SWIFT

CunningStunt_1

Wow. A community submitted article, on a pay per post crypto site. What a reliable source. Let's verify that with SWIFT... https://www.swift.com/news-events/news/swift-explores-blockchain-interoperability-remove-friction-tokenised-asset-settlement. https://www.swift.com/news-events/press-releases/swift-ubs-asset-management-and-chainlink-successfully-complete-innovative-pilot-bridge-tokenized-assets-existing-payment-systems SWIFT says you are lying and spreading misinformation. Shame on you.

CunningStunt_1

Why don't you buy the coin with the actual banking partnerships? XRP/XDC and to a certain extent hbar are constantly talking about SWIFT, DTCC, general large scale banking integration. When it is chainlink doing all of those things.

Ok_Cupcake8900

Mainstream adoption will be organisations like SWIFT integrating blockchain seamlessly into their network. People will use blockchain chain tech without the ven knowing it or having to go through these manual transactions

CunningStunt_1

>Wrong again. CCIP users are the bridging protocols. But that vertical has much more competition, from LayerZero to other intent-based protocols. VRF is again used by apps to generate random outputs. VRF used by individual players within gaming environments. https://pentagon.games/ https://ccip.chain.link/ Operates wallet to wallet on the majority of txs. Only differs when it has taken over things like ronin bridge or whatever. >WTF are you talking about? Proof of reserves is done at the off-chain level, either via some Merkle tree proof or a third party audit. https://chain.link/education-hub/proof-of-reserves The result of proof of reserves is pushed to protocols using the stables. Risk management. Read the stablecoin act. >They want closer integration of value capture across their portfolio. For example, if they own a protocol issuing real estate RWA, they want to make sure the same protocol is using an oracle they own So you agree, the value capture is not on the L1. It is data and protocol level? >The one who owns downstream and upstream supply chains has the market power to decide who owns the middle. If they own the asset issuing base and the customer relationship, then they have the market power to decide on the oracle. >Link doesn't issue assets. Those who issue assets will favor the oracle they own and use it instead. Link has no moat here. You can tokenize assets using Chainlink. Bakes in their cross-chain token standard. Traps you in the chainlink standard, on whatever chain/s you want. https://tokenmanager.chain.link/ Tokenmanager is a beta for CRE(chainlink runtime environment). Which will be pushed out by SWIFT. I suspect it is being used by DTCC based on their previous work together on [NAV data](https://www.dtcc.com/dtcc-connection/articles/2024/may/16/smart-nav-pilot-report-bringing-trusted-data-to-the-blockchain-ecosystem). >The data is pretty strong in showing where blockchain "yield" happens. It is at the SoV value. You all trying to gaslight ppl into overvaluing basic TradFi stuff at higher premium without justification. The primary attraction is crypto native assets. Off chain assets are secondary in interest and have better Web 2 outlets to provide better UX and exchange fluidity. Isn't the entire aim to bring those assets on chain? The value in blockchain is cost savings and freeing up illiquid assets? Are you trolling me? You don't seem to know a lot about Chainlink, but you are acting as if you do.

Aconyminomicon

The guy responding to you is the typical Hedera hater who knows basically nothing about the difference in hashgraph DLT vs blockchain DLT. They don't know that Hedera is a solution to many problems, and inversly, 99% of large cap crypto like SOL/DOT/ETH/ADA are all different solutions to problems no one really has. If the coin isn't ISO20022 compliant, then the coin is not going to hold up long term. If you can't plug in to the existing framework like ISO compliant coins can, then why would SWIFT or any other network devote their own time and money into helping people use inferior networks like Solana or Ethereum. When SOL and ETH got ETF applications, nothing happened. When HBAR got its ETF application and only the application, it did a 6x. The smart money knows where to go but the average crypto person is psychologically manipulated with group think, echo chambers, and perpetual promises that will never be delivered.

kkye4

Totally fair take—and one a lot of long-time DOT holders are quietly sharing right now. You’re not alone in feeling that Polkadot’s momentum in terms of hype and narrative has cooled off, while Chainlink’s narrative is heating up again, especially around CCIP (Cross-Chain Interoperability Protocol). Here’s a breakdown to help you think it through: ⸻ Polkadot vs. Chainlink: Current Sentiment & Traction Polkadot (DOT) • Strengths: • Solid tech (shared security, parachains). • A dedicated dev community (Substrate framework is still used a lot). • Active in Web3 governance and cross-chain communication (XCM). • Weaknesses: • Sluggish adoption of parachains by killer apps. • Governance changes and the move to Polkadot 2.0 confused many holders. • Lack of hype and media buzz—it’s become more of an “infra” project, not a shiny consumer-facing ecosystem. Chainlink (LINK) • Strengths: • CCIP is gaining real traction—big names like SWIFT, DTCC, and tokenized asset platforms are experimenting or integrating it. • Chainlink’s oracle dominance is unmatched. • Maintains strong partnerships and buzz, especially in the real-world asset (RWA) narrative. • Weaknesses: • Centralization concerns (Oracle committees). • Some argue it’s more enterprise-facing than retail-focused. • Still working on fee/value accrual mechanisms for LINK token holders. ⸻ Community & Hype Shift • LINK’s hype is back, especially among DeFi and TradFi crossover folks. • DOT feels like it’s drifting—some of its original backers have shifted attention to other chains like Cosmos, Near, or modular solutions like Celestia. ⸻ If You’re Considering Rotating DOT into LINK • From a narrative momentum perspective, LINK is arguably in a much better position in 2025. • That said, DOT is probably undervalued on a purely tech basis—if Polkadot 2.0 ever clicks or parachains take off, it could be a sleeper. • If you’re more into momentum and growth narratives, LINK might feel more “alive.” • If you’re still a believer in long-term infrastructure bets, keeping some DOT or rotating only part might make sense. ⸻

CunningStunt_1

Perhaps a coin with unparalleled banking connections. Yet still undervalued relative to the rest of the market. [SWIFT](https://www.swift.com/news-events/press-releases/swift-ubs-asset-management-and-chainlink-successfully-complete-innovative-pilot-bridge-tokenized-assets-existing-payment-systems) [Euroclear](https://www.finextra.com/pressarticle/102833/eurocler-and-swift-join-chainlink-ai-and-blockchain-initiative-for-corporate-actions) [Central bank of Brasil](https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/chainlink-joins-banco-inter-microsoft-and-7comm-consortium-to-support-trade-finance-use-case-in-phase-2-of-drex-pilot-302309772.html) Chainlink.

Ok_Resident2948

You may want to consider using an OTC broker/trading desk instead of exchanges (centralized or decentralized). They offer: * Far greater liquidity (utilize institutional liquidity pools/networks) * Greater privacy of your transactions * Little to no slippage issues * No front running (orders are not visible to the market like w/exchanges) * Less issues with network congestion that can delay your activities * VIP level service rather than an impersonal app for everything OTC brokers will allow you to maintain your own wallet (i.e. Ledger, etc.) rather than provide you with custodial services which is important for those concerned with losing access due to financial failure of a custodian or it being hacked. The downsides to OTC brokers: * Minimum trade size requirements * Potentially higher fees to transfer fiat out to bank accounts (SWIFT Wire or ACH) * Limited more towards established tokens, no ICO’s and many meme’s OTC brokers are ideal for those who are high volume traders or trade in large blocks that can be disruptive to the markets and offer far greater privacy with regard to your trades and orders. I highly recommend this option over a CEX or DEX, especially if you trade on a regular basis or simply want a better level of service.

Opposite-Cod-8290

Because it’s a one trick pony with all its eggs in one basket. SWIFT is owned by the banks do you really think they would let someone else run there operation?

arBettor

BREAKING NEWS (some future date): Brad Garlinghouse becomes world's first trillionaire for completely failing to disrupt SWIFT.

Onauto

XRP. It IS decentralized. Ripple is not. People always get that wrong. It’s the future of global trade and finance. Currently number 3 crypto built by bitcoiners. Relationships with 300 institutions, partners with BofA, 7% of South Korea uses it almost daily. Japan lowered taxes on XRP from 50% to 15% and 80% of their banks have been approved to use it. UAE and India just completed an oil deal using it. Candidate for the FedNow system. Possible replacement of the SWIFT system but more likely, SWIFT will integrate XRP to stay relevant. Named first for the US crypto stockpile. Connections with WEF, IMF, and many governments. Likely to surpass ETH and has versatile functionality. 19 ETF’s filed, Tokenization of RWA, cross border payments, NFC’s, DeFi getting there, leveraged trading now available. There’s too much to list. It’s the chosen coin. I have high coinfidance in its future.

Leafan1976

If you are willing to hold for 2-5 years. I would suggest $HBAR is priced lower than a lot of others still. Under .20 currently. But the tech and Council that Hedera has is different from Blockchain. Called HashGraph. The HashGraph is already Quantum Secure and Running in real world scenarios. I could rhyme off a list of things. But SWIFT is running payments on HashGraph (will probably beat out XRP) SEALSQ already has 21 Million homes running their Smart Hydro meters on Hedera HashGraph, they also already have a satellite in Space (SealSQ) running on Hedera. Everyone is overlooking HBAR BIG TIME I believe HBAR/Hedera will over take ETH in 5 years, as the council has been preparing for this moment for YEARS. They will be one of the FIRST to pass all regulations necessary, again because they have built under the impression that Regulation WILL be Implemented if Crypto is to see MASS adoption.... Ya. So I'd buy HBAR if I was picking anything in the top 50 for a long term hold. Oh ALSO of NOTE .... HBAR has a 100 year Business plan already.... They are NOT going anywhere BUT UP

DasKapitalist

All of these comments assume a BTC country is going to engage in a protracted conventional war with Opforistan. Rather than just put a price on the head of the leader of Opforistan and his generals. That's hard to do with fiat because the bankster oligarchs will cut nations out of SWIFT if they dare to make wars personal, but with crypto you can't stop the signal. Fortunately the possibility of that will likely prevent conflict for the same reason no one invades countries who possess nuclear weapons - the risk of the conflict becomes too personal.

Fickle-Rich2581

Look, personally, I think xrp is going to be the new financial system for banks to transfer money because SWIFT needs to change. While trump is in office you could see some crazy returns if he pushes them and they get mass adoption. When he’s not president, who knows what democrats will do to it. The banking world moves slow, so you’re probably better off putting it in bitcoin, because, even with good Bullish news, the economy is going to scare any gains. Now I feel it’s better to put money in gold then crypto then stocks for the immediate future. Stocks last, too scared of what trumps doing. My opinion

Aconyminomicon

This is not correct at all. Chainlink........links different blockchains into the existing financial infrastructure (SWIFT network). It is chain Agnostic. They are basically selling the pick axes to all the people who think they struck gold. Without Chainlink, there would be no crypto.

Cryptocaller

Haha, your lies just keep getting worse. Who cares if you’re up personally? I bought XRP at .17 cents…Echo cares, it’s crap. How about you defending some of your main talking points instead of just blathering on? Brad himself said that he could see Ripple LLC, ie: XRP as a replacement for SWIFT/ACH. “Not an American based crypto” is unprovable. But why does that even matter? Are you some type of neo-nazi? No one cares about the founding country of origin of any crypto. “No creator”. Well then how does it exist if no one created it? You simply don’t know who they are and your perspective that this is a bad thing is ideologically flawed. They/them created Bitcoin and then walked away with zero profit. Brad on the other hand “minted” out of thin air 100,000,000,000 Billion tokens and proceeds to sell millions them every year and the only person that benefits from those sales is him. “And it’s connected to Tether” Oh yeah? How exactly? “All signs point to it going straight to zero” Now you’re just clowning around. Nothing points to the number one crypto currency in history over the past 16 years as “going to zero”. I would like to hear your opinion but you are an absolute moron and so I’ll simply say good luck in life because you’re going to really need it.

Cryptocaller

You’re so funny. Regardless of your investment staring point, BTC will always be a better investment. Do you even understand the functionality of XRP? They’re trying to replace SWIFT/ACH as a transactional token. Where’s the store of value in micro transactions? You have no clue what you’re even talking about. You’ve been sold on the memes of XRP. You will 100% lose all of your money.

MrBluoe

This is what chatGPT has to say about my comment in case anyone's interested: You raise some valid points. Here’s a breakdown of the selling point of XRP and where its value lies: 1. XRP’s Target Audience: Unlike other blockchain networks targeting individual users or Web3 projects, XRP is primarily focused on financial institutions (banks, payment processors, remittance services). This is a more traditional business model, relying on institutional partnerships and cross-border payments. 2. Revenue Model: Ripple sells XRP to institutions that want to use its liquidity tools (like On-Demand Liquidity, or ODL). While fees are low, Ripple charges financial institutions for using these services, especially when providing cross-border liquidity. This makes money for Ripple even if the transaction fees are minimal. 3. Why Ripple’s Model is Attractive: Cross-border payments: XRP offers liquidity where traditional financial systems struggle. It helps institutions move money across borders quickly and efficiently (typically faster than SWIFT or traditional channels). Pre-mined coins: Ripple's pre-mined coins mean it has control over supply and can guarantee liquidity, a critical point for financial institutions relying on predictable transaction costs. Institutional Trust: Ripple is well-regarded in the traditional finance sector because it works within existing financial regulations. Many Web3 projects avoid traditional institutions due to regulatory issues, but Ripple leans into this space by offering compliance, which is an appealing factor for banks. 4. Network Sustainability: XRP’s consensus mechanism is efficient and low-cost, which allows the network to sustain itself with minimal transaction fees. Ripple’s institutional sales model will likely remain a key revenue source while its network growth (and increasing adoption) boosts the value and usage of XRP. 5. Decentralization vs. Centralization: While Ripple’s XRP Ledger is decentralized, Ripple Labs controls a significant portion of the supply (around 46 billion XRP). This centralization has been criticized, but the company claims that it is working toward decentralizing the ecosystem over time. On the other hand, some Web3 projects have more decentralized blockchains, which could appeal to crypto purists but don’t offer the same institutional-grade features or regulatory compliance that Ripple can. 6. Why Companies Pay Ripple: Reliability and scalability: Ripple’s blockchain offers faster settlement times and cost efficiency for large-scale international transactions. For businesses that need to transfer large amounts of money globally, the benefits outweigh using "free" chains that may not offer the same assurances. Regulatory Clarity: Ripple operates within a legal framework, which is often appealing to businesses that face compliance and regulatory pressure. In conclusion, XRP may not fit the Web3 or decentralized ideal for some, but it offers real-world utility to institutions looking for faster, cheaper, and more compliant cross-border payment solutions. If Web3 adoption is important for you, you might lean toward decentralized chains like Ethereum or Solana, but XRP's primary selling point remains enterprise adoption and regulatory trust. Sources: https://ripple.com/insights/understanding-ripple-and-xrp/ https://www.coindesk.com/business/2021/10/14/how-ripple-makes-money/

deviantgoober

Yet the problem is America influences SWIFT to do just that, even if its not fully American. Like the US Dollar, they block people out of SWIFT as a means of economic control.

Petursinn

Hahaha ... okokok, so you tell me XRP is like buying stock? But quess what? THERE IS NO STOCK, you dont own ANYTHING, you dont get to vote or get dividends, you own nothing! How on earth is that a good deal? XRP is to Swift what a pidgeon is to the internet, SWIFT is MAGNITUDES faster and handles MAGNITUDES more volume than XRP will EVER do. Where do you guys get your information?

Petursinn

I have had this conversion so many times now... I have some information for you right here, easily verifiable about XRP: \--- Centralization in XRP every transaction needs to be verified by a server from a pre-approved list. That list is "allegedly" not only Ripple servers, but it actually is only Ripple servers. Also it needs to be 90% the same on every node, meaning, it is basically the same list on every node. So in reality you have only Ripple servers that are approved in the pre-approved list and no other alternatives. This if from their official documentation [https://xrpl.org/docs/concepts/consensus-protocol/unl](https://xrpl.org/docs/concepts/consensus-protocol/unl) "Initially, it was believed that 60% overlap between two servers' UNLs was enough to prevent those servers from forking apart. However, further research showed that in the worst case scenario, 90% overlap was required to prevent a fork" \--- ISO20022 The whole narrative about Ripple somehow creating the ISO20022 standard to replace SWIFT and enforcing banks to use it is an absolute lie. ISO20022 is made by SWIFT, a company formed by the largest banks in the world that currently facilitates international transactions. There is a website dedicated to it [https://www.iso20022.org/](https://www.iso20022.org/), the standard is from 2013. Ripple simply implemented a subset of that standard, something thousands of financial companies around the world have done. This was a big narrative that Ripple was promoting on social media in September-December 2024, and it was an absolute disinformation campaign, but they were very successful in creating this illusion that they were bringing in new technology to replace SWIFT, namely the ISO20022 standard. It is quite clear that they were running a coordinated propaganda campaign with these messages using AI and bots along with paid influencer to hype up the XRP coin. There was also a big list of companies being pushed around that showed who had made NDA with Ripple. As if that meant any obligations between the two parties, which it clearly does not. \--- XRP token The XRP token is premined by Ripple, and it is sold by them to fund their marketing (instagram and youtube influencers) and development. Every XRP in existance has been created by them. Almost all utility cases that Ripple has developed evolve around a separated blockchain from the XRP. This means that everyone who is buying XRP, is basically just giving them money. There is no use case for XRP and there will never be any use case for XRP. (Read up on XRPL and the RLUSD)

Petursinn

Hahahah, you mean like one company holding more than 50% of the coins? You needing to register for a wallet with the central database? You needing to pay for said registration? The way that it can be shut down by the US government in a second? Or even by the Ripple CEO? Please tell me what makes XRP great and don not give me that SWIFT integration bullshit that has been debunked a hundred times.

JohnKostly

As long as there is the monopoly SWIFT, there will be Bitcoin. And as long as Mastercard and VISA censor, and have no oversight, there will be Bitcoin.

CunningStunt_1

The one working with SWIFT (11k banks), the DTCC (clears trillions a year), Euroclear (again, trillions), UBS etc etc. Shouldn't be too hard to identify if you don't go on social media. Use actual sources.

solenico

The point is that there is no incentive for financial institutions not to rather create their own blockchain being openly centralized. Not like XRP which is mushy centralized. Instant SEPA covers 36 countries. There’s no technical reasons it couldn’t cover all currencies using EUR as transfer currency. It exist and is proven technology. The decision not to make SEPA global has exactly same issues as XRP has. Still. It covers 36 countries and XRP covers 0. SWIFT is making money for banks with its crazy expenses. That’s the reason why banks are not interested in moving to other options. lol as much as you want, but XRP is dead horse for the reasons I have explained. Your discussion style calling the opponent stupid and constantly lolling tells a lot about your intelligence.

Renowned_Molecule

Owning BRICS PAY is like saying ripple could own SWIFT. SWIFT is not something someone can acquire.

robeewankenobee

>Currently, SWIFT is used by more than 11,000 banking institutions located in over 200 countries vs. >BRICS is an intergovernmental organization comprising ten countries – Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa, Egypt, Ethiopia, Indonesia, Iran and the United Arab Emirates. The title: >Is The SWIFT Monopoly At Risk Go home title, you're drunk.

coinfeeds-bot

tldr; Russia is spearheading the development of a BRICS payment network to reduce reliance on the SWIFT system and promote financial independence from Western influence. The system, called BRICS Pay, will connect national payment systems of member countries and be open to non-member nations. It aims to bypass sanctions, promote national currencies, and reduce dependence on the US dollar. However, challenges include internal BRICS divergences, the dominance of the dollar, and the need to ensure the system's reliability and global compatibility. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.

bestjaegerpilot

it's important to note that the CEO of Robinhood said they plan on using SWIFT to sign transactions. That's like a big :shrug: But yea he also says tokenization is the future.

R4ID

> I don’t think you understand why SWIFT takes five days to move money. It’s not because of technology. it is 100% because of technology. each hop in the chain doesnt provide visibility into the transaction, you can send the money and call the bank and ask at what point is my money at in the chain and they legit have no idea. There is no Pre-messaging system from end to end, its from bank to bank. so at best your bank would say XYZ has it, you call them they say ABC has it right now, you call them ABC says EFG has it and so on and so on. There is no visibility no pre-messaging authorization end to end its individual companies handling each hop. Each has their own ledger, their own liquidity, their own mini payment network within the greater network itself. >By moving to global IBAN we could fix the issue and using SEPA we have it already working. I have thai bhat and need Egyptian pound. SEPA cannot help me atm > XRP cannot provide anything we already have working across Europe. XRP can do that transfer currently, SEPA can not. I would say that is providing something.

Longjumping-Bonus723

Pro tip: Chainlink is working with SWIFT ;)

solenico

I don’t think you understand why SWIFT takes five days to move money. It’s bit because of technology. It’s because of practicality. Bank can keep the money and earn interest. It’s made up problem. By moving to global we could fix the issue and using SEPA we have it already working. XRP cannot provide anything we already have working across Europe. We have the technology already now. It is not XRP. It’s IBAN and I tant SEPA.

R4ID

> Oh so now it’s irrelevant. Yes your knowledge about a different chain does not relate to how the UNL system for the XRPL works. >Can you yourself specify how is XRP faster and has less fees compared to SOL or Atom? Sol goes down regularly, and cannot exchange value from A to B. if I have Thai baht can I use Sol to get egyptian pound? how about Atom? do you understand why having a DEX built in at a protocol level that has AMM and order books plus ILP integration and autro bridging is important when doing payments? >Isn’t that your case? Do you use Wise? Have you ever used any modern digital services I sent money to Greece 3 months ago, it took 2 days to arrive via Wise. >Do you understand how much more progressed Europe is compared US to transfer money in the first place? and? >Do you have any idea how antique US bank system feels to non US citizens? im not a US citizen lol. >Do you know what IBAN is? I can transfer money within seconds between any European country just by using IBAN. US and Canada does not use IBAN which is why you don’t understand rest of the world is not reliant on SWIFT. Im familiar with it, Again please use Thai bhat to get egyptian pound. let me know how those corridors work for you.

solenico

Oh so now it’s irrelevant. Can you yourself specify how is XRP faster and has less fees compared to SOL or Atom? Isn’t that your case? Do you use Wise? Have you ever used any modern digital services Do you understand how much more progressed Europe is compared US to transfer money in the first place? Do you have any idea how antique US bank system feels to non US citizens? Do you know what IBAN is? I can transfer money within seconds between any European country just by using IBAN. US and CAnada does not use IBAN which is why you don’t understand rest of the world is not reliant on SWIFT.

R4ID

> XRPL is as much to trust as SWIFT. One an open source decentralized network anyone can join the other a private, permissioned network... uh huh. > It is trying to solve a problem that does not exist. Moving value from A to B is a problem to the majority of the world, theres a reason its a quadrillion dollar annual market cap >I can transfer money from EU to US by using crypto within seconds and with for example Wise within few hours. And you can pay a premium rate and fee to do so, Now try and move thai baht into Egyptian pound... do you understand the problem yet?

solenico

XRPL is as much to trust as SWIFT. It is trying to solve a problem that does not exist. I can transfer money from EU to US by using crypto within seconds and with for example Wise within few hours. I don’t see any reason why would banks go to XRPL. It just doesn’t make sense.

Jamesta696

It just sounds like you're either **jealous** or **mad** or both at their success, you're obviously not invested in it so why all the fuss? 🤔 No one knows who the inventors of Bitcoin are but yet we should buy it? 🤭 Sounds like a security risk. theres something we can pull on numerous tokens, yet Ripple is the most transparent of all. NDAs, Partnerships, adoption, integration into FedNow, successfully tested by hundreds of banks on the SWIFT system, ISO 20022 compliant, they buying out the right businesses so what if they integrate their technologies into them? I would do the same, that's how the world turns all companies do that, you're acting like this is something new and dangerous what they're doing 🥱  The bits of escrow being released and relocked each month could have funded their acquisition, who knows until they touch more on it, as they're transparent and you'll know soon enough. They are accomplishments, major ones, but the maxi mentality makes you see different,can't change your level of thinking, so good day to you ✌️

UbiquitousGrips

Yes, oracles that will connect tradfi to defi, provide instant settlement, and removes all need for a “trust based” system because they provide the truth, with slashing of LINK as an enforcement mechanism. It makes operating costs cheaper as well for these massive companies. It can even be extended to voting and AI to reduce voter fraud and AI hallucinations (providing incorrect info). It would’ve prevented the 08 crisis if their balance sheets were ran through truth based oracles, or prevented Enron, all because it removes the “trust me” aspect. I can go on and on, but when you look at SWIFT and DTCC who is partnering with Chainlink and soon to be live, it’s clear they are one of the best out there.

Hidden5G

Gold and research ISO20022 compliant tokens, SWIFT has imposed a deadline of Nov 2025 for full compliancy. Leave the OG meme coin behind…btc was labeled a meme coin by the coinbase CEO. It literally offers nothing but speculation, it’s nothing more than a digital rock. Use common sense. btc is like old flip phone tech, when the world has already moved onto smart phones.

NoFollowingMe

Yeah well aware. Saylors running a ponzi scheme that owns a huge percent of Bitcoin. Ripple doesn’t need affiliation with SWIFT because it’s building an alternative system, already processing millions in transaction volume for clients. XRP’s value proposition isn’t about "grabbing" SWIFT but offering a competitive edge in a trillion-dollar market, backed by a clear use case that sets it apart from mischaracterizations of centralized control or empty promises. I don't follow tiktok, you might. Clown. I get all my facts from legit sources and I've been close to buying HBAR but I'll stick with XRP. Thanks. In response to the escrow, do some more research before telling me that ripple owns 50% of it's supply. Lol that's not how it works.

Status-Nose-7173

XRP isn't buying anything, Ripple is. You know, Ripple aka the company that holds over 50% of all XRP tokens? Yet you're crying about BTC being a ponzi scheme? Interesting brain you have there. I'm sure the whole "grabbing 10% of SWIFT" is coming down the road any day... even though Ripple is not in any way affiliated with SWIFT but Chainlink is and Hadera has it's foot in the door. But yes, all the crpyto TikTokers are right, XRP to the moon.

Status-Nose-7173

That "grabbing 10% of SWIFT" coming down the road any day now I'm sure

Status-Nose-7173

That's the XRP gang now. *GUYS WE JUST NEED 10% OF SWIFT*

biba8163

> Without Defi you are relying on centralised exchanges exclusively. Your understanding of Finance is weak. Shitcoin trading is NOT finance. > I currently have access to a 2%-3% interest rate on AAVE thru my crypto investments. It is quite literally the lowest cost credit I have access to. Hell my mortgage is a massively collateralised position with a 6%-7% interest rate. Taking out loans using shitcoin tokens which typically drop -75% to -95% as collateral is finance. You cannot get a mortgage through the DeFI meme. You cannot get any real world financial products through bullshit DeFi memes. > But congratulations you are smarter than both SWIFT and DTCC who are actively backing oracles and a unified golden record thru Chainlink ChainLink is a scam: All it does is centralized shitcoin price feeds for shitcoin casinos. Once in a while they'll do some pilot partnership memes and create lots of hype luring more gullible noobs. LINK for the past few years has been shilling some pilot where Swift messages can be sent to multiple blockchains and the transactions are acknowledged. These pilots that no financial institutions use and no institutions pay for LINK to justify a meme token d dump like LINK a $10 Billion marketcap - How many hundreds of millions of revenue does ChainLink collect from financial institutions?! ZERO - How many hundreds of millions of investment does ChainLink get from financial institutions?! ZERO - Where does ChainLink get all their money to do these useless pilot programs that are solutions looking for a problem?! BAGHOLDERS And Bagholders are acting like Swift is some huge multi-national trillion dollar marketcap company. Swift is a bank messaging platform run by a Cooperative of 3,000 employees. Chainlink is a typical crypto scam like many that partnered with traditional real world companies to shill their tokens for fictional vaporware use cases. The only source of revenue has been 300 Million tokens dumped on bagholders since 2020 and the price is down -30% in 5 years.

nitrozing

Decentralisation of DAO’s is a legitimate concern. Your understanding of Defi and oracles though is very weak. Without Defi you are relying on centralised exchanges exclusively. Without Defi your options are to be a buyer or seller. You can never act as the market organising and profiting from swaps of buyers and sellers. The ability to organise trades and profit from the service through liquidity pools is quite literally a financial service by definition, yelling in caps doesn’t change the definition mate. I currently have access to a 2%-3% interest rate on AAVE thru my crypto investments. It is quite literally the lowest cost credit I have access to. Hell my mortgage is a massively collateralised position with a 6%-7% interest rate. Accessing cheap credit through collateralised positions is another financial service by definition which is possible right now. IDC to explain oracles to you anyway. If you can’t understand the use case of Defi which relies on oracles for timely information you’ll never realise the use of oracles. But congratulations you are smarter than both SWIFT and DTCC who are actively backing oracles and a unified golden record thru Chainlink. Stick to your guns though, I’ll stick to mine. Good luck!

silversqueezer21

XRP may be centralized in its roots, but its ledger is a decentralized beast—faster, cheaper, and ready to bridge the gaps that relics like SWIFT can’t touch. And there's not another coin out there that can bridge global currencies and provide liquidity on a scale that XRP can because of the relationship that Ripple have built

silversqueezer21

First off, the claim that XRP has “done absolutely nothing” since 2014 is a bit like saying a Formula 1 car hasn’t moved because it’s been stuck in the pit lane. Sure, it’s not lapping the track at full speed—yet—but that doesn’t mean the engine isn’t revving. Ripple, the company behind XRP, has been quietly building bridges with over 300 institutional partners globally, including 38 of the world’s top 100 banks testing or integrating its solutions. That’s not “nothing”; that’s groundwork. You say you work for a bank and saw Ripple “wining and dining” six years ago, with no benefits apparent then. Fair enough—banks move slower than a sloth on a Sunday stroll, especially when it comes to tech that threatens their cozy SWIFT monopoly. But dismissing XRP because it didn’t dazzle you in 2019 is like writing off electric cars in 2010 because they didn’t have enough charging stations. The landscape’s changing, mate. Now, let’s tackle the stablecoin argument. You’re right that stables on Solana and Ethereum—like USDT or USDC—are slick, low-fee options for moving value around. They’ve carved out a niche, with a combined market cap north of $170 billion as of early 2025, and they’re eating into remittance markets from the US to Mexico and beyond. But to say they “do everything XRP does” is a stretch. XRP isn’t trying to be a stablecoin—it’s a bridge currency, designed to zip liquidity between fiat pairs in seconds, slashing the cost and time of cross-border payments. The XRP Ledger settles transactions in 3-5 seconds at a fraction of a cent, compared to SWIFT’s days-long slog and fees that can hit $50 a pop. Stables are great for parking value or trading on DeFi platforms, but they’re not built to handle the $150 trillion cross-border payment market that XRP is gunning for. And while stables have their place, they’re often pegged to the dollar, which ties them to the same fiat system XRP aims to disrupt. Apples and oranges, my friend. As for SWIFT, you’re betting it won’t be displaced “anytime soon,” and stables won’t do it, so XRP has “0.0% chance.” I get the skepticism—SWIFT is a behemoth, handling over $5 trillion daily across 11,000 institutions. It’s the financial world’s equivalent of a tank: slow, clunky, but hard to topple. But here’s the rub: the system’s inefficiencies are glaring, and banks know it. XRP doesn’t need to “displace” SWIFT overnight; it just needs to carve out a slice of that pie. If it captured even 5-10% of SWIFT’s volume—say, $125 trillion annually—its market cap would balloon, and its price would follow. Ripple’s On-Demand Liquidity service is already making inroads, and with regulatory clarity emerging (like the SEC dropping its appeal in 2024), the path is clearing. Plus, let’s not pretend the powers that be haven’t noticed SWIFT’s cracks—maybe they’re even steering the ship toward a new harbor, one where XRP plays a starring role. Which brings me to the bigger picture you might be missing. The blog I wrote—The Prodigal Coin Returns—lays out a theory that the global financial elite aren’t bumbling idiots. They’ve known fiat currencies collapse to zero since Nixon ditched the gold standard in ’71. Japan’s reverse carry trade, propping up the USD for decades, is unraveling as rates rise and investors bolt. Trump’s tariffs, like the 24% slap on Japan, are accelerating the chaos, and right on cue, Japanese banks are cozying up to XRP as a liquidity lifeline. Coincidence? Or a chess move in a grand reset where XRP, persecuted by the SEC for years, emerges as the prodigal son just when the system needs it most? You say Ripple was “desperate” six years ago, but maybe they were just early—planting seeds for a harvest you didn’t see coming. Now, the market cap jab. You’re waving XRP’s fully diluted valuation (FDV) like a red flag, and I’ll bite. With 100 billion total tokens and 58 billion in circulation as of April 2025, XRP’s market cap at $2.13 per token (current price) sits around $123 billion. You’re right to point out the FDV—$213 billion if all tokens were circulating—but that’s hardly a death knell. XRP’s price has surged 269% in the past year, hitting $3.39 in January 2025 before settling back. Compare that to Bitcoin’s run from $4,000 in November 2018 to $104,000 in January 2025—a 2500% gain, sure, but XRP’s 545% climb from 55 cents to $3.00 over a similar stretch isn’t exactly “nothing.” And if XRP starts eating into SWIFT’s lunch, that FDV could look like pocket change. Charts don’t lie, but they don’t tell the whole story either. You’re right that facts don’t care about feelings, but they also don’t care about outdated assumptions. XRP isn’t a relic; it’s a sleeper agent, waking up just as the old system starts to creak. Maybe your bank didn’t see the benefit six years ago, but the world’s shifting under your feet. Japan’s on board, Trump’s crypto-friendly, and Ripple’s playing the long game. Call it a “shitcoin” if you want, but this coin might just be the one laughing all the way to the bank—your bank, in fact. Care to place a bet on that? I’ll be here, sipping my coffee, watching the reset unfold. Cheers!

Mountain-Ad326

Shitcoin. Been around since 2014 and done absolutely nothing. Stables on SOL and ETH do everything XRP does already and its free less fees. Stables wont displace SWIFT anytime soon either so there is 0.0% chance XRP does. I work for banks. I remember ripple wining and dining us around 6 years ago, they were desperate to get it in then but we couldnt see the benefit. Its done nothing since then and it wont do anything. A technology made obsolete before its introduced. That aside, learn to read a chart and work out a FDV market cap. Hate away guys. Facts dont care about feelings BTC NOV 2018 - $4,000 BTC JAN 2025 - $104,000 XRP NOV 2018 - 0.55c XRP JAN 2024 - $3.00

Hidden5G

Totally appreciate the calm tone and your perspective. You’re right..implementation is everything. No argument there. But we’re no longer in the “whiteboard” phase with these ISO-compliant networks. We’re watching central banks, institutional infrastructure, and global financial bodies quietly plug them in behind the scenes. It’s not speculation in the sense of “maybe it’ll exist”..it’s more a question of timing and adoption curves now. SWIFT has its self imposed deadline of Nov 2025. As for privacy…it is a commodity, agreed. But that’s why we’re seeing moves toward hybrid systems. Permissioned layers, selective disclosure, zero-knowledge proofs..they’re building privacy into compliant frameworks. The financial world wants privacy, but it also wants auditability and regulatory acceptance. That balance is what modern utility chains are aiming for. Now, regarding Bitcoin…no one’s saying a collapse is imminent, but it’s fair to question its role in a rapidly evolving ecosystem. It’s become a store of sentiment more than a store of value. It’s reactive. It moves when narratives shift, but it doesn’t drive change. The market’s correlation to Bitcoin is still strong, but that’s not permanent. when true utility decouples and starts showing real-world traction, we could see an inversion…where Bitcoin lags while tokenized assets accelerate. There’s a reason it was isolated in its own reserve..to separate it from true utilities when then decoupling begins…which is inevitable. So it’s less about hoping Bitcoin fails…and more about acknowledging that legacy tech in any space eventually gets sidelined. Just because it was first doesn’t mean it’s best. Bitcoin sparked the revolution..but it’s not the one leading it forward anymore.

Hidden5G

You’ve gone through a lot of mental gymnastics to basically say one thing: privacy matters. Sure it does. But let’s not confuse privacy with utility, and let’s not pretend Bitcoin is some untouchable bastion of decentralization anymore. It’s been labeled a meme coin by Coinbase’s own CEO, it consumes more power per transaction than some countries, and it’s become the poster child for government surveillance thanks to public ledger analysis tools like Chainalysis. Privacy? That ship sailed the moment KYC and compliance took over the ramps. And if we’re talking value retention…Bitcoin’s “value” is still dictated by speculation. It doesn’t power anything. It doesn’t bridge anything. It doesn’t scale. It’s not ISO 20022 compliant, and when real utility starts moving on those rails, Bitcoin will remain on the sidelines, like a flip phone in a world built for smartphones. XMR? Respect for what it’s built to do, but don’t kid yourself. Regulatory pressure on privacy coins is mounting globally. There’s a reason they’re being delisted left and right. Meanwhile, XRP and ISO-compliant assets are being integrated into real-time financial infrastructure: Ripple’s tested with SWIFT, partnered with central banks, and survived the SEC’s lawsuit…winning clarity most tokens still dream of. The OCC has already cleared banks to custody crypto under letter 1179 and the newer 1183, and the Federal Reserve just acknowledged the tokenization of finance in its roadmap. So no…this isn’t about rolling the dice at a casino. It’s about knowing what’s being built behind the curtain while everyone else is still romanticizing a whitepaper from 2008. We’re not betting on hope. We’re aligning with infrastructure.

nugymmer

SWIFT is also employing Chainlink for the oracle service, which should eventually pay off for anyone invested in a few oracle based token, not just Chainlink. But Chainlink will be the mainstay as far as I'm aware. There were several bridge hacks that could have easily been avoided if they'd just used Chainlink. With tokenization you will need oracles.

JustStopppingBye

[https://www.swift.com/news-events/news/live-trials-digital-asset-transactions-swift-start-2025](https://www.swift.com/news-events/news/live-trials-digital-asset-transactions-swift-start-2025) "But today, relying on SWIFT feels like routing emails through the postal office. Tokenization changes all that. If SWIFT is the postal service, tokenization is email itself—assets move directly and instantly, sidestepping intermediaries" Swift has been testing blockchain since at least 2015. The amount of clueless people in this industry is astonishing.

coinfeeds-bot

tldr; BlackRock CEO Larry Fink has strongly endorsed the tokenization of assets, calling it a revolution in investing. He advocates for transforming stocks, bonds, and real estate into digital tokens for instant online trading, bypassing outdated financial systems like SWIFT. Fink's stance marks a shift from his earlier skepticism of bitcoin, now recognizing decentralized finance as innovative. However, he warns that crypto could threaten the U.S. dollar's dominance if seen as a safer store of value, urging fiscal reforms to mitigate risks. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.

Hidden5G

ISO20022 compliant tokens that meet SWIFT’s self imposed Nov deadline. Invest wisely, outside the noise. GL.

Hidden5G

Research about ISO20022 compliant tokens, and SWIFT’s self imposed Nov deadline. Your future self would be thankful. GL, invest wisely outside the noise.

Alfador8

>Fees will temporarily skyrocket, users will modify their behavior, demand for transactions will decrease and blocks will no longer be full and fees will be low. If a user *needs* to make a transaction, they will pay the fee. I expect the Bitcoin base layer to have a role more akin to SWIFT in the long run, with large transactions being the norm, in which case the fee will be irrelevant in comparison to the size of the transaction. >Miners will not mine at a loss to ensure access to transactions, that is not a nash equilibrium in game theory Miners who are mining for profit will not mine at a loss. Miners who are mining to exert influence on block construction will. MSTR isn't contributing to mining because there isn't an incentive to do so at the moment. Everything works as is. If that changes, then the incentives change and we will see behaviors with respect to mining change. You're free to have your opinions, I've spent a lot of time thinking about all of this and have formed my own predictions/opinions. Time will tell who is right.

coinfeeds-bot

tldr; Stablecoins are poised to revolutionize the global FOREX market, potentially replacing traditional systems like SWIFT. With daily trading volumes in FOREX reaching $7.5 trillion, stablecoins could serve as invisible rails for currency swaps, especially in emerging markets. Companies like Nonco aim to use blockchain networks for efficient global value transfers, leveraging stablecoins pegged to fiat currencies. This shift could modernize the monetary system, enhancing infrastructure and institutional adoption while reducing reliance on outdated mechanisms. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.

00roast00

What are you on about? I'm giving a simpton like yourself an example of a use case of Hedera. I've not said anything about partnerships with SWIFT, I used SWIFT as a simple example of what Hedera can do. You clearly have a bias against hbar which is fine, but at least have a logical argument.

00roast00

They haven't. I also didn't say they are using it, I said "like SWIFT". I'm giving examples of potential use case.

CunningStunt_1

I'll give you 1000 chainlink if you can provide some information from SWIFT saying they are using HBAR.

00roast00

I think you need to go read about Hbar, it's not just a coin for transacting money like Bitcoin, it's a ledger. It'll get used on an institutional level like SWIFT, where most day to day people will never hear of it.

Hidden5G

Oh, so you’ll always take one Bitcoin over one XRP? That’s cute. btc was one low so that’s a weird comparison. And “no shitcoin has returned to its all-time high”? First of all, XRP’s all-time high was hit while it was under an SEC lawsuit, with exchanges delisting it and suppressing its market access..yet it still remained a top asset. Now, with regulatory clarity and institutional adoption ramping up, it’s positioned for real world utility. There’s a reason why it’s known as the “bankers token” around the world for over a decade. Can btc say that ? Meanwhile, Bitcoin is 100% speculation, has no institutional use case, and is so slow and inefficient that even the people calling it “digital gold” know it can’t be used for payments. It was even labeled a meme coin by the coinbase CEO. As well as isolated in its own reserve to separate it from real world use utility tokens when the decoupling begins. Also, funny that you mention Bitcoin hitting $100,000. We sold our meter 2.73 BTC at just over $100K…and put it all into ISO 20022-compliant assets, because, unlike you, we understand what’s actually happening in global finance. You can keep your outdated relic…we’ll take the future of financial capital, built on a system that SWIFT itself is integrating. Bitcoin is flip phone technology, and the world is already moving to smartphones. You can stay in the past if you want, but don’t expect the rest of us to wait around for you while parroting maxi fud. Strap in…

gowithflow192

You quoted me as saying “plenty of users have said this”. I never said that. Nor did I mean that. I don't listen to "fake crypto influencers". Personally I think XRP will carve out a niche and coexist with SWIFT. I don't think SWIFT will end like crypto bros think. There's room for both. They perform different use cases. I'm not idealogically-driven either way like crypto fan boys are. Calm down instead of telling people to "touch grass".

gowithflow192

SWIFT has 2,400 shareholders. Yet ovre 11,000 financial institutions use it. Why did you completely invent a quote there?

StraightStackin

XRP just announced SWIFT acquisition Holy shit!!!!!!!! It's flying!!!!!

gowithflow192

A consortium of banks may own SWIFT but there are plenty of users of it that have no say and would welcome and use a competitor.

CryptoTaxIsTooHigh

xrp isn't there for normal people. It's for large financial institutions to transfer crypto securely and instantly. Most like customers are banks. They want to replace the SWIFT system I think. Well it is certainly possible that they might replace SWIFT but lets see.

CunningStunt_1

XDC's golden goose is SWIFT. LINK has already won that. Ask retail about xdc does. They will think XRP and buy that. Meanwhile chainlink is already doing what those two pretend they are doing on social media.

Vivid_Collar7469

As other said it wants to be SWIFT but it will likely fail. Such protocol requires more than tech and money. First it will have to compete with SWIFT, a much bigger boy. Then it will have to convince sovereign countries and banks (many still crypto adverse and all risk adverse) to trust and redesign their banking system. Besides XRP is not decentralised- global south countries have already built their own swifts, after the damage the Biden administation did when it used SWIFT as a political and sanctions tool. Even if Trump supports it, he is really aggressive with tariffs and not making a lot of friends woeldwide. And the Venmo you are talking about is being built as we speak. Its WLFI and should roll out in coming months. USD1 stablecoin is going to be part of it.

Miserable_Twist1

All these people talking about Ripple/XRP not wanting retail and focusing on banks are missing a huge caveat. The institutional usage of instantaneous international transfers using momentary ownership of XRP will not and can not account for a significant about of the demand for XRP. If it did, it wouldn’t work. You need massive pools of liquidity on either side of these transactions in order for this to work without a massive amount of slippage in price which ultimately will cost far more than any current transaction fee for every day SWIFT transactions. This is the real demand, the liquidity supplied by retail in the local markets that the banks rely on for this transaction to work. If the transactions themselves produced a sizeable amount of demand for the XRP token, the volatility would be all over the place and there would be huge buy/sell spreads.

InclineDumbbellPress

Yep if its gonna be centralized might as well go SWIFT

MVazovski

That's like, your opinion, man. I trust SWIFT more than I trust majority of thr cryptocurrencies. Which is not a hard to beat since the bar is all the way down in magma.

givenofaux

They’re trying to replace SWIFT not financial services apps.

MVazovski

Ripple doesn't want to be Venmo, it wants to be SWIFT. The only way through that is the US government. That's why everyone in xrp sub buys XRP. That's exactly why I don't.

Affectionate-Bird948

Yes send me 10k please 🥹! Need to refurbish our flat Benjamin Couderc IBAN : GB11 REVO 0099 7078 8149 97 SWIFT CODE : REVOGB21. Would help massively! Much appreciated ❤️❤️

Hidden5G

It is. With the right knowledge and investments, you can secure your comfortable future imo. Research ISO 20022 compliant tokens, stay away from meme coins, no matter how good it may sound…even btc which was recently labeled a meme coin by the coinbase CEO recently and isolated in its own reserve away from utility tokens. This advice will be downvoted by the btc maxis, don’t let that sway you. those that know me know I don’t care about downvotes, or fear any btc maxi FUD. ISO 20022 is inevitable, it’s a SWIFT mandated deadline for late Nov 25.

AvatarOfMomus

> No it isnt, again its a simple calculation. Yes, but it's still not the most relevant comparison. You're assuming that nothing can be changed with the legacy banking systems, when that's just not true. > not only would it not cost them much of anything There's no other way for me to say this, this is just straight up wrong. I've worked *around* some of these sorts of legacy systems and they are *massively painful* to change or swap away from. They generally have a whole bunch of important stuff built into the processes, like creating legal filings for transactions, ensuring compliance with laws on both ends, etc. If you want to swap to a new system, of any kind, then there's a *massive* amount of work to do in replicating all of that, figuring out where the new system should deviate if at all, and then testing the whole thing for months. This is why you don't see any big banks saying they're jumping on the bandwagon and doing all their transactions via blockchain. At most they're partnering with some chain or other to "study the possibility" or "set up a test system" or the like... because they know it's going to be a MASSIVE pain to actually swap over the live system. > They are already paying a fee to Multiple other companies indefinitely into the future. Not really and no? Like... the banks that use SWIFT also own it... in short: > The Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication (SWIFT), legally S.W.I.F.T. SC, is a cooperative established in 1973 in Belgium (French: Société Coopérative) and owned by the banks and other member firms that use its service. SWIFT provides the main messaging network through which international payments are initiated. SWIFT doesn't make a profit, it collects fees to pay for its operations, but those fees are fairly small because it's not a for-profit group. > the only reason it takes days to process things... That's... not really true for the majority of major banks these days. The fundamental issue remains that the systems in question are *slow*. When you see a bank transaction as "pending" that's a layer that's been built on top of these legacy systems that runs at a much faster rate, but the actual transaction is sitting in some data store waiting to be processed by the old-as-dirt system actually running things and producing the bank's "source of truth". The same goes for international transactions but with more faff and more laws involved. > Unless you are using a global ledger like a blockchain, you're not really able to do this. Sure you are... all of this is electronic anyways, it's 100% possible to build a system that settles transactions nearly instantly across borders, legal limits of the jurisdictions involved allowing. There's even already a central organization in the form of SWIFT that could run such a system as a centralized point, and thus have a more cost-effective system than any distributed blockchain could manage. > If they want to use blockchain to transfer tokens from A to B, the value of the token needs to be real value. The nostro vostro system SWIFT uses today has pre-funding in the trillions across the globe which they use to transfer that value. Okay, but again the existing system for settling these transactions already exists, so it's going to be easier for the banks to build on that, and the agreements already in place, then it will be for them to change to a completely different system and get everyone to agree. Especially when the "real value" in quiestion here is a crypto token that's only worth whatever someone is willing to pay for it... > USD is the leader simply because of their military's influence atm. Bretton woods in 1944 set up the dollar as the "global reserve currency" and its been a shell game ever since. Yeah no... USD is used because the US is the largest economy, not because of anything military. If Country A wants to buy something from Country B then either B needs to have a need of A's currency to buy stuff from them, or they need to find a third currency that both want to use to buy things from a country that will accept that third currency. Since the US economy buys and sells so much stuff all over the world there's the broadest demand for US dollars. That's why its' stayed the default in international transactions. Not because of Bretton Woods or because of the US military. If it was due to Bretton Woods then that would only apply to those 44 countries, or would have fallen appart when the US Dollar ended convertability to gold even for other countries. Or you'd see countries that are antagonistic to the US avoiding the dollar for international trade. None of these things happened.

R4ID

>This is the wrong thought though. No it isnt, again its a simple calculation. Time in the asset X price change. If you drastically reduce the time it takes you drastically reduce the volatility. >The real question isn't "how is XRP compared to how bad international money transfers are now", it's "how much would it cost them to adopt XRP or a similar token, instead of just upgrading the existing systems that haven't seen significant changes since the 90s". not only would it not cost them much of anything, it would produce massive profits and growth for their market share. If I can transfer way faster for way less of a fee I can just undercut everything you offer your customers. The other FI/banks options are Lose customers/market share or adopt the same tech. >Since the future cost of relying on something like XRP, and therefore essentially paying a fee to another company indefinitely into the future, is effectively infinite then the answer pretty clearly becomes "update the standards and the existing systems" not "use someone else's crypto token". They are already paying a fee to Multiple other companies indefinitely into the future. Ripples tech stack reduces this fee drastically while offering a stronger product to the customer. This allows them to gain market share from competitions by being able to offer a faster/cheaper product to consumers. >Not really. I mean, strictly speaking the answer isn't even to use a crypto token. It's to update the existing systems to not take days to process things. the only reason it takes days to process things is because they have to do many hops and use prefunding/nostro vostro systems to facilitate the transfer. Banks dont work 24/7 and some regions dont work on weekends/holidays. This is what causes the delays which increases the cost because the volatility is increased by being in the asset longer. Ripples tech stack does away with the prefunding and has ILP/Multihop to complete complex multi currency transactions, it allows payments to settle in 3-5 seconds instead of days. Unless you are using a global ledger like a blockchain, you're not really able to do this. >But those existing systems are just implementing an agreed upon shared specification, which the big international institutions agreed on. That's the underlying basis of SWIFT, and if they can agree on that then they don't need the "trust" you're talking about. They just need to shared standard. If they want to use blockchain to transfer tokens from A to B, the value of the token needs to be real value. The nostro vostro system SWIFT uses today has pre-funding in the trillions across the globe which they use to transfer that value. >I mean... sort of, but every crypto token is valued in USD for a reason. If you look at the prices in any other currency and then divide by the USD exchange rate you get the price in USD almost without exception. The few exceptions that exist are either due to local regulations, which is extremely rare at this point, or due to errors in the charting software or the pull of the exchange rate between the other currency and USD. USD is the leader simply because of their military's influence atm. Bretton woods in 1944 set up the dollar as the "global reserve currency" and its been a shell game ever since. >Basically at this point Crypto is valued for international transactions because it can then be sold for USD and then that USD is easily converted into a local currency, it's just that sometimes that conversion step happens as part of the sale. its valued because its solving a problem at a faster speed, lower cost, more secure way. it being done in "USD" by default is again just because of bretton woods.

AvatarOfMomus

> Because the volatility over the 3 seconds it require to send and transfer value via XRP is less than using the traditional banking system This is the wrong thought though. The real question isn't "how is XRP compared to how bad international money transfers are now", it's "how much would it cost them to adopt XRP or a similar token, instead of just upgrading the existing systems that haven't seen significant changes since the 90s". Since the future cost of relying on something like XRP, and therefore essentially paying a fee to another company indefinitely into the future, is effectively infinite then the answer pretty clearly becomes "update the standards and the existing systems" not "use someone else's crypto token". > This requires them to lockup their own funds, build their own networks, and then Each "trust" the reserves and or stablecoin that each of them would have to make. BoA coin with Citi coin with santander coin and so on. Not really. I mean, strictly speaking the answer isn't even to use a crypto token. It's to update the existing systems to not take days to process things. But those existing systems are just implementing an agreed upon shared specification, which the big international institutions agreed on. That's the underlying basis of SWIFT, and if they can agree on that then they don't need the "trust" you're talking about. They just need to shared standard. > Stablecoins arent solving the same problem XRP solves. They arent geopolitically neutral, they require pre-funding / locking up of funds in excess of what you need to transfer. They can lose value due to printing of its assets or say War or other economic problems. I mean... sort of, but every crypto token is valued in USD for a reason. If you look at the prices in any other currency and then divide by the USD exchange rate you get the price in USD almost without exception. The few exceptions that exist are either due to local regulations, which is extremely rare at this point, or due to errors in the charting software or the pull of the exchange rate between the other currency and USD. Basically at this point Crypto is valued for international transactions because it can then be sold for USD and then that USD is easily converted into a local currency, it's just that sometimes that conversion step happens as part of the sale.

Hidden5G

ISO 20022 is a global financial messaging standard adopted by SWIFT to modernize and streamline cross border payments. It enhances security, efficiency, and interoperability between banks and financial institutions. SWIFT has set a mandatory deadline of November 22, 2025, for full implementation, making it the new global standard for payment processing and data exchange. The deadline is for banks and financial institutions to fully transition to ISO 20022 for cross border payments. SWIFT…which facilitates international transactions for over 11,000 banks, set this deadline to ensure global financial messaging is standardized, more efficient, and data rich.

Longjumping-Bonus723

Chainlink could be the data feed for the WLFI stablecoin which might be the reason why they bought so much. After all link is connected to SWIFT. and aave will be the required swap engine. If thes pull this off I'm rich. Chainlink is the safest investment in crypto after BTC IMHO.

mbate2305

you really dont have any idea what swift does do you?? SWIFT have no need to announce something that is industry standard like initiating a payment which is what ripple and many other crypto companies have done... the only thing chainlink have done with SWIFT is use a legacy format message for 1 use case as an experiment and you blow that into SWIFT is the using chainlink for everything... its the same old pattern with chainlink fanbois... they take a generic comment and blow it out of all proportion.. SWIFT does 1 experiment, = SWIFT is running the entire financial system on chainlink "We're going to have to have Treasury lay out specific requirements to prove that your stablecoin is backed." = chainink will be mandated by congress... you cant even see how ridiculous your own statements are... you must have a major bag load of chainlink with all the false pumping you are doing... maybe ask Sergey how you are going to make any money cos the only people that re right now is node operators !!!

mbate2305

this is getting pretty boring.... ripple and lots of other companies have been integrating with payment schemes like SWIFT for years... you are clueless and keep demonstrating that with your pathetic childish exchanges... you tell me when swift announces more than an experiment going live.... with a legacy standard that the industry is moving away from... as i said before i have already broken down what "swift integration" was done ..read it an educate yourself

JustStopppingBye

“SWIFT announcement link or iI highly doubt this is true.. XRP holder of many years” Lmao. Still waiting for the swift/ripple integration? 🤣

SunDreamShineDay

>That is my source. The source is SWIFT. Your source does not claim that >Swift will connect to Chainlink only That is you saying that, and you are speculating on it and claiming it as fact, you are inferring something and coming to a conclusion weighted by what you want to happen without recognizing there are other ways for interoperability. I do believe Swift will be using Chainlink. I do not believe Swift will only be using Chainlink. An oracle is just that, an oracle, it is not a one size fits all solution, and a deeper background in the technology, both oracles and blockchains would help you here. No shade thrown, not here to say one ring will rule them all, that isn’t happening as we speak, not here to say everything you are discussing is shite, what I am saying is you are speculating when you say “Swift will connect to Chainlink only”.

mbate2305

lol a conversation turns into chainlink will be mandatory.. you are so delusional its actually funny. SWIFT move slower than a dead snail.... they have taken 20 years to adopt ISO... you really have no idea what you are talking about

CunningStunt_1

That is my source. The source is SWIFT. "Simply not be feasible for financial institutions to connect to each and every platform individually" Is swift not a valid source? What sort of evidence would you like?

Many_Drink5348

Or SWIFT just makes their own blockchain.

CunningStunt_1

How would that benefit SWIFT? They are a messaging platform between banks. SWIFT are assuming that every bank (or most will at least) will run its own chain. To maintain its current purpose, it needs a method to communicate between those chains. So they use chainlink. SWIFT can now interact with every blockchain that chainlink is connected to. Without changing their existing systems. Without upgrading 11,500 banks internal working processes or systems. They can become a hub for tokenisation via Chainlink. I've said this 100 times in this thread, please do read the links. It explains it all.

absurdcriminality

Why would SWIFT even need external crypto platforms? If they want to use blockchain tech they can build their own

Hidden5G

XRP is positioned at the forefront of ISO 20022 adoption, the new global standard for financial messaging that is being implemented by banks and institutions worldwide. Major players like the Federal Reserve, SWIFT, and central banks are shifting to this protocol, and XRP is one of the few digital assets already compliant. Clearly your unaware of these upcoming financial changes. 1. “XRP has had 12 years to prove utility and has utterly failed.” Completely false. XRP is already being used for cross-border payments, remittances, and liquidity solutions by institutions like Santander, SBI, and Tranglo. SWIFT itself is testing blockchain-based settlements, and XRP is well-positioned to integrate into this system. 2. “For international liquidity, you’d use U.S. bonds or gold.” Bonds and gold aren’t settlement mechanisms…they’re stores of value. Banks currently use nostro/vostro accounts with pre-funded liquidity, which XRP eliminates by enabling instant, trustless transactions. 3. “Bitcoin has way more liquidity and no counterparty risk.” Bitcoin is slow, expensive, and unsuitable for real time financial transactions. 10 minute block times, high fees, and scalability issues make it unusable for institutional payments. That’s why banks aren’t adopting Bitcoin for global settlements. 4. “Ripple holding 50% of XRP is a counterparty risk.” That XRP is locked in escrow, released on a structured schedule…meanwhile, Bitcoin’s mining is heavily centralized among a few major pools. In reality, Bitcoin maxis ignore their own asset’s centralization problem. 5. “Stablecoins are the future, even Ripple is creating one.” Stablecoins rely on trust in an issuer and reserves. XRP doesn’t require that..it’s a neutral bridge asset. Banks will use both, but XRP provides instant settlement and liquidity bridging between all digital and fiat currencies. 6. XRP’s Market Cap Multiplier Unlike Bitcoin, which requires a 1:1 market cap ratio to move value, XRP can process trillions in daily liquidity with a fraction of its supply. That’s why it’s being positioned as a key asset in institutional finance. With ISO 20022 rolling out globally, financial institutions are moving toward blockchain-based settlements, and XRP is one of the few digital assets already built for this transition. You might want to educate yourself on how institutional finance actually works before speaking so definitively. There’s a reason XRP has been called the “bankers’ token” for over a decade..because it actually has utility.

Lexsteel11

I taught myself solidity during Covid and deployed a smart contract on Ethereum main net so I could understand mechanics of token gating with web3 wallets, token burn, etc. But my first step in learning was reading The Bitcoin Standard and Debt: The First 5,000 Years. Made me understand: -Crypto is the future 100% and a marketers dream for breaking down data silos. -CBDCs are inevitable; once first world power achieves programmable money, eliminating AHC/SWIFT inefficiencies, and enabling airdrops, it will be an economic arms race.

CunningStunt_1

Strange comment. So chainlinks work with swift is a grift? Or xrp and hbar claiming they work with swift is a grift? Both are? >Also, why connect to SWIFT when you can use the blockchain. Isn't the blockchain supposed to replace SWIFT. We are going backward now to pump our shitcoin bags If you read the post and links. The answer to that question would be obvious.

Y0l0BallsDeep

Because they are shitcoins. Also, why connect to SWIFT when you can use the blockchain. Isn't the blockchain supposed to replace SWIFT. We are going backward now to pump our shitcoin bags?

Dhaupin

Yeah totally agree. If it's not the next "internet", it's for sure the next "banking". The concept of a modern/cheap/instant replacement for SWIFT and ACH is far too alluring. The big money is there, it's just waiting on the sidelines until crypto either gets it's shit together, or faces a reckoning moment like dotcom to weed out the trash/vapor. Coinbase is good, but they're kinda expensive for day to day use. Depending on where you are located, there are cheaper CEX for "etc", and you can still use coinbase like a mothership. You're on the def right track with wallets. Look into wrapped tokens and derivatives (synthetic assets) to get exposure to other chains/markets without fragmenting yourself too much (wallet sanity lol). Always remember though, your trade for self custody doesn't give inherent security. You can still be exposed to "liquidity runs" and network fails, and honestly you're way more exposed to scams and fake apps. Be careful

CunningStunt_1

Chainlink do a lot. And are involved in so many projects with so many large financial players. https://www.swift.com/news-events/press-releases/swift-ubs-asset-management-and-chainlink-successfully-complete-innovative-pilot-bridge-tokenized-assets-existing-payment-systems SWIFT is the messaging network banks use to transfer funds. 12,000 banks use it. https://thefintechtimes.com/brazil-central-bank-microsoft-chainlink-and-7comm-pilot-cbdc-trade-finance-solution/ And they are prob the most used defi protocol.

XoXeLo

I remember when each altcoin had it's own explanation on how unique it was and how it was going to revolutionize something (XRP replacing SWIFT)

magic-karma

I hold XRP. I’m in at .33 . I sold 1/3 at .90 so take anything I say knowing that. I liked XRP for the use case and some banks actually using it. SWIFT is old and needs updating, maybe XRP could be part of that replacement. Ripple feels centralized. That might work for them as they have an effective lobby and in a “pay to play” Political environment, they seem like they would use their lobby to buy adoption, if possible. I’ll prob convert 1/3 more XRP into LINK I have good profit I like LINK better. It just seems better positioned Ripple seems too centralized. The XRP community is a little cult-y (more so than most crypto) I don’t like the sales to institutions, I don’t v think institutions would buy the retail tokens and so unsure of the total upside I’ll let ride the 1/3 in case of political maneuvering, adoption, ETF. Just a few thoughts.

Miserable_Twist1

If SWIFT needs to upgrade their systems they will. If banks want to use a centralized token as an intermediary there are better options. There is no future path where XRP is ahead or is the rational choice, regardless of the future you choose. XRP holders are like Tesla investors, they just keep repeating corporate press releases that claim Tesla will have the most advanced self driving cars but if you dig into the data Tesla is dead last against all major self driving systems. It’s all talk. If people want to take Ripple at their word, that’s on them but it’s a terrible way to invest.

Born_Acanthisitta395

The Centralization Concern – Ripple’s Control Over XRP One of the biggest red flags with XRP is Ripple’s control over its supply. Here’s why: • Ripple initially held 80% of XRP’s total supply (100 billion tokens were pre-mined at launch). • To ease fears of centralization, Ripple locked most of its holdings in an escrow system and releases 1 billion XRP per month into circulation. • Recently, they sent 200 million XRP to an unknown wallet—which is exactly the kind of shady move that fuels skepticism. This setup creates supply-side concerns, as Ripple can dump XRP onto the market whenever it wants. Unlike Bitcoin, where supply is scarce and fixed, Ripple’s control over XRP’s release schedule means it’s not fully decentralized—and investors are at the mercy of Ripple’s decisions. The “Banker’s Coin” Argument Many XRP bulls claim that banks will eventually use XRP as a reserve currency for cross-border transactions. The logic: • XRP settles faster and cheaper than SWIFT. • Banks can reduce their need for nostro accounts by using XRP for liquidity. • Ripple has partnered with institutions like Santander, SBI Holdings, and Tranglo—suggesting that XRP could be integrated into banking systems. BUT—this doesn’t necessarily mean XRP holders will benefit. • Banks don’t need to buy XRP on the open market; they can acquire it directly from Ripple at a discount. • Ripple has positioned itself as a B2B solution provider, not a platform for retail investors to profit from speculation. • Even if banks use XRP, that doesn’t mean price appreciation for holders. They just need liquidity, not investment upside. Think of it this way: SWIFT processes trillions of dollars daily, yet no one is buying SWIFT stock expecting it to 100x. Why XRP Price Predictions Are Probably Nonsense The idea that XRP will hit $10, $100, or beyond is largely based on speculation, not fundamentals. Here’s why: • Ripple’s own sales suppress price growth – They continuously offload XRP into the market. More supply = downward pressure on price. • Regulatory uncertainty – The SEC lawsuit over XRP’s status as a security has been a major obstacle, and even though Ripple had partial legal wins, it’s still not out of the woods. If XRP is labeled a security, its utility as a currency could be severely restricted. • Adoption ≠ Price Growth – Even if XRP becomes a standard for payments, price will only increase if there’s demand beyond just liquidity provisioning. XRP isn’t designed to be a store of value like Bitcoin or Ethereum. It’s built for speed and efficiency, and those qualities don’t necessarily translate into an appreciating asset.