Why Ripple’s New Stablecoin Isn’t Meant to Kill XRP

A crypto strategist who focuses on wealth-building is pushing back against a growing narrative in XRP circles: that Ripple’s new dollar-pegged stablecoin, RLUSD, makes XRP obsolete.

In a detailed breakdown, Dr. Kamilah Stevenson argues the two assets were designed to solve different problems inside the same cross-border payments stack — and that confusing their roles is already causing some holders to rotate out of XRP for the wrong reasons.

RLUSD As The On-Chain “Receipt” XRP As The “Truck”

The core claim is straightforward: RLUSD exists to eliminate volatility at the entry point for institutions, while XRP exists to bridge value between currencies and jurisdictions in real time.

For banks and large institutions, volatility is a deal-breaker. “You cannot send something worth a hundred dollars and have it arrive worth $87 three minutes later,” she says.

A stablecoin like RLUSD fixes that by representing a digital dollar that “does not go up, does not go down” and can be approved by compliance teams because $1 RLUSD is always intended to equal $1.

But that stability cuts both ways. RLUSD can move dollars fast, yet it “does not convert itself.” If a bank in Germany sends RLUSD to a bank in South Korea, the receiving side still needs Korean won. RLUSD arrives as dollars and stays dollars, pushing the conversion problem down the line rather than removing it.

XRP is framed as the missing piece: a neutral, liquid bridge asset not tied to any single currency, built to handle real-time conversion between, for example, RLUSD and Nigerian naira or Singapore dollars and Nigerian naira, in seconds and without pre-funded accounts.

The Pre-Funded Capital Problem Stablecoins Can’t Fix

Much of the video focuses on how money actually moves today.

Banks maintain large pre-funded nostro accounts in multiple countries so they can settle cross-border transfers through chains of correspondent banks. The host cites estimates of more than $10 trillion sitting idle in these accounts worldwide — capital that earns nothing while it waits “just in case” a payment is needed.

XRP’s original design goal, Stevenson says, is to eliminate that dead capital. Instead of stocking “kitchens” (pre-funded accounts) everywhere, banks could tap XRP on demand as a bridge asset: local currency → XRP → foreign currency, with settlement in a few seconds and no dormant pools of cash.

In Dr. Kamilah Stevenson’s model transaction, a bank in Singapore converts dollars into RLUSD for a clean, stable on-ramp, then RLUSD is swapped into XRP, which bridges across ledgers in three to five seconds before converting into Nigerian naira on the other side.

Remove RLUSD and the entry becomes less palatable for institutions; remove XRP and the conversion and capital-efficiency benefits collapse.

Strategic Implications For XRP Holders In a Sensitive Market

The host stresses that Ripple “did not build RLUSD and then hope that it would not compete with XRP.” Because the same company designed both, she argues, the architecture intentionally puts RLUSD and XRP in sequence: RLUSD as the on-ramp, XRP as the bridge, local fiat as the exit.

She also highlights a point that often gets lost in retail discussions: institutional flows consume XRP in active liquidity, turning over the same units multiple times per day, rather than simply parking them.

As new corridors open, more stablecoins are issued, and banks adopt tokenized rails, she expects more XRP to be drawn into operational use and away from exchange float.

For investors, the immediate takeaway is less about short-term price and more about understanding function. If the host is right, growing RLUSD volume is not a bearish signal for XRP, but an indicator of increasing throughput on rails that still rely on XRP at the core.

Also, Dr. Kamilah Stevenson flags upcoming regulatory clarity — referencing efforts like the Clarity Act and recent OCC guidance on bank crypto custody — as the backdrop against which this infrastructure could scale, but stays cautious on timing and specific outcomes.

Her final warning is behavioral rather than technical: many holders, she says, are selling out of positions “because they lack understanding,” reacting to narratives about competition between assets that were architected to be complementary.

For the broader market, the debate underscores a larger shift: as major players move from speculative tokens toward full payment stacks, the distinction between value representation (stablecoins) and value transfer (bridge assets) may become one of the most important design choices in institutional crypto adoption.

Explore DailyCoin’s hottest crypto news right now:
97% of DeFi Projects Fail to Generate Revenue, Data Shows
Analyst: XRP’s Price Structure Is ‘Greater Than Noise’

People Also Ask:

Does the host give price predictions for XRP or RLUSD? No concrete price targets are given. The emphasis is on infrastructure, liquidity flows, and long-term positioning rather than short-term speculation.

Is RLUSD described as fully regulated in the video? Dr. Kamilah Stevenson frames RLUSD as compliance-friendly and suitable for institutional use but does not detail specific licenses or jurisdictions.

Does the video treat other stablecoins as competitors? The core argument is that any stablecoin increases on-ramp volume, which ultimately drives more demand for a neutral bridge asset like XRP in this architecture.

DailyCoin’s Vibe Check: Which way are you leaning towards after reading this article?

Bullish Bearish Neutral

Market Sentiment

0% Neutral