Ripple’s RLUSD stablecoin is rapidly expanding on Ethereum instead of the company’s own XRP Ledger (XRPL).
According to CryptoSlate According to data, RLUSD’s total circulating supply rose to $1.26 billion within 12 months of launch. Of this, approximately $1.03 billion, or 82% of the total supply, is on Ethereum, while the balance of $235 million is on XRPL.
These numbers show that the market appears to prefer the deep liquidity and composability of the Ethereum Virtual Machine over the more compliance-oriented architecture of the XRPL.
Why RLUSD is growing on Ethereum
The main driver of this disparity is the maturity of the underlying financial stack.
On Ethereum, RLUSD entered an environment where dollar liquidity is already entrenched. Data from DeFiLlama confirms that Ethereum continues to lead across chains in total value (TVL) and stablecoin offerings, providing a ready-made ecosystem for new assets.
So any new stablecoin that can connect to major DeFi protocols like Aave, Curve, and Uniswap immediately benefits from existing routing engines, collateral frameworks, and risk models.
RLUSD’s presence on Aave and Curve confirms this. The USDC/RLUSD pool on Curve now has approximately $74 million in liquidity, making it one of the larger stablecoin pools on the platform.
For institutional treasuries, market makers and arbitrage agencies, this depth is non-negotiable. It ensures smooth execution of trades in the tens of millions, facilitating basic trades and yield-farming strategies that power modern crypto capital markets.
On the other hand, the XRPL is still in the early stages of building a DeFi base. The automated market maker (AMM) at the protocol level did not go live until 2024. Thus, any RLUSD-related pools in the ledger, such as the USD/RLUSD pair created in January 2025, still suffer from shallow depth and limited follow-through.
Furthermore, the XRPL AMM design has not yet attracted the density of liquidity providers seen in EVM ecosystems.
Consequently, a dollar of RLUSD staked on XRPL currently finds far fewer venues for swaps, leverage, or returns than the same dollar staked on Ethereum.
RLUSD’s growing user base on Ethereum
Critics might argue that RLUSD’s Ethereum offering is merely a “vanity statistic,” minting large sums but sitting idle.
However, a deeper analysis of data on transmission in the chain refutes this. RLUSD exhibits a true product-market fit with Ethereum, characterized by high speed and recurring usage.
According to Token Terminal, weekly RLUSD transfer volume on Ethereum now averages around $1.0 billion, a dramatic increase from the $66 million average at the start of the year.
The data shows a clear structural shift from a steady uptrend in the first half of 2025, followed by a “re-base” to a significantly higher bottom in the second half.
Crucially, recent weeks have seen activity concentrate around this increased level, rather than peaking and rebounding. In terms of market structure, a rising baseline generally indicates a transition from a distribution phase to a utility phase.
This implies that the token is used in ongoing, recurring flows, such as institutional settlement and commercial payments, rather than isolated speculative events.
Transfer numbers support this statement. The number of weekly transactions on Ethereum now averages 7,000, up from 240 in January.
The fact that the number of transmissions is increasing in parallel with the volume is a crucial health indicator. If volume were to increase while numbers remained the same, it would indicate a market dominated by a few whales moving huge amounts of money. Instead, the simultaneous increase points to broader participation.
Moreover, the data on farming indicate a healthy risk distribution. According to data from Etherscan, Ripple’s RLUSD has attracted around 6,400 on-chain holders on Ethereum as of the end of November 2025, up from just 750 at the start of the year.
While supply growth has been driven by “fat” batch releases rather than drop coins, the number of holders has followed a smooth upward curve.
The friction between RLUSD and XRPL
The structural difference between the two networks explains why the “permissionless” growth loop has favored Ethereum.
On Ethereum, RLUSD functions as a standard ERC-20 token. Wallets, custodians, accounting middleware, and DeFi aggregators are already optimized for this standard.
Once a protocol like Curve “enables” a token, it becomes part of the standard universe of dollar pairs alongside USDC and USDT, accessible to any address without prior permission.
On the other hand, XRPL’s design choices, while technically robust, impose significantly more friction on the user.
To hold RLUSD on the home ledger, users generally need to maintain an XRP balance to meet reserve requirements and configure a specific line of trust to the issuer. If the publisher enables the ‘RequireAuth’ setting, a feature designed for strict compliance and granular control, accounts must be explicitly allowedlisted before they can receive tokens.
While Ripple notes that these features are attractive to banks that require explicit control, they act as a brake on organic adoption.
Essentially, the compliance tools that make XRPL attractive to regulated entities are the same features that slow wallet-to-wallet distribution.
In a market where capital seeks the path of least resistance, the operational burden of trustlines makes XRPL less competitive against the high-frequency, automated flows that define DeFi.
RLUSD’s path to growth
Despite the ledger imbalance, RLUSD’s overall trajectory puts Ripple within striking distance of a major market level.
Token Terminal has stated that Ripple would cement itself as the third largest stablecoin issuer globally, behind only incumbents Tether and Circle, if RLLUSD’s market cap were to grow 10x from current levels.
Considering this, RLUSD’s growth depends heavily on whether Ripple can leverage its Ethereum success to eventually jump-start its own chain.
According to a baseline projection for the next six months, RLUSD’s Ethereum supply will increase from around $1.0 billion to a range of $1.4 billion to $1.7 billion. This assumes that Curve liquidity remains within the $60 million to $100 million range and that demand for CEX and OTC continues to grow.
This way, XRPL would likely see its pools accumulate more liquidity over time but remain a small portion of total issuance.
Meanwhile, a more aggressive “catch-up” scenario for XRPL would require deliberate market intervention. If Ripple or its partners commit to multi-month AMM rewards programs and successfully mask trustline configurations behind one-click wallet interfaces, the native ledger could start to erode Ethereum’s lead.
With these levers, XRPL liquidity could plausibly reach $500 million and claim up to 25% of the total supply.
However, the downside risk to the native ledger is real. If Ethereum solidifies its lead and expands the Curve USDC/RLUSD pool beyond $150 million, the network effects could become insurmountable. In that scenario, Ethereum could hold 80% to 90% of the supply indefinitely.
For now, Ripple finds itself in a paradoxical position: to succeed in its ambition to become a leading stablecoin issuer, it must rely on the infrastructure of its biggest rival.
