Jake Claver, a prominent business leader and financial strategist, has asserted that the growing prominence of stablecoins does not reduce the need for XRP.
In a recent statement on the social media platform X, Claver addressed the misconception that the rise of fiat-backed and algorithmic stablecoins would diminish XRP’s utility in cross-border finance.
According to Claver, that view is incorrect. He stated that the current $27 trillion locked in Nostro/Vostro accounts globally could expand to over $50 trillion, citing distrust among banks regarding the use of competing stablecoins as the primary driver for that potential increase.
Claver emphasized that XRP, functioning as a neutral bridge asset, maintains its relevance because it is not issued by any specific institution or nation-state, making it a uniquely suited tool for settlement between parties that do not trust each other.
People think stablecoins reduce XRP's need. Wrong. $27T in Nostro/Vostro accounts could grow to $50T+ because banks won't trust competitors' coins. XRP becomes the neutral bridge.
— Jake Claver, QFOP (@beyond_broke) June 17, 2025
Community Response Highlights Diverging Views
Claver’s post attracted commentary from X users who expanded on or challenged his assertion. One user, who goes by the name Trenton valley boy, echoed Claver’s point about trust in financial counterparties.
He noted that the core issue in the present financial system is the lack of trust between institutions, especially when dealing with manipulated or overinflated currencies. According to him, XRP addresses that issue through the introduction of the Automated Market Maker (AMM) feature, which eliminates counterparty risk by allowing for trustless liquidity provision on-chain.
We are on X, follow us to connect with us :- @TimesTabloid1
— TimesTabloid (@TimesTabloid1) June 15, 2025
The user then compared Bitcoin to XRP, stating that even Bitcoin represents a form of counterparty risk due to its volatile price action and longer settlement times. He argued that the volatility during transaction finality windows can lead to significant financial impact, especially when values shift by thousands of dollars in minutes. In his view, stablecoins issued on the XRP Ledger (XRPL) provide a counterparty-risk-free alternative.
He acknowledged that XRP itself could remain volatile, but stablecoins moving via XRPL in three to five seconds do not suffer from the same risk. He concluded by stating that the ability to recognize and act on these developments is essential to being prepared for the future of money movement.
Criticism Refutes XRP Bridge Currency Narrative
However, the post was not without opposition. Another user, STU, firmly disagreed with Claver’s claims. He argued that the vision of banks using XRP as a bridge currency is outdated and no longer aligns with current market dynamics.
According to STU, that idea represents a belief from 2017 that never materialized at scale. He stated that no banks are currently using XRP for bridging transactions, and suggested that this was the motivation behind Ripple’s shift toward RLUSD, its U.S. dollar-backed stablecoin.
STU concluded that Ripple is now focusing on bringing volume to the XRP Ledger through the issuance of a trusted stablecoin, rather than relying on the XRP token itself as the primary utility.
The broader relevance of Claver’s argument lies in the evolving architecture of international finance. With increasing regulatory clarity and emerging technologies like AMM and tokenized fiat currencies on-chain, platforms such as the XRPL continue to evolve. While some argue XRP’s original use case is no longer viable, others maintain that the system still needs a trust-minimized, efficient bridge asset.
Disclaimer: This content is meant to inform and should not be considered financial advice. The views expressed in this article may include the author’s personal opinions and do not represent Times Tabloid’s opinion. Readers are advised to conduct thorough research before making any investment decisions. Any action taken by the reader is strictly at their own risk. Times Tabloid is not responsible for any financial losses.
Follow us on X, Facebook, Telegram, and Google News
