Expert Explains Why RLUSD Can’t Replace XRP

RLUSD could facilitate a growing share of dollar-based transactions on the XRP Ledger, but its role does not necessarily extend to every type of digital asset exchange.

The discussion centers on the different functions of XRP and RLUSD, particularly as more financial assets move onchain.

While RLUSD provides a dollar-denominated option for payments and trading, proponents of XRP’s routing utility believe a neutral intermediary could remain necessary for transactions involving assets that do not share a common currency.

Why RLUSD Cannot Cover Every Transaction

ChartNerd shared a statement from Sagar Shah, Chief Business Officer at Evernorth, explaining why RLUSD cannot replace XRP across all trading scenarios.

Shah noted that many transactions on the XRP Ledger involve the US dollar on at least one side, making RLUSD suitable for those activities. However, he identified other transactions that do not naturally involve dollars, including swaps between tokenized US Treasuries and tokenized euro money market funds.

He also referenced lending markets denominated in different assets and other cross-asset transactions without a dollar component. Such activities may require an intermediary asset to facilitate exchanges between assets that lack sufficient direct liquidity.

Shah described XRP as the asset that could serve this purpose, referring to it as the “Swap Kid.” His explanation presents XRP and RLUSD as assets with distinct functions rather than direct substitutes in every transaction.

Nick | Crypto Crusader Sees a Growing Need for XRP

Nick argued that XRP remains a strong candidate for routing transactions between fiat-backed stablecoins. He acknowledged that the current use case faces limitations because most stablecoins are backed by the US dollar.

However, he suggested that the situation could change as more currencies become available in digital form. In his view, a financial system with onchain representations of multiple fiat currencies would create greater demand for a neutral bridge currency.

Nick maintained that the need for such an intermediary would persist as financial activity moves onto blockchain networks.

Critics Question XRP’s Competitive Advantage

Alew explained that stablecoins with sufficient direct liquidity can trade against one another without routing through XRP. They could also use another liquid asset, including a US dollar stablecoin such as RLUSD, as an intermediary.

The commenter further argued that XRP must compete with alternative routing models on trading spreads, market depth, execution costs and settlement efficiency. According to Alew, greater stablecoin liquidity could reduce the economic incentive to use XRP for some transactions.

The debate ultimately concerns whether XRP can offer a more efficient route than competing assets as onchain markets expand. While Shah and Nick see a continuing role for XRP in cross-asset transactions, Alew maintains that adoption will depend on liquidity and execution advantages rather than XRP’s neutral position alone.