding.
Subnet Development: Promotion and development of its Layer 2 subnet system, allowing for the creation of gasless or permissioned sidechains tailored for specific enterprise needs, enhancing scalability and privacy while inheriting mainnet security. The official release of XDC Subnet was noted as a recent development.
Interoperability: Enhancing connections with other blockchain networks and legacy systems is a priority. This includes integrations like LayerZero for omnichain functionality and existing bridges to networks like Corda and Wanchain.
Compliance and Regulatory Alignment: Continued adherence to international standards like ISO 20022 and MLETR, and collaboration with regulated partners to ensure the network is suitable for institutional and enterprise use in regulated industries.
RWA Tokenization Expansion: Building on existing partnerships (e.g., with InvestaX for licensed RWA token issuance in Singapore) and targeting the projected multi-trillion dollar RWA market remains a cornerstone of XDC’s strategy.
Roadmap Updates: The XDC Network was scheduled to provide an ecosystem update on May 28, 2025, titled “Inside XDC: Ecosystem Highlights & The Road Forward,” which was expected to detail progress, priorities, and future plans. Specifics for late 2025 and 2026 will likely depend on the announcements from such updates.

XRP Ledger: Key Upcoming Upgrades and Strategic Focus (2025 and beyond)

The XRP Ledger’s development roadmap is focused on expanding its programmability, enhancing its DeFi capabilities, and catering to institutional needs for compliance and RWA tokenization.

XRPL EVM Sidechain Mainnet Launch: A major milestone expected in Q2 2025, this sidechain will bring full EVM compatibility to the XRPL ecosystem, enabling Ethereum developers to deploy their smart contracts and dApps, thereby significantly expanding the XRPL’s potential use cases.
Native Smart Contract Evolution:
- Extensions: This modular feature will allow developers to attach new code to existing XRPL primitives (e.g., escrows, AMMs) to customize functionality without requiring full smart contract deployment. “Smart Escrows” are planned for a Q3 2025 announcement, with a devnet expected in Q4 2025.
- Hooks: Continued development of Hooks for specialized, lightweight Layer 1 smart contract logic directly on the XRP Ledger.
DeFi Ecosystem Expansion: Enhancements to the native DEX and AMMs (including Clawback support for AMMs) are ongoing. A native lending protocol is also planned, expected by Q3 2025, to facilitate institutional DeFi and integrate with Ripple Payments, RWAs, and stablecoins.
RWA Tokenization: The introduction of the Multi-Purpose Token (MPT) standard is key to this strategy. MPTs are semi-fungible tokens designed to represent and trade tokenized bonds, other RWAs, and structured financial products, supporting metadata like expiry dates.
Institutional Compliance Features: Development of an improved Decentralized Identity (DID) standard with a Credentials standard. This will support Permissioned DEX and Permissioned Domain features, allowing institutions to create compliant platforms on XRPL that meet KYC requirements while preserving privacy.
RLUSD Stablecoin Growth: Ripple is prioritizing the ramp-up and adoption of its native stablecoin, RLUSD, on the XRP Ledger.
Interoperability: The integration of Axelar, expected in Q2 2025, will connect the XRP Ledger to over 60 other blockchain platforms, enhancing cross-chain liquidity and data transfer.
Roadmap Communication: RippleX and the XRPL Foundation regularly communicate updates. Ripple’s “XRPL Insights” blog post in February 2025 detailed many of these plans for the year.

Potential Impact of Future Developments on Their Competitive Positions

Both XDC and XRP are strategically evolving to capture opportunities in the rapidly growing RWA tokenization and institutional DeFi sectors. This shared focus indicates a recognition that these areas are likely to be major drivers of growth and value for Layer 1 blockchains in the coming years. The ability to securely, compliantly, and efficiently tokenize, manage, and trade RWAs will be a key differentiator.

Their approaches to smart contract evolution highlight different philosophies. XDC is deepening its native EVM environment on Layer 1, aiming for seamless integration and ease of use for the large existing pool of Solidity developers. This offers simplicity and direct L1 functionality. XRP, conversely, is pursuing a multi-pronged strategy: Hooks for specific, lightweight L1 logic; Extensions for enhancing existing L1 primitives; and a full-fledged EVM Sidechain for comprehensive dApp support. This offers greater flexibility to cater to diverse needs but may introduce more complexity for developers in choosing the right tool and could lead to a degree of fragmentation. The success of these strategies will depend on developer adoption and the perceived trade-offs between direct L1 integration versus sidechain capabilities.

Ultimately, XDC’s future success hinges on the widespread adoption of XDC 2.0 and its ability to attract significant trade finance volume and RWA tokenization projects onto its platform. For XRP, its competitiveness will be heavily influenced by the successful launch and adoption of its EVM sidechain (to diversify beyond its historical payment focus), the continued evolution of its native smart contract capabilities, and, critically, a favorable and definitive resolution to the SEC lawsuit that provides regulatory clarity in the U.S. market.

Conclusion: Which Path Forward – XDC or XRP?

The question “Is XDC better than XRP?” does not yield a simple yes or no answer. Both XDC Network and XRP Ledger are robust platforms with distinct strengths, target markets, and technological approaches, though their paths are increasingly converging in areas like RWA tokenization and DeFi.

Recap of Key Differentiators

Core Focus & Architecture: XDC Network is an enterprise-grade hybrid blockchain with native EVM compatibility, specifically designed for trade finance, RWA tokenization, and ISO 20022 compliance. XRP Ledger is a highly specialized Layer 1 protocol optimized for fast, low-cost payments and liquidity provision, now expanding its capabilities with an EVM-compatible Layer 2 sidechain and enhanced L1 programmability.
Consensus & Tokenomics: XDC employs XDPoS with BFT (XDC 2.0), featuring masternode/staking rewards and a new token burn mechanism. XRP uses the RPCA, with a pre-mined total supply and a deflationary transaction fee burn mechanism; its validators are not directly rewarded by the protocol with new tokens.
Regulatory Journey: XDC has pursued proactive compliance within its niche, aligning with international standards and engaging with regulatory bodies and industry consortia from an early stage. XRP has faced a prolonged and impactful legal battle with the U.S. SEC, creating significant regulatory uncertainty in one of its key potential markets, though it has seen positive regulatory developments in Europe and parts of Asia.

A Nuanced Answer

The “better” platform depends entirely on the specific needs, priorities, and risk appetite of the user, developer, or investor:

XDC Network may be considered “better” for:

Enterprises and financial institutions specifically seeking a hybrid blockchain solution with native EVM support tailored for complex trade finance operations, supply chain management, or RWA tokenization that requires a high degree of compliance with standards like ISO 20022 and MLETR from the ground up.
Developers looking to build sophisticated dApps for these niches directly on an EVM-compatible Layer 1 with options for permissioned or gasless subnets.
Investors looking for exposure to a project with a strong focus on the potentially massive (but still developing) markets of trade finance digitization and RWA tokenization, who are willing to accept the risks associated with a smaller market capitalization project in exchange for potentially higher growth.

XRP Ledger may be considered “better” for:

Financial institutions and payment providers needing a highly reliable, exceptionally fast, and extremely low-cost infrastructure for cross-border payments, remittances, and real-time liquidity sourcing, particularly if the SEC lawsuit resolves favorably, providing clear U.S. regulatory status.
Developers seeking a mature, battle-tested Layer 1 for payment-centric applications or those looking to leverage its upcoming EVM sidechain to tap into its established ecosystem and user base for broader DeFi or NFT applications.
Investors seeking exposure to a more established, highly liquid digital asset with the potential for a significant rebound driven by regulatory clarity, new institutional products (like spot ETFs), or a potential Ripple IPO, and who are comfortable with the ongoing legal risks.

The idea that one is universally superior to the other is a misconception. They are different tools designed for different, albeit sometimes overlapping, purposes. An enterprise aiming to tokenize and finance international trade receivables might find XDC’s features and compliance integrations more immediately aligned with its needs. A bank looking to reduce the cost and time of settling international currency transactions might lean towards XRP, especially if regulatory concerns are alleviated.

Emphasis on Due Diligence and Aligning Choices with Individual Goals

The cryptocurrency market is inherently volatile and speculative. This comparative analysis provides a framework for understanding XDC and XRP, but it is not financial advice. Any decision to use, build on, or invest in these platforms should be preceded by thorough personal research (DYOR).

Readers must consider their own risk tolerance, investment objectives, time horizon, and the specific utility they seek from a blockchain network. The “better” choice is ultimately a personal one, contingent on these individual factors and a deep understanding of each project’s evolving landscape.

Final Thought on the Evolving Landscape

Both XDC Network and XRP Ledger are dynamic projects with significant ongoing development. Their technologies, adoption rates, regulatory standings, and competitive positions are not static. As they execute their roadmaps and as the broader cryptocurrency and global regulatory landscapes continue to evolve, their relative strengths and weaknesses may shift. Continuous monitoring and reassessment will be key for anyone involved with these compelling but distinct blockchain ecosystems. The increasing focus of both platforms on RWA tokenization and institutional DeFi suggests that these will be critical arenas for future competition and innovation.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

Is XDC a better long-term investment than XRP? This depends on an investor’s risk appetite and belief in their respective core markets. XDC, with its lower market cap and focus on the burgeoning trade finance and RWA sectors, may offer higher percentage growth potential but also carries the risks of a smaller project. XRP, if it overcomes its regulatory hurdles, has a large established network and strong institutional connections that could drive significant value. Both have strong long-term arguments but also distinct risk profiles. Many analysts suggest XDC has strong long-term potential if enterprise adoption in its niche accelerates , while XRP’s long-term outlook is heavily tied to the SEC case resolution and broader institutional use.
What are the main technological differences between XDC and XRP? XDC Network is a hybrid (public/private) EVM-compatible Layer 1 blockchain using XDPoS consensus (upgraded to XDC 2.0 with BFT) and supporting subnets. XRP Ledger is a specialized public Layer 1 blockchain using the Ripple Protocol Consensus Algorithm (RPCA) and is now adding EVM compatibility via a Layer 2 sidechain, alongside L1 smart contract capabilities like Hooks and Extensions.
Which has lower transaction fees, XDC or XRP? Both XDC and XRP offer extremely low transaction fees, typically fractions of a cent. XDC quotes fees around $0.00001 , while XRP fees are around $0.0002. For most practical purposes, both are highly cost-effective. XDC also has a concept for gasless subnets for specific applications.
How does the regulatory situation of XRP affect its comparison with XDC? XRP’s ongoing lawsuit with the U.S. SEC creates significant regulatory uncertainty and risk, particularly for U.S. adoption. A negative outcome could severely impact its market. XDC has focused on proactive compliance in its target sectors like trade finance and alignment with international standards (ISO 20022, MLETR) and regulatory frameworks like MiCA in Europe, potentially offering a smoother path for enterprise adoption in those areas. This makes XDC appear less encumbered by major, unresolved legal battles in key markets compared to XRP currently.
What are the primary use cases for XDC vs. XRP? XDC’s primary use cases are enterprise solutions in trade finance, real-world asset (RWA) tokenization, and ISO 20022-compliant financial messaging. XRP’s traditional primary use case is facilitating fast, low-cost cross-border payments and providing liquidity for financial institutions. Both are expanding into DeFi and broader RWA applications.