Track market-moving stories before they get noisy

XRP’s latest sell-off has put the $1 level back at the center of market attention, with traders watching whether the token can hold psychological support while derivatives data shows a sharp flush in long positions. The move comes as XRP continues to trade inside a broader multi-month falling wedge structure, keeping both technical traders and leveraged participants on edge.

TL;DR XRP tested the psychological $1 support level during the June 26 sell-off. Daily charts show XRP trading inside a multi-month falling wedge pattern. Long liquidations reportedly reached $40.73 million on June 25, the highest single-day figure since early February 2026. Analysts are watching the $1.10 to $1.12 area as a potential short-term momentum reclaim zone, while lower monthly support sits near $0.91. The $1 Level Takes Center Stage Round-number levels often matter in crypto because they become easy reference points for both retail traders and automated strategies. For XRP, the $1 area is especially important because it has served as a psychological dividing line between deeper bearish momentum and attempts at stabilization.

The validated pack shows XRP testing that level on June 26 as sell-side pressure accelerated. However, the writing boundaries are important: $1 should not be described as a guaranteed floor. The same validation notes point to longer-term monthly support lower, around $0.91, meaning a break of the psychological level could still leave the market searching for a more durable base.

Liquidations Add Fuel To The Decline The move was not just about spot selling. XRP long liquidations reportedly reached $40.73 million on June 25, marking the highest single-day liquidation volume since early February 2026. More than 97% of XRP long positions were wiped out in the 24-hour period leading into June 26, according to the validated derivatives data.

That matters because liquidation-heavy declines can move faster than ordinary spot corrections. When leveraged longs are forced out, exchanges automatically close losing positions, which can amplify downside moves and push price into key levels faster than discretionary traders expect.

Falling Wedge Keeps Traders Watching For A Reclaim Technically, XRP remains inside a multi-month falling wedge pattern. Traders often watch wedge structures for signs of compression and potential reversal, but the pattern does not guarantee a breakout. In the current setup, the validated pack notes that reclaiming the $1.10 to $1.12 region would be needed to shift short-term momentum more constructively.

Until that happens, the market remains vulnerable to failed bounces. XRP can stabilize near $1, but bulls need to prove that the move is more than a temporary pause after leverage was flushed out. A clean move back above the reclaim zone would likely be watched as a first sign that the sell-off is losing force.

What XRP Bulls Need To Avoid The main danger for bulls is a decisive loss of $1 followed by weak demand on any retest. If that happens, traders may shift focus toward the lower monthly support area near $0.91. That does not mean XRP must trade there, but it gives the market a clear downside reference if psychological support fails.

For now, XRP is caught between two competing signals: a technical structure that some traders may view as a potential reversal setup, and liquidation data showing that leveraged bullish positioning has already been punished heavily. The next test is whether spot demand can replace the leverage that just left the market.

This report is based on information from Crypto.news XRP Wedge and BeInCrypto XRP Support.

This article was written by the News Desk and edited by Samuel Rae.

21h10 ▪ 5 min read ▪ by Luc Jose A.

Summarize this article with:

The crypto market is going through a phase of strong turbulence, once again illustrating the intrinsic volatility that characterizes this asset class. A systemic correction triggered by the main cryptos is leading investors to rebalance competitive power relations and historical valuation levels. This dynamic shows that the apparent resilience of institutional infrastructures does not always guarantee the price stability of the underlying tokens on secondary markets. With XRP, the native currency of the Ripple protocol, we have a perfect example of this contemporary sectoral fracture. The company is multiplying technical initiatives, but the stock is critically underperforming compared to other major capitalizations in the sector.

In brief XRP records a 43 % drop since the beginning of the year and loses ground against several major cryptos. The token’s decline contrasts with Ripple’s institutional advances, fueling investors’ doubts. Analysts are divided on XRP’s future, between risk of a new correction and hope for a lasting rebound. The quantified capitulation and loss of XRP’s strategic ranks This Thursday, June 25, XRP plunged to an annual low of $1.01. This sharp drop is part of a wave of liquidation that shook the crypto market. Indeed, Bitcoin lost ground. The flagship asset even approached $58,000.

However, Ripple’s crypto had indeed recovered some of its losses that Friday morning, trading around $1.03, but it still recorded a 4.5% drop over a 24-hour session. Such a move deepened XRP’s weekly losses to 7.7%.

Since early June 2026, the asset has lost more than 20% relative to its prior level above $1.30, heading for a second consecutive month of monthly declines, bringing its year-to-date (YTD) drop to 43%.

This ongoing erosion has heavily weighed on the asset’s competitiveness, as these market indicators confirm :

A collapse from the peaks: In October 2025, the token flirted with its all-time high at $3.66 for a capitalization exceeding 200 billion dollars, before closing the year at $1.88 (115 billion dollars) and losing its third place to USDT ; Underperformance versus BNB : While BNB resisted better with a 13% drop over 30 days, XRP plunged nearly 22% over the same period. XRP’s capitalization collapsed to 64.7 billion dollars on June 26, compared to over 82 billion dollars on June 1, allowing BNB to pull ahead at 76.4 billion dollars ; Being overtaken by stablecoins : In addition to USDT, XRP is now being surpassed by USDC, whose market capitalization is today over 73 billion dollars. The divide between institutional progress and market expectations This prolonged decline illustrates a clear disconnect between price movement on the markets and the company’s actions. Indeed, this underperformance continues despite Ripple’s ongoing efforts to integrate the XRP Ledger (XRPL) and its underlying protocol into the structures of the international financial system.

This technical and financial gap fuels strong frustrations among the asset’s long-standing investors. On social networks, many retail investors express their exasperation without restraint. They claim that the gains made by the company mainly benefit its proprietary technologies and its own stablecoin projects, while individual token holders must bear the financial losses.

Technical scenarios and confrontation of price forecasts In terms of technical analysis, the possibility of breaking some key levels provokes divergent opinions, drawing opposing scenarios on the asset’s future. Bearish analysts, on one side, warn that a significant liquidity gap will open if the major psychological support at $1.00 were to break definitively. Skeptics are already betting on low technical targets, around $0.87, $0.70, or even extreme forecasts at $0.30, while ridiculing the optimism of investors aiming for a price target of $5.

Conversely, bullish supporters of the so-called “XRP Army” community show firmness. They see this return to the $1.00 level as a top strategic accumulation zone and assert that the current market structure is only meant to eliminate short-term investors before triggering a major macroeconomic breakout.

The evolution of Ripple’s crypto in the coming months will depend on its ability to maintain or not its technical and psychological support threshold at $1.00. If markets follow the most pessimistic analysts’ forecasts, the asset could enter a prolonged and lasting contraction phase, worsening the confidence crisis among small holders.

On the other hand, if the current investor base manages to stabilize the price at these valuation levels, it would offer the necessary respite to observe whether Ripple’s institutional integrations will translate into concrete economic utility for the token or not. How this confrontation between the technical market dynamics and the fundamental objectives of the Ripple ecosystem will be resolved will be a key indicator for the entire crypto sector.

Maximize your Cointribune experience with our "Read to Earn" program! For every article you read, earn points and access exclusive rewards. Sign up now and start earning benefits.

Join the program

A

A

Lien copié

Luc Jose A.

Diplômé de Sciences Po Toulouse et titulaire d'une certification consultant blockchain délivrée par Alyra, j'ai rejoint l'aventure Cointribune en 2019. Convaincu du potentiel de la blockchain pour transformer de nombreux secteurs de l'économie, j'ai pris l'engagement de sensibiliser et d'informer le grand public sur cet écosystème en constante évolution. Mon objectif est de permettre à chacun de mieux comprendre la blockchain et de saisir les opportunités qu'elle offre. Je m'efforce chaque jour de fournir une analyse objective de l'actualité, de décrypter les tendances du marché, de relayer les dernières innovations technologiques et de mettre en perspective les enjeux économiques et sociétaux de cette révolution en marche.

DISCLAIMER

The views, thoughts, and opinions expressed in this article belong solely to the author, and should not be taken as investment advice. Do your own research before taking any investment decisions.

THE STREET: World's most intelligent human being makes bold XRP prediction

According to market analyst Bird, XRP could be on the verge of one of its most pivotal technical turning points in recent years. Price action has remained trapped within a broad symmetrical triangle formation for an extended period, but the coming days and weeks may bring a decisive directional move.

All eyes on a breakout as trading range tightensCoinCodex data shows XRP trading at $1.04 at the time of writing. Bird argues that the current calm in the price doesn’t signal reduced interest; rather, it reflects mounting tension between buyers and sellers as the range narrows further.

In technical analysis, a symmetrical triangle describes a gradually narrowing structure where prices form lower highs and higher lows. As the price oscillates within an ever-shrinking band, the chances of a powerful breakout in either direction become more prominent.

Mini glossary: A symmetrical triangle is a chart pattern where price moves within an increasingly tight range. It does not guarantee direction on its own; breakouts to the upside or downside, especially accompanied by high volume, are considered confirmation.

Observers note that XRP’s movement space within this multi-year structure has diminished, bringing the market to a critical inflection point.

$4 target gains traction but confirmation still lackingBird believes that a breakout above the upper resistance line of the triangle, supported by strong buying interest, could signal a bullish move. In such a scenario, the $4 price target would come further into view.

Such a development would mark a key technical milestone and could rekindle interest among both retail and institutional investors. With the long-standing sideways, compressed price action, market participants are monitoring every move closely.

Analysts focus on trading volume and strong supportFrom a technical perspective, prolonged periods of consolidation can often lead to powerful expansions in price once the squeeze ends. The consensus building among analysts is that XRP has been accumulating within this long-term pattern for several months, potentially setting the stage for a significant move.

Yet, there is still no definitive sign of a breakout. Unless XRP clearly moves above its resistance or drops below the triangle’s major support line, the current price action is seen not as a confirmed trend shift but rather as ongoing consolidation.

For now, analysts are emphasizing the need for a clear spike in trading volumes and a definite directional move before making bold calls about the next big shift. Some continue to caution that a short-term dip toward $0.90 remains possible before any strong upside momentum emerges.

For the moment, the prevailing view is that XRP remains tightly squeezed into an ever-narrowing range. Whether the result is a surge towards $4 or a sharp reversal remains one of the most closely watched questions in the near-term crypto market landscape.

Disclaimer: The information contained in this article does not constitute investment advice. Investors should be aware that cryptocurrencies carry high volatility and therefore risk, and should conduct their own research.

A wave of cryptocurrencies are marketed as “ISO 20022 compliant,” with the promise that banks will adopt them and send prices soaring. This guide explains what the standard actually is, why it matters for global payments, and why the “compliant coin” label is mostly a myth.

Summary

ISO 20022 is a global standard for the messages financial institutions send one another, defining a common, data-rich language for payments and securities, not a rule about cryptocurrencies. Major systems including SWIFT and the United States Fedwire have adopted it, replacing older, simpler message formats with structured data that carries far more information. A group of tokens, including XRP, XLM, ALGO, HBAR, and others, are widely marketed as “ISO 20022 compliant,” fueling a belief that banks will adopt them and lift their prices. That label is largely a myth: there is no certification or registry for compliant coins, and being aligned with the standard does not mean a token is endorsed, validated, or destined for bank adoption. The standard genuinely matters for connecting traditional finance and blockchain, but the investment thesis built on the compliance label rests on a misunderstanding of what ISO 20022 actually is. Table of Contents

The standard that runs the world’s payment messagesWhy the financial world is switching to itA worked example: what richer data actually buysWhere crypto enters the pictureThe “compliant coin” myth, explainedWhat “aligned” actually means for a tokenThe XRP case specificallyWhat ISO 20022 does and does not mean for pricesRed flags and scams to watchFrequently Asked Questions ISO 20022 is an international standard that defines a common, structured language for the electronic messages financial institutions send one another, covering payments, securities trades, and other financial transactions. That is the whole of it: it is a messaging standard, a shared format that lets banks, payment systems, and market infrastructures exchange information in a consistent, data-rich way. It says nothing, in itself, about cryptocurrencies. And yet ISO 20022 has become one of the most hyped terms in certain corners of the crypto market, attached to a list of tokens, XRP, Stellar’s XLM, Algorand’s ALGO, Hedera’s HBAR, and several others, that are marketed as “ISO 20022 compliant,” with the implication that this compliance makes them special, bank-ready, and poised to soar once financial institutions adopt the standard. 

The reality is more mundane and more important to understand, because the gap between what ISO 20022 is and what the hype claims it means is exactly where investors get misled. This guide explains the standard plainly, why the financial world is adopting it, where crypto genuinely fits, and why the “compliant coin” label is largely a marketing myth rather than a meaningful endorsement.

The reason this matters is that ISO 20022 sits at the intersection of a real, significant trend and a layer of misleading marketing, and telling the two apart is essential. The real trend is that the global financial system is upgrading the language it uses to move money, a genuine modernization with real consequences for how payments work and how easily traditional finance can connect to blockchains. The misleading layer is the claim that certain tokens are validated or endorsed by the standard, a claim that has fueled speculative buying based on a misunderstanding. 

This guide covers what ISO 20022 actually is, why institutions are switching to it, what richer messaging buys them, where the crypto angle comes from, why the compliance label is a myth, what alignment truly means, the specific case of XRP, and how to read the whole phenomenon honestly. The goal is to leave you understanding both the substance and the spin.

The standard that runs the world’s payment messages Start with what ISO 20022 fundamentally is, because its name makes it sound more mysterious than it is. When a bank sends money to another bank, no physical cash travels; instead, the banks exchange messages instructing each other to debit one account and credit another. For decades, those messages used older, rigid formats that packed limited information into terse codes, formats designed in an era of expensive bandwidth and simple transactions. ISO 20022 is the modern replacement: a standardized, structured language for these financial messages that can carry far more information in a consistent, machine-readable form. Think of it as a shared grammar that every institution agrees to speak, so that a message sent by a bank in one country can be understood automatically by a system in another without translation or guesswork.

The power of ISO 20022 lies in two qualities: it is standardized, meaning everyone uses the same format, and it is rich, meaning each message can carry detailed, well-organized data rather than cramped codes. A useful way to picture it is the difference between a tightly abbreviated telegram and a properly structured digital form. The old formats were like telegrams, squeezing essential facts into minimal space and leaving much to interpretation. ISO 20022 is like a structured form with clearly labeled fields for every relevant detail: who is paying, who is receiving, the purpose of the payment, the parties involved, and the regulatory information attached. This is not a small upgrade. It changes what financial systems can do with a payment message, because a message that carries clean, structured, comprehensive data can be processed, screened, and reconciled automatically in ways that the old cramped formats never allowed.

Why the financial world is switching to it The migration to ISO 20022 is one of the largest coordinated upgrades in the history of financial infrastructure, and it is happening because the old messaging formats had become a serious bottleneck. The legacy formats carried so little structured data that banks constantly had to deal with incomplete information, manual intervention, and errors, all of which slow payments down and raise costs. When a payment message lacks clear, structured fields, a human often has to step in to interpret it, check it against sanctions lists, or chase missing details, and every such intervention is friction. As global payments grew in volume and as regulatory demands for transparency and screening intensified, the limitations of the old formats became untenable. ISO 20022 solves this by carrying the rich, structured data that lets far more of the process happen automatically and accurately.

The adoption has been sweeping. The global messaging network that connects most of the world’s banks has been migrating its cross-border payments to ISO 20022, phasing out the legacy formats. Major domestic payment systems have moved as well, including the United States’ main real-time settlement system, which adopted ISO 20022 for its operations, joining systems in Europe and elsewhere that had already transitioned. The direction is unmistakable: the world’s core payment rails are converging on this single standard, because the benefits, richer data, better automation, improved compliance, and smoother interoperability between systems, are compelling enough to justify an enormous, multi-year coordinated effort. For the financial industry, ISO 20022 is simply the new common language of money movement, and the migration to it is a genuine, consequential modernization. None of this, it is worth stressing again, has anything inherent to do with cryptocurrencies. It is about how banks and payment systems talk to each other.

A worked example: what richer data actually buys To make the value concrete, picture a single cross-border payment under the old system and under ISO 20022, because the difference shows why institutions care.

Under a legacy format, a bank sending a payment abroad might transmit a message with a sender, a receiver, an amount, and a short, cramped reference field, with much of the contextual detail abbreviated, omitted, or jammed into free-text notes that no automated system can reliably read. When that message arrives, the receiving bank may not have enough structured information to automatically confirm the purpose of the payment, verify the parties against regulatory lists, or match it to the right account, so a staff member has to intervene, slowing the payment and introducing the possibility of error. Multiply that friction across millions of payments and the cost in time, money, and risk is enormous.

Now picture the same payment under ISO 20022. The message arrives with clearly labeled, structured fields: the full identities of the sender and receiver, the precise purpose of the payment, the regulatory and compliance information, and the references needed to match it automatically to the correct account. Because the data is structured and comprehensive, the receiving bank’s systems can process it without human intervention, screen it against sanctions and fraud checks automatically, and reconcile it instantly. The payment moves faster, costs less to handle, and carries less risk of error or of slipping past compliance controls. This is the real, unglamorous value of ISO 20022: it turns payment messages from cramped telegrams that often need human interpretation into structured data that machines can handle end to end. That improvement in automation, compliance, and interoperability is why the entire financial world is undertaking the switch, and it is a truly significant upgrade to the plumbing of global finance. It is also, notably, an upgrade about messages, not about money itself, and certainly not about any particular token.

Where crypto enters the picture So how did a banking messaging standard become a crypto buzzword? The connection runs through the idea of interoperability between traditional finance and blockchain. As ISO 20022 became the language banks use, some blockchain projects, particularly those focused on payments and settlement, positioned themselves as able to work with that language, to structure their own messaging or data in ways compatible with the standard that banks were adopting. The thinking was reasonable on its surface: if banks are standardizing on ISO 20022, then a blockchain that can speak the same data language might integrate more easily into bank workflows, which could be an advantage for a payments-focused crypto network.

From that reasonable starting point grew a much larger and much shakier narrative. A list of tokens came to be labeled “ISO 20022 compliant” across crypto media and social channels, typically including XRP, Stellar’s XLM, Cardano’s ADA, Algorand’s ALGO, Hedera’s HBAR, and a handful of others associated with payments or enterprise use. Around this list formed a popular investment thesis: that because these tokens are ISO 20022 compliant, banks adopting the standard will naturally adopt these tokens, driving massive demand and sending prices soaring. The thesis is seductive because it connects a real, sweeping trend, the global migration to ISO 20022, to a specific set of assets, implying that those assets are uniquely positioned to benefit from the trend. Entire communities and marketing campaigns have been built around the “ISO 20022 coin” label, treating it as a mark of quality and a catalyst for price appreciation. The trouble is that the label means far less than the hype suggests, and in important respects it is simply false.

The “compliant coin” myth, explained Here is the core fact that punctures the hype: there is no such thing as official ISO 20022 certification for a cryptocurrency, because no certification process or registry for compliant coins exists. The standard is a messaging format used by financial institutions, and it has no mechanism for validating, endorsing, or registering tokens. When you see a coin described as “ISO 20022 certified” or “endorsed by ISO,” that language is marketing, and it is misleading or outright false. No authority hands out a compliance badge to cryptocurrencies, no list of approved tokens is maintained by the standards body, and being included on a community-circulated “ISO 20022 coin” list confers no official status whatsoever. The label that has driven so much speculative interest does not correspond to any real certification.

This matters because the entire investment thesis rests on a misreading of what the standard is. ISO 20022 governs how financial institutions format the messages they send each other; it does not validate the assets those messages might reference, and it does not bless particular blockchains as bank-ready. A bank using ISO 20022 messaging to interact with a crypto-related service is using the standard to communicate, which says nothing about whether the underlying token is approved, valuable, or destined for adoption. The conflation of “this token’s project works with ISO 20022 data formats” and “this token is officially compliant and therefore bank-endorsed” is the heart of the myth. The first may be true in a narrow technical sense for some projects; the second is not a real category. An investor buying a token because it appears on an “ISO 20022 compliant” list is buying based on a designation that does not officially exist, which is precisely the kind of misunderstanding that marketing language is designed to exploit.

What “aligned” actually means for a token To be fair and precise, there is a real kernel beneath the myth, and understanding it keeps this guide honest. A blockchain project truly can do engineering work to make its systems compatible with ISO 20022 data, structuring the information its network handles so that it maps cleanly onto the standard’s fields, or building tools that let institutions using ISO 20022 messaging interact with the blockchain more easily. This is real work, and for a project aiming to serve banks and payment providers, being able to speak the same data language as the institutions it wants as customers is a sensible and potentially useful capability. So when a project says it is “aligned with” or “built for” ISO 20022, it may be describing genuine technical compatibility, which is not nothing.

But notice how far that real kernel is from what the hype claims. Technical compatibility with a messaging standard is a feature a project chooses to build, not a certification it receives, and it does not make the project’s token special, validated, or guaranteed adoption. Plenty of capability can be ISO 20022 compatible without any of it translating into demand for a token, because, as with so much in crypto infrastructure, the usefulness of a network to institutions is a separate question from demand for its native asset. A project can do excellent work making its systems speak the standard’s language and still see no particular benefit flow to its token, because banks using that compatibility are using the technology, not buying the coin. So “aligned with ISO 20022” should be read as a modest, real technical claim about a project’s engineering, never as an official stamp of approval or a reason to expect price appreciation. The distance between the honest version of the claim and the hyped version is enormous.

The XRP case specifically Because XRP sits at the center of the ISO 20022 hype, it is worth examining its actual relationship to the standard, which illustrates the whole confusion neatly. Ripple, the company associated with XRP, has genuine ties to the world of financial messaging standards; as a company building payment infrastructure for institutions, Ripple participates in the relevant standards bodies and works with the messaging formats that banks use. That corporate level engagement is real and is part of why XRP appears at the top of most “ISO 20022 coin” lists. But here the crucial distinction between Ripple the company and XRP the token reasserts itself, the same distinction that runs through so much of the XRP story.

Ripple’s involvement with financial messaging standards as a company does not mean that XRP the token is “ISO 20022 compliant” in any meaningful sense. Ripple’s own chief technology officer has stated plainly that XRP has nothing to do with ISO 20022, clarifying that while Ripple as a company may engage with the standards world, that engagement does not translate into the token itself being compliant or endorsed. The standard is about how institutions message each other; XRP is a digital asset that can serve as a bridge in settlement. Those are different things, and a company working with messaging standards does not make its associated token a certified ISO 20022 instrument. The persistence of the XRP ISO 20022 conflation, despite direct clarification from the people who would know, shows how powerful the marketing narrative has become and how readily a real corporate fact, Ripple engages with standards bodies, gets transformed into a false token level claim, XRP is officially ISO 20022 compliant and therefore bank bound. The honest position is that Ripple’s standards work is real and XRP’s “compliance” is a myth, and both can be true at once.

What ISO 20022 does and does not mean for prices Pulling it together, the right way to think about ISO 20022 is to separate its genuine significance from its mythologized one, because both exist and they point in very different directions. Truly, ISO 20022 is a meaningful, long-term tailwind for the convergence of traditional finance and blockchain. 

As the entire financial system standardizes on a rich, structured data language, it becomes technically easier for blockchain networks that can speak that language to integrate with bank workflows, and over a long horizon that interoperability supports the broader adoption of blockchain-based settlement and tokenization. For payments-focused crypto projects, being able to work with the standard banks use is a real and sensible capability that may help them win institutional business over time. That is a slow, structural benefit to the ecosystem, and it is worth understanding.

What ISO 20022 is not is a catalyst that validates specific tokens or that should be expected to pump particular coins. There is no certification, no registry, no official “compliant coin” status, and no mechanism by which the standard endorses or guarantees adoption of any asset. The investment thesis that says “this token is ISO 20022 compliant, so banks will adopt it and the price will soar” rests on a designation that does not officially exist and a causal chain that does not hold, because banks adopting a messaging standard does not mean banks buying tokens. 

The disciplined reading is to treat ISO 20022 as what it is, an important modernization of financial messaging that gently supports long-term blockchain interoperability, and to treat the “compliant coin” label as what it is, a marketing narrative untethered from any official meaning. A project’s genuine technical work with the standard can be a small point in its favor. The compliance badge that crypto marketing waves around is not a reason to buy anything.

Red flags and scams to watch Because the ISO 20022 narrative is so heavily marketed and so widely misunderstood, it has become fertile ground for misleading promotion and outright scams, and knowing the warning signs protects you. The danger is not the standard itself, which is a legitimate piece of financial infrastructure, but the way its name is used to lend false authority to speculative pitches. Treat the following as red flags whenever you encounter ISO 20022 in a crypto context:

• Any claim that a token is “ISO 20022 certified,” “approved by ISO,” or “officially compliant.” No such certification or registry exists for cryptocurrencies, so this language is always misleading, and a project or promoter using it is either confused or deliberately exploiting the confusion.

• Price predictions that treat the standard as a guaranteed catalyst, such as promises that a coin will surge “once ISO 20022 goes live” or “when banks switch.” Banks adopting a messaging standard is not the same as banks buying tokens, and anyone presenting it as a sure path to gains is selling a misunderstanding.

• “ISO 20022 coin list” promotions that bundle a group of tokens as uniquely positioned to benefit, often used to pump lower-quality assets by association with the more credible names on the list. The list has no official status, and inclusion confers nothing.

• Urgency and exclusivity, such as claims that you must buy before a specific adoption date or miss a once-in-a-lifetime window. Genuine infrastructure modernization unfolds over years and does not create the kind of dated price triggers these pitches invent.

• Sources that conflate Ripple’s corporate standards work, or any company’s, with token-level compliance. A company engaging with standards bodies is real; the leap to “therefore the token is endorsed” is the exact sleight of hand to distrust.

The broader risk is financial. People have bought tokens primarily because of the ISO 20022 label, expecting bank adoption to drive prices, and that thesis rests on a designation that does not officially exist. If you are considering an asset associated with the standard, evaluate it on its actual fundamentals, its technology, adoption, team, and tokenomics, exactly as you would any other, and disregard the compliance badge entirely, because it carries no real weight. As with anything in crypto, never invest money you cannot afford to lose, be skeptical of any pitch that promises certainty, and remember that the louder a narrative is marketed, the more carefully it deserves to be checked.

Frequently Asked Questions What is ISO 20022 in simple terms? ISO 20022 is an international standard that defines a common, structured language for the electronic messages financial institutions send one another, covering payments, securities, and other transactions. It replaces older, rigid message formats with richer, machine-readable data, so that a payment message can carry detailed, clearly labeled information that systems can process automatically. It is a messaging standard for banks and payment systems, not a rule about cryptocurrencies, and it has nothing inherent to do with any token.

Why are banks adopting ISO 20022? Because the older message formats carried so little structured data that they created constant friction: incomplete information, manual intervention, errors, and difficulty with automated compliance screening. ISO 20022 carries rich, structured data that lets far more of the payment process happen automatically and accurately, improving speed, cost, fraud and sanctions screening, and reconciliation. The world’s core payment rails, including the main global bank messaging network and major domestic settlement systems like the United States Fedwire, have migrated to it because the benefits justify the enormous coordinated effort.

What are “ISO 20022 coins”? It is a label, circulated across crypto media and social channels, applied to a list of tokens, commonly XRP, XLM, ADA, ALGO, HBAR, and a few others, that are marketed as being compatible with or “compliant” with the standard. Around this label grew an investment thesis claiming that because banks are adopting ISO 20022, they will adopt these tokens, driving prices up. The label has fueled significant speculative interest, but it does not correspond to any official certification or status, which is the central problem with it.

Is the “ISO 20022 compliant” label real? Largely no. There is no certification process or registry for compliant cryptocurrencies, because the standard is a messaging format for institutions and has no mechanism for validating or endorsing tokens. Language like “ISO 20022 certified” or “endorsed by ISO” is marketing and is misleading or false. A project can do genuine engineering to make its systems compatible with ISO 20022 data, which is a real but modest technical capability, but that is very different from an official compliance badge. No authority approves or registers tokens under the standard.

Is XRP actually ISO 20022 compliant? Not in the way the hype implies. Ripple, the company, truly engages with financial messaging standards bodies as part of building institutional payment infrastructure, which is why XRP tops most “ISO 20022 coin” lists. But Ripple’s own chief technology officer has stated plainly that XRP, the token, has nothing to do with ISO 20022. The standard concerns how institutions message each other; XRP is a separate digital asset. A company working with messaging standards does not make its associated token a certified ISO 20022 instrument, so the token level compliance claim is a myth, even though Ripple’s standards work is real.

Should ISO 20022 affect which tokens I buy? Not on the basis of the compliance label, which does not officially exist. ISO 20022 is a genuine, long-term tailwind for connecting traditional finance and blockchain, and a payments project’s real technical compatibility with the standard can be a small point in its favor. But the standard does not validate, endorse, or guarantee adoption of any token, and banks adopting a messaging standard does not mean banks buying coins. Treating an “ISO 20022 compliant” label as a reason to expect price appreciation means relying on a designation that does not exist and a causal chain that does not hold.

This article is educational information, not investment advice. It aims to clarify a widely misunderstood topic, and details reflect reporting available as of June 26, 2026. Verify current information from primary sources, and be especially cautious of marketing language that implies official certification where none exists.

Table of contents

XRP is at $1.04. Down 4.2% today. Down nearly 8% on the week. It is the weakest major coin on the board, again.

And it is getting close to the one number that matters: $1.00.

Let me lay out exactly where things stand, because this is a tense moment for XRP holders and there is no point dressing it up.

The setup is ugly XRP has fallen harder than Bitcoin, harder than Ethereum, harder than Solana this week. That is not a coincidence. XRP is a high-beta coin. When the market drops, it drops more. Right now the whole market is dropping, with Bitcoin at a 20-month low, so XRP is taking the worst of it.

The chart is bearish. Price is below every major moving average. Sellers keep breaking support levels on heavy volume. Every bounce has failed. This is a downtrend, plain and simple.

And the price is now sitting just four cents above $1.00.

Why $1 is the line $1.00 is not just a round number. It is the floor XRP has defended this entire correction. Hold it, and the structure survives. Lose it, and you risk a fast move lower as the last line of defense fails and stops get triggered.

At $1.04, that floor is within striking distance of a single bad day. That is the tension.

Washington just made it harder Here is the part that stings. XRP’s biggest catalyst was supposed to be the CLARITY Act, the bill that would finally classify XRP as a commodity and end years of regulatory limbo. It just hit a wall.

Two problems. First, nearly 100 Catholic bishops sent a letter to the Senate opposing the bill, arguing one of its provisions weakens safeguards against human trafficking. Second, a separate political fight over a housing bill has jammed up Congress, and the CLARITY Act is now stuck behind it. Next real checkpoint: a July 17 hearing.

So the catalyst that was supposed to lift XRP just got pushed further out. Bad timing, with the price already on the ropes.

It is not all bad, to be fair Step back from the price and the long-term picture is steadier than the chart suggests. XRP ETFs have been pulling in money for weeks. Ripple keeps signing institutional deals and expanding through the DTCC tokenization group. The cross-border payments use case is real and it is not going anywhere.

The CLARITY delay is a setback, not a death sentence. The bill is still alive. July 17 is a real date on the calendar.

So you have got a weak price and a delayed catalyst fighting against a long-term story that keeps getting stronger. Those two things are pulling in opposite directions. The next few weeks decide which one wins.

The levels Down: $1.00 is the line. Below it, $0.95 then $0.90.

Up: reclaim $1.12 first, then $1.20 to say the downtrend is easing.

Until XRP gets back above those levels, every bounce is a selling opportunity for the bears.

Bottom line XRP at $1.04 is the weakest major coin this week, four cents from a $1 floor it has to hold, with its big catalyst stalled in Washington until at least July 17. Near-term, this is tough, no way around it.

But the institutional foundation underneath, ETF inflows, Ripple deals, the DTCC role, keeps building while the price bleeds. Watch $1.00. Everything hinges on it. Hold it and XRP lives to fight another day. Lose it and the next leg down opens up. That is the whole story right now, and it comes down to four cents.

FAQ What is the XRP price today?

XRP is trading at $1.04 on June 26, 2026, down 4.2% on the day and nearly 8% on the week, the weakest performer among major coins and closing in on the critical $1.00 level.

Will XRP fall below $1?

It is a real risk. At $1.04, XRP is within a single bad day of $1.00, the floor it has defended all correction. Sellers keep breaking support on heavy volume. Holding $1 keeps the structure intact; losing it opens $0.95 then $0.90.

Why is XRP falling more than other coins?

XRP is a high-beta coin that falls harder than Bitcoin in selloffs. With the market at a 20-month low and a liquidation-driven decline, XRP is taking the worst of it, compounded by a stalled CLARITY Act.

What happened with the CLARITY Act?

Nearly 100 Catholic bishops sent a letter opposing it over trafficking-safeguard concerns, and a separate housing-bill fight has jammed Congress. The bill is stalled, with a July 17 hearing as the next checkpoint.

What are the key XRP levels to watch?

Down: $1.00 is the critical line, then $0.95 and $0.90. Up: XRP needs to reclaim $1.12, then $1.20 to signal the downtrend is easing.

This is not investment advice. Cryptocurrency is highly volatile. Always do your own research.

AUTHOR

Simeon is a detail-driven editor who sharpens every piece with clarity and precision, ensuring clean, consistent, and professional content throughout.

Ripple CTO emeritus David Schwartz has pushed back on a fresh social media debate over whether XRP existed before Bitcoin. 

Summary

Schwartz said Fugger’s 2004 idea was a payment network, not XRP or decentralized assets. XRPL history places XRP’s creation in 2012, years after Bitcoin launched in 2009 officially. The debate shows how older RipplePay ideas still drive confusion around XRP’s real origin. The exchange began after Crypto Dyl News claimed on X that “Bitcoin was NOT the 1st” and that XRP was created in 1988.

That claim drew a question from XRP community user MitchRob, who asked Schwartz whether Ryan Fugger had conceptualized XRP and the XRP Ledger before or after Bitcoin. Schwartz replied that Fugger had conceptualized a decentralized payment and settlement network around 2004, well before Bitcoin.

Schwartz added one key limit to that answer. He said Fugger’s idea did not include decentralized assets. That distinction separates RipplePay, Fugger’s early payment concept, from XRP and the XRP Ledger, which arrived later.

Ryan Fugger built RipplePay, not XRP Fugger’s RipplePay concept dates back to 2004. It focused on payments, IOUs and trust lines between users. It did not operate as a blockchain in the modern crypto sense, and it did not include XRP as a native asset.

Ryan Fugger conceptualized a decentralized payment/settlement network (but without decentralized assets) around 2004, well before bitcoin.

— David 'JoelKatz' Schwartz (@JoelKatz) June 26, 2026 Schwartz’s answer makes that point clear. He wrote that Fugger conceptualized a decentralized payment and settlement network “but without decentralized assets” around 2004. That means the idea came before Bitcoin, but XRP itself did not.

The official XRP Ledger history page places XRP’s launch in 2012. It says Schwartz, Jed McCaleb and Arthur Britto built a distributed ledger that aimed to improve on Bitcoin’s limits. The ledger included a native asset that became XRP.

The XRPL learning portal also says the three developers joined forces in 2011 to create a faster and more scalable digital asset. That timeline puts XRP after Bitcoin, not before it.

XRP origin debate continues online MitchRob later asked whether Satoshi Nakamoto may have drawn any inspiration from Fugger’s earlier concepts. He also asked which network was built with a better framework for payments and settlement.

Schwartz had not answered that follow-up in the provided thread at the time of writing. The question remains speculative because no public evidence in the thread shows that Satoshi used Fugger’s work when designing Bitcoin.

The confusion comes from the Ripple name. Fugger’s RipplePay project came before Bitcoin, while the XRP Ledger came after Bitcoin. Ripple Labs later used the Ripple name, but the technical system behind XRP was built separately.

As previously reported, David Schwartz recently explained his XRP Ledger role after stepping back from daily leadership. The report noted that he remains CTO emeritus and one of XRPL’s co-creators.

XRPL history still matters The debate comes as XRP Ledger development continues. In a previous article, crypto.news discussed Schwartz backing the XRP Ledger 3.2.0 upgrade, which renamed the core server software from rippled to xrpld.

That update moved XRPL further away from older Ripple-branded software names. It also added cleanup fixes for features tied to DeFi tools, vaults, lending, permissioned domains and token functions.

Previously, crypto.news explored XRPL’s growing tokenized finance use cases. Schwartz said XRPL use is expanding from payments into tokenized assets, stablecoins and other financial tools.

The latest exchange does not change XRP’s history. Fugger helped shape an early payment idea before Bitcoin. XRP and XRPL, however, began later as separate code written by Schwartz, McCaleb and Britto.

David Schwartz, who served for many years as Ripple’s Chief Technology Officer and now holds the title of CTO Emeritus, has issued a direct response to longstanding debates over the origins of XRP. Schwartz categorically denied claims that Canadian developer Ryan Fugger created the XRP token.

RipplePay at the center of the debateAt the heart of these claims lies the RipplePay system, established by Fugger in 2004. Launched five years before Bitcoin, RipplePay’s similar name led some in the crypto community to incorrectly credit Fugger as the founder of XRP. In his latest comments, Schwartz emphasized that this perception is not accurate from either a technical or historical perspective.

According to Schwartz, XRP’s true history began in 2012, and any effort to trace a “hidden founder” back to earlier times lacks technical basis.

Schwartz outlined that Fugger’s 2004 RipplePay initiative was an ordinary payment system based on mutual trust between users. This system had neither a blockchain foundation nor a digital coin. The technical underpinnings associated with XRP emerged only in 2012, after Chris Larsen and Jed McCaleb acquired the RipplePay platform from Fugger.

Emphasis on building the code from scratchSchwartz explained that the team—later known as OpenCoin and eventually Ripple Labs—acquired RipplePay mainly for its brand value and memorable name, not for its technology. He stressed that the technical infrastructure was completely rebuilt. Jed McCaleb, Arthur Britto, and David Schwartz wrote entirely new code to develop the XRP Ledger (XRPL) and XRP token. The consensus is that only the name survived from the old system.

Ripple is widely recognized for its cross-border payment technologies. The XRP Ledger stands out as the open-source, distributed system that supports XRP. Schwartz’s statement was issued as conspiracy theories regarding the origins of XRP resurfaced on social media.

Old patents reignited rumorsSome of these theories cited Schwartz’s distributed computing patent applications filed between 1988 and 1991. These documents have led to periodic speculation that Schwartz could be Satoshi Nakamoto, the enigmatic creator of Bitcoin. Even further, certain XRP supporters have pointed to these patents as supposed evidence that the coin was secretly developed under the influence of the US government.

Mini glossary: Distributed computing refers to systems in which transaction and data processing workloads are shared across multiple computers, rather than being handled by a single central entity. Although this concept shares some similarities with modern blockchain structures, early distributed computing patents alone do not represent a direct foundation for today’s crypto networks.

Schwartz rejected these interpretations, arguing that his late-1980s developments are technologically outdated and unrelated to the modern architecture of XRP Ledger. As he explained, the efforts to link his own patents or Fugger’s earlier project to the birth of XRP simply fit available facts into appealing narratives.

With this recent clarification, Schwartz reaffirmed that XRP’s origins date to 2012. He reiterated that the token’s creation was based on new code and a completely reimagined technical structure; earlier claims to founding are regarded as historical curiosities rather than technically valid arguments.

Disclaimer: The information contained in this article does not constitute investment advice. Investors should be aware that cryptocurrencies carry high volatility and therefore risk, and should conduct their own research.

A conditional national trust bank charter, a pending Federal Reserve master account, and a string of acquisitions in brokerage, payments, and treasury. Ripple is assembling a full regulated-finance stack. The benefits flow first to its stablecoin and the company itself. What is left for XRP is the question.

Summary

Ripple has assembled a full regulated-finance stack: a conditional national trust bank charter, a pending Federal Reserve master account bid, and acquisitions in prime brokerage, payments, and treasury services. The charter and master account primarily benefit RLUSD, Ripple’s stablecoin, whose reserves would sit under federal and state oversight, not XRP directly. A national trust bank cannot take ordinary deposits or carry federal deposit insurance, so the real prize is direct access to Federal Reserve payment rails and custody of its own stablecoin reserves. For XRP, the benefit is indirect: a more legitimate, bank-grade Ripple strengthens the whole ecosystem and XRP’s role as a bridge asset, but it creates no direct token-demand mechanism. This is the same pattern that defined XRP through 2026, in which Ripple’s wins flow first to the company and RLUSD, with the token benefiting slowly, if at all. Ripple is turning itself into a bank, or something very close to one, and it is doing it methodically.

Over the past year the company won conditional federal approval to operate a national trust bank, applied for a Federal Reserve master account that would give it direct access to the central bank’s payment systems, and bought its way into prime brokerage, payments, and corporate treasury services through a series of acquisitions.

Add the dollar stablecoin it already issues, the 70-plus regulatory licenses it holds around the world, and a fresh European license that lets it passport services across 30 countries, and the picture is unmistakable.

A company once known mainly for a cross-border payments network and a controversial token is assembling the full apparatus of a regulated financial institution.

For XRP holders, who have watched the token grind sideways near a dollar through a year of Ripple triumphs, the natural question is what all of this means for them.

The honest answer is more complicated, and more sobering, than the headlines suggest, because almost every piece of Ripple’s banking build benefits the company and its stablecoin first, and the token only indirectly.

This piece works through Ripple’s transformation into a regulated financial institution and what it actually delivers for XRP. It covers the banking stack Ripple is assembling, what a national trust bank can and cannot do, the real prize of a Federal Reserve master account, why the charter is mostly a stablecoin story, what genuinely accrues to XRP, the bull case within the bank build, and what holders should watch.

The goal is to separate the real significance of Ripple becoming a bank, which is considerable for the company, from the wishful assumption that everything good for Ripple is automatically good for the token, which 2026 has repeatedly shown to be false.

A payments company is turning into a financial institution Take the full measure of what Ripple has built, because the strategy only becomes clear when you see the pieces together.

The foundation is a conditional charter to operate a national trust bank, granted by the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, the federal regulator that supervises national banks. The OCC conditionally approved Ripple National Trust Bank alongside other crypto firms in a broader wave of national trust bank approvals.

That federal approval matters because it moves Ripple deeper into the regulated banking perimeter without turning it into an ordinary retail bank.

A subsequent rule expanded what such trust banks are allowed to do, turning what would have been a narrow custody license into something with real operational scope, including digital-asset custody, stablecoin reserve management, and certain payment services.

On top of the charter, a Ripple subsidiary applied for a Federal Reserve master account, the account that would connect Ripple directly to the central bank’s payment rails.

And around that regulatory core, Ripple has been buying capabilities: a prime brokerage, a payments business, and a corporate treasury-services firm, each acquisition adding a piece of the institutional-finance stack.

Layer in the rest and the ambition is obvious. Ripple issues a dollar-pegged stablecoin that has grown past $1 billion in market value.

It holds dozens of regulatory licenses across jurisdictions, and it recently secured preliminary European authorization that lets it offer regulated services across the entire European Economic Area.

That is where Ripple’s European license fits into the larger build. The company is not only chasing U.S. banking access; it is trying to make its regulated-finance stack portable across major markets.

Taken individually, any one of these is a notable corporate step. Taken together, they describe a single, coherent strategy: to become the institutional infrastructure layer for crypto-native finance.

Ripple wants to be a regulated entity that banks and corporations can trust to custody assets, manage stablecoin reserves, settle payments, and connect to both the traditional financial system and the blockchain world.

Ripple is not dabbling in banking. It is building a bank-grade financial institution deliberately, piece by piece.

The question for a token holder is where, in all of this carefully assembled machinery, XRP actually fits.

What a national trust bank is, and what it is not Before assessing what the charter means for XRP, it is worth being precise about what a national trust bank actually is, because the word “bank” carries connotations the charter does not deliver.

A national trust bank is not a retail bank. It cannot take ordinary deposits, cannot offer checking or savings accounts, and does not carry federal deposit insurance, the protection that backs ordinary bank deposits.

What it can do is custody assets, provide fiduciary and trust services, manage reserves, and, under the expanded rule, handle digital-asset custody and certain payment-related functions.

Headlines that say “Ripple becomes a bank” are gesturing at something real, but they compress away an important distinction.

That distinction matters for understanding the charter’s purpose. Ripple’s trust bank exists primarily to serve Ripple’s stablecoin business.

Its core planned function is to custody and manage the reserve assets that back the stablecoin, which today are held through a separate trust entity, and to provide custody to institutional clients.

By bringing reserve management in-house under a federal charter, Ripple gains tighter control, removes reliance on third-party custodians, and obtains a regulatory standing that few stablecoin issuers can match: oversight at both the federal level, through the national chartering regulator, and the state level, through New York’s financial regulator.

That dual supervision is a genuine selling point to institutions weighing whether to trust Ripple’s rails.

This is also why the fight over trust charters matters. Senator Elizabeth Warren and banking groups have challenged the idea that crypto firms with OCC trust charters should be treated like bank-grade institutions, arguing that they could act like crypto banks without the same restrictions.

NEW: Sen. Elizabeth Warren joins banks to challenge Ripple and other crypto firms with OCC trust charters. Claims they act as crypto banks avoiding regulatory obligations pic.twitter.com/ojuHDUd73U

— crypto.news (@cryptodotnews) May 28, 2026 The crypto industry has pushed back. The Digital Chamber called on the OCC to uphold crypto trust bank charters for firms including Coinbase, Ripple, Circle, and BitGo, arguing that the charters are part of bringing digital assets into regulated finance rather than keeping them outside it.

NEW: Digital Chamber calls on OCC to uphold crypto trust bank charters for Coinbase, Ripple, Circle and BitGo against Sen. Warren’s claim of banking law violations pic.twitter.com/qBLrmTOD14

— crypto.news (@cryptodotnews) May 27, 2026 But notice what the trust bank does not do. It does not custody XRP for the benefit of XRP holders, does not create any obligation to buy or hold the token, and does not make XRP a bank deposit or a regulated bank instrument.

It is, at its heart, infrastructure for the stablecoin, which is the recurring theme of Ripple’s entire banking build.

The real prize: a Federal Reserve master account The most consequential piece of Ripple’s banking strategy is the one furthest from being secured: a Federal Reserve master account.

A master account is the account a financial institution holds directly with the central bank, and it is the gateway to the core of the financial system.

It allows direct settlement through the central bank’s payment networks, the same rails the largest banks use, and direct access to base money rather than balances held at a commercial bank.

For a stablecoin issuer, the prize is enormous. With a master account, Ripple could hold the reserves backing its stablecoin directly at the central bank, the safest possible place, eliminating the counterparty risk of relying on private banks and giving institutions far greater confidence in the stablecoin’s solvency and redemption safety.

That is why custody and reserve safety matters so much in this story. Stablecoins are only as trusted as the assets backing them, the institutions holding those assets, and the transparency around redemption.

The catch is that no crypto-native firm has ever received full access of this kind on ordinary terms, and the bar is extraordinarily high.

The central bank has historically been reluctant to extend master accounts to non-traditional institutions. Uninsured trust banks face the most stringent levels of review, and previous attempts by crypto-adjacent firms to win access have often failed or taken years.

Ripple’s subsidiary has applied, and the application remains pending, with no public timeline and no clear signal of when or whether the central bank will act.

Approval would be genuinely transformative. It would mark a deeper integration between a crypto-native company and the core U.S. financial system, and it would dramatically strengthen the institutional credibility of RLUSD.

Ripple, Circle receive conditional national bank charter approvals from OCC

— crypto.news (@cryptodotnews) December 12, 2025 But it is far from assured. Even in the optimistic case, the direct beneficiary is again the stablecoin and the company’s settlement capabilities, not the token.

A master account would let Ripple hold stablecoin reserves at the central bank and settle through its rails. It would not, by itself, create demand for XRP.

The prize is real, and the prize is mostly about everything except the token.

Why this is mostly a stablecoin story Step back and a clear pattern emerges from every piece of Ripple’s banking build: it is, overwhelmingly, a stablecoin story.

The trust charter exists primarily to custody and manage stablecoin reserves. The master account, if granted, would primarily benefit the stablecoin by letting its reserves sit at the central bank.

The European license primarily expands where Ripple can offer regulated payment and stablecoin services. The acquisitions in brokerage, payments, and treasury primarily build out an institutional settlement and services business in which the stablecoin is the natural cash leg.

Ripple’s dollar stablecoin has grown past $1 billion, expanded across multiple blockchains, and won approvals in multiple jurisdictions. The banking apparatus is being constructed largely to support and legitimize it.

That is why the RLUSD the bank serves is the center of the story. A stablecoin is useful to institutions precisely because it is designed to hold a steady dollar value while moving across crypto rails.

Ripple’s own reserve-transparency page also shows why this matters. The company is trying to make RLUSD look less like an experimental crypto product and more like a regulated dollar instrument with transparent backing, regular attestations, and bank-grade custody.

This is the same dynamic that defined XRP through 2026, when Ripple’s marquee bank deals and settlement milestones ran through its stablecoin and ledger while the token captured little beyond a negligible network fee.

As previously reported, this is why Ripple wins bypass the token. Ripple can deepen its institutional footprint while XRP still waits for direct, measurable token demand.

The banking build is that dynamic taken to its logical conclusion. Ripple is constructing a regulated financial institution whose central purpose is to make its stablecoin the most trusted, most institutionally credible dollar token in the market, and to build a settlement and custody business around it.

XRP is part of the broader ecosystem, but it is not the thing the bank is for.

A holder hoping that the charter, the master account bid, and the acquisitions would translate into direct demand for the token is, once again, watching the wrong variable.

The value of all this machinery flows first to Ripple the company and to the stablecoin it is built to serve, exactly as Ripple’s own communications have acknowledged in noting that the banking progress is unlikely to move the token’s price directly or immediately.

So what do XRP holders actually get? If the bank build is mostly about the stablecoin, the fair question is whether XRP holders get anything at all.

The honest answer is yes, but indirectly and slowly. The benefit to XRP runs through legitimacy and ecosystem strength rather than any direct mechanism.

As Ripple becomes a regulated, bank-grade financial institution, the entire ecosystem it anchors gains credibility in the eyes of the banks and corporations Ripple wants as customers.

A more trusted Ripple makes every part of its stack, including the ledger on which XRP lives and the role XRP can play, more palatable to institutional users.

The argument, which Ripple and many holders make, is that demand for one asset in an ecosystem can lift others in the same stack, and that a Ripple wired into the core of the financial system is a Ripple better positioned to drive real-world use of XRP as a bridge asset over time.

This indirect benefit is not nothing, and it would be a mistake to dismiss it. XRP’s most plausible long-term role is as a bridge asset that moves value between currencies in settlement.

A Ripple with a federal charter, a master account, and a credible institutional settlement business is a Ripple with more opportunities to route that kind of settlement in ways that touch the token.

But the benefit is conditional, gradual, and unguaranteed, three qualities that make it very different from the direct, immediate boost holders often hope for.

XRP does not become a bank deposit, a stablecoin, or a regulated instrument through any of this. It remains a separate, volatile asset whose demand depends on whether Ripple’s growing institutional infrastructure eventually channels real settlement volume through it.

The competing path is obvious: the same settlement volume could instead keep flowing through RLUSD, which is better suited to settlement precisely because it does not move in price.

The banking build improves the odds that Ripple can win regulated institutional business someday. It does not make that business flow through XRP now, and it does not create token demand on its own.

The bull case within the bank build In fairness to the optimistic view, there is a coherent bull case for XRP buried inside Ripple’s banking transformation, and it deserves a clear statement.

The strongest version goes like this: Ripple is methodically removing every reason an institution might hesitate to build on its rails.

The charter answers the custody and reserve-management question. The master account, if granted, answers the reserve-safety question at the highest possible level.

The acquisitions answer the brokerage, payments, and treasury questions. The licenses answer the regulatory question across jurisdictions.

As those barriers fall one by one, Ripple becomes a place where serious institutions can conduct serious volume. In a world where Ripple is running large-scale regulated settlement, the case for using XRP as the neutral bridge asset between currencies strengthens, because the infrastructure to do it at scale finally exists and is trusted.

Pair that with the token’s other tailwinds, including the regulatory clarity from its resolved legal status, the spot exchange-traded funds gathering assets, and the prospect of federal legislation codifying its commodity classification, and the bull case becomes clearer.

That is where the legislation that could codify XRP fits in. If the CLARITY Act turns XRP’s commodity treatment into durable federal law, it could make institutions more comfortable using the token where it has a genuine settlement role.

In that version of the future, XRP sits inside a maturing, increasingly bank-grade ecosystem at exactly the moment that ecosystem becomes capable of institutional-scale activity.

If even a fraction of the settlement flowing through a fully built-out Ripple touches XRP as a bridge, the demand could be meaningful, and it would arrive on top of a token that has already cleared its regulatory hurdles.

This is a real argument, and it is why the banking build is truly good news for the long-term XRP thesis even though it is not a direct catalyst.

The caveat, as always, is the word “if.” The bull case depends on Ripple choosing and managing to route settlement through the token rather than through the stablecoin, and the entire pattern of 2026 suggests the stablecoin keeps winning that role.

The infrastructure being built is real. Whether XRP is wired into it is the open question.

What XRP holders should watch For a holder trying to judge whether Ripple’s banking transformation will ever translate into token demand, the analysis points to a few specific signals worth tracking, none of which is another charter or acquisition headline.

The first is the Federal Reserve master account decision.

If granted, it would be a landmark for Ripple and the stablecoin, and it would mark the company’s deepest integration into the financial system. Over time, that expands the surface area where XRP could be used.

If denied, a key piece of the institutional thesis stalls.

Either way, it is the most consequential pending item, and its outcome shapes everything downstream.

The second and more important signal is whether XRP actually appears in the settlement flows of Ripple’s bank-grade business, as opposed to the stablecoin doing all the work.

This is the variable that decides the entire question. If Ripple’s institutional settlement increasingly routes through XRP as a bridge asset, generating real, recurring token demand, then the banking build will finally have reached the token.

If, as has been the pattern, the stablecoin carries the settlement while XRP captures only a fee, then the bank is a Ripple and stablecoin story with XRP riding the halo of legitimacy but not the flows.

The third signal is the broader regulatory picture, particularly whether federal legislation codifies XRP’s status, which would compound the legitimacy the banking build provides.

The honest synthesis is that Ripple becoming a bank is a major, genuine achievement that strengthens the company, the stablecoin, and the long-term credibility of the whole ecosystem.

For XRP specifically, it improves the odds without delivering the goods.

The token’s payoff depends on a future choice, to run regulated settlement through XRP, that Ripple has not yet shown it will make.

Until it does, the bank is being built for everything except the token, and the token, as it has all year, waits.

Frequently asked questions Is Ripple actually becoming a bank? Sort of, but with important caveats. Ripple won conditional federal approval to operate a national trust bank and applied for a Federal Reserve master account, and it has acquired prime brokerage, payments, and treasury businesses. But a national trust bank is not a retail bank: it cannot take ordinary deposits, offer checking or savings accounts, or carry federal deposit insurance. It is a specialized institution for custody, fiduciary services, and reserve management. So Ripple is building a bank-grade regulated financial institution, but one focused on custody and stablecoin reserves instead of traditional deposit-taking banking.

What is the Federal Reserve master account and why does it matter? A master account is an account held directly with the central bank, giving direct access to its payment rails and to base money, the same access the largest banks have. For Ripple, it would let the company hold its stablecoin’s reserves directly at the central bank, the safest possible location, eliminating reliance on private banks and boosting institutional confidence in the stablecoin. No crypto-native firm has ever been granted full access of this kind on ordinary terms, the review is stringent, and Ripple’s application is pending with no timeline. Approval would be transformative for the company and stablecoin, though not a direct catalyst for XRP.

Does Ripple’s banking push help XRP? Indirectly and gradually, not directly. The charter and master account primarily benefit Ripple’s stablecoin, whose reserves they would custody and secure. XRP does not become a deposit, a stablecoin, or a regulated instrument. The benefit to XRP runs through legitimacy: a bank-grade Ripple strengthens the whole ecosystem and improves the odds that XRP is eventually used as a bridge asset in regulated settlement. But that is conditional and slow, not the direct demand boost holders often hope for, and Ripple itself has acknowledged the banking progress is unlikely to move the token’s price immediately.

Why does the stablecoin benefit more than XRP? Because the entire banking build is designed around the stablecoin. The trust charter exists mainly to custody and manage stablecoin reserves. The master account, if granted, would let those reserves sit at the central bank. The acquisitions build a settlement business in which the stablecoin is the natural cash leg. A stablecoin is suited to settlement precisely because it holds a steady value, while XRP’s volatility makes it less suitable for that role. So Ripple’s regulated infrastructure naturally channels value to the stablecoin, with XRP benefiting only as part of the broader, more credible ecosystem.

What is the bull case for XRP in all this? The bull case is that Ripple is methodically removing every reason an institution might hesitate to use its rails, through the charter, the master account bid, the acquisitions, and the licenses. As those barriers fall, Ripple becomes capable of large-scale regulated settlement, and the case for using XRP as a neutral bridge asset between currencies strengthens because the trusted infrastructure to do it finally exists. Combined with XRP’s regulatory clarity, its ETFs, and possible federal legislation, the bull case is that XRP sits inside a maturing, bank-grade ecosystem just as that ecosystem becomes capable of institutional-scale activity. The caveat is whether settlement actually routes through XRP instead of the stablecoin.

What should XRP holders watch next? Three things. First, the Federal Reserve master account decision, which would mark Ripple’s deepest integration into the financial system and expand where XRP could be used, or stall a key part of the thesis if denied. Second, and most important, whether XRP actually appears in the settlement flows of Ripple’s institutional business, generating real token demand, as opposed to the stablecoin doing all the work. Third, the broader regulatory picture, especially whether federal legislation codifies XRP’s commodity status. The token’s payoff depends on Ripple choosing to route regulated settlement through XRP, a choice it has not yet shown it will make.

This article is information, not investment advice. Cryptocurrency is volatile, and regulatory approvals, corporate plans, and figures reflect reporting available as of June 26, 2026, which can change quickly. Verify current data from primary sources before making any decision.

The XRP Ledger (XRPL) is poised to welcome a new generation of lending and yield products as its decentralized finance (DeFi) ecosystem continues its rapid expansion. 

Ripple executive J. Ayo Akinyele has provided a detailed clarification regarding the upcoming Lending Protocol v1.1. 

Akinyele explicitly stated that v1.1 is an enhancement to the existing protocol, rather than a replacement for v1.0, and emphasized that developers have no reason to hold off on utilizing v1.0 today.

HOT Stories

"The protocol works as designed," Akinyele noted, explaining that the v1.1 update simply introduces refinements and added flexibility driven by feedback from the ecosystem and the long-term vision for lending on the XRPL.

Version 1.1 will ship as a separate amendment that extends the existing protocol. The previous will not be deprecated, meaning supporting it now allows institutions and developers to deploy lending applications and use cases directly on the mainnet.

"The protocol works as designed. v1.1 enhances it: refinements and added flexibility driven by ecosystem feedback and where we want lending on XRPL to go. It ships as a separate amendment that extends the existing protocol. v1.0 will not be deprecated, and supporting it now will enable institutions and developers to deploy lending applications and use cases on mainnet," he said. 

The activation of v1.1 will follow the standard amendment process, meaning there is no dependency requiring users to wait for it before acting on v1.0. Each amendment will be reviewed on its own merits by validators on their normal cadence.

SOIL eyes first application After the news of the protocol's development, another Ripple executive confirmed that a new wave of lending and yield products is officially coming to the network.

SOIL, a prominent protocol known for offering institutional lending services using USDC, RLUSD, and XRP, has officially announced its plans to integrate the XRPL Lending Protocol alongside SAV. The firm is positioning itself to become the first application to leverage these native features, which could potentially introduce an entirely new category of yield-generation products directly to the XRP Ledger.

To facilitate this new phase of lending services, the firm has proposed the activation of specific technical standards in the near future. Most notably, this includes the XLS-65 and XLS-66 standards, which are expected to be activated as soon as possible to ensure the lending upgrade is effectively deployed across the network.

TLDR: Binance’s XRP Perpetual-Spot Volume Imbalance Z-Score sits near neutral at 0.17, within normal historical range. XRP dropped over 3.3% in 24 hours to $1.049 as tech stock declines triggered over $1 billion in crypto liquidations. Ripple’s RLUSD stablecoin launched on SBI VC Trade in Japan, becoming the first regulated listing with zero fees. Spot XRP ETFs recorded $31.32 million in June net inflows, well below May’s record high of $132 million. Binance’s XRP Perpetual-Spot Volume Imbalance Z-Score is holding near neutral at approximately 0.17, according to the latest on-chain data.

The reading reflects that the gap between perpetual and spot trading volumes remains within a historically normal range.

XRP is trading near $1.02 as of this writing, down over 4.4% in 24 hours amid a broad crypto market selloff. Despite the price drop, derivatives market activity has not shown signs of excessive speculative buildup.

Z-Score Stability Points to Measured Derivatives Positioning The Volume Imbalance indicator on Binance measures the difference between perpetual and spot trading volumes for XRP.

The current reading stands at approximately 0.51, with the 30-day Z-Score sitting near 0.17. That figure places the current imbalance well within the range of normal activity relative to the past month.

Source: CryptoQuant

Perpetual trading continues to dominate XRP market activity, but the margin of dominance remains unremarkable.

The Z-Score has moved through notable swings over the past several months. During price rallies in April and May, perpetual volumes expanded sharply, widening the gap above spot market activity on several occasions.

As XRP’s price retreated and speculative interest eased, the indicator pulled back toward balanced levels. The 30-day Z-Score then stabilized near zero before settling at its current modest positive reading.

A Z-Score of 0.17 indicates the present level of perpetual dominance is not exceptional. It falls broadly in line with average derivatives activity recorded over the past month.

There is no evidence of the kind of leverage buildup that typically precedes sharp price swings or large-scale liquidation events. At the same time, the reading does not suggest any notable drop in trader participation across derivatives markets.

The data paints a picture of cautious, measured positioning in XRP derivatives at this stage. Traders appear to be adjusting exposure gradually rather than piling into directional bets.

That behavior is consistent with a market navigating a broad selloff without taking on outsized risk. The Z-Score’s proximity to neutral reflects that restraint across Binance’s XRP derivatives market.

Market Context: Selloff and Ecosystem Developments XRP’s decline of over 4.4% in 24 hours came alongside a broader crypto market selloff driven by falling technology stocks.

Over $1 billion in crypto positions were liquidated during the period across the market. The price pressure pushed XRP to approximately $1.02, compounding recent weakness in the token.

Despite the turbulence, Binance’s derivatives data has not shown a corresponding spike in speculative activity.

Ripple’s RLUSD stablecoin launched in Japan through SBI VC Trade, the first Japanese exchange to list the asset. The listing is fully regulated and carries zero fees, going live immediately upon approval.

X Finance Bull noted on X that the Japan listing continues opening regulatory doors for the broader Ripple ecosystem.

JUST IN 🚨 RLUSD on Japan now.

Is $XRP for settlement next?

SBI VC Trade became the first Japanese exchange to list Ripple's stablecoin, fully regulated, zero fees, live today.

Japan keeps opening doors for the Ripple ecosystem one piece at a time.pic.twitter.com/IT9nYBpz1g https://t.co/SfemaHq3N2

— X Finance Bull (@Xfinancebull) June 24, 2026

RLUSD also surpassed Ethereum in circulating supply, adding to the milestone’s weight despite subdued XRP price action.

Spot XRP ETFs recorded $31.32 million in net inflows during June, per SoSoValue data. That figure trails May’s record of $132 million in net inflows by a wide margin.

Still, the ongoing institutional interest reflected in ETF flows contrasts with the short-term price weakness. Cumulative inflows into spot XRP ETF products have exceeded $1.43 billion since their November 2025 launch.

The combination of a neutral Z-Score, modest ETF inflows, and active ecosystem expansion gives a layered picture of XRP’s current market state.

Price performance has weakened amid macro-driven selling pressure. However, derivatives positioning on Binance remains measured, and the broader Ripple infrastructure continues to grow.

The Z-Score’s stability near 0.17 suggests traders are not amplifying the selloff through excessive leveraged exposure.

Cover image via U.Today Disclaimer: The opinions expressed by our writers are their own and do not represent the views of U.Today. The financial and market information provided on U.Today is intended for informational purposes only. U.Today is not liable for any financial losses incurred while trading cryptocurrencies. Conduct your own research by contacting financial experts before making any investment decisions. We believe that all content is accurate as of the date of publication, but certain offers mentioned may no longer be available.

TL;DR 

XRP on-chain map points to $0.51: Key support at $1.06 holds 830M+ coins; a breakdown targets $0.80, $0.62, and $0.51 where 1.06B XRP cost basis is concentrated.Dormant 2024 whale moves $2.5 million in SHIB: 600 billion tokens routed through OTC-linked smart contracts; over $20M moved via similar channels in the past month amid a 23% price drop.Singapore adds Hyperliquid to investor alert list: Project insists no rules were broken; Multicoin's Kyle Samani accuses the team of misrepresenting decentralization; Bitwise CEO backs its fundamentals.Bitcoin tests $58,000 as Q2 concludes: $900 million in liquidations, seven weeks of ETF outflows at $1.34B, hawkish Fed wipes out Q3 rate cut hopes.On-chain roadmap plots XRP trajectory down to $0.51As the crypto market tries to find solid ground, well-known analyst Ali Martinez shared fresh Glassnode on-chain data on XRP, clearly showing where buyers are hiding and what traders should prepare for. Through the URPD metric, or realized price distribution, he effectively drew a roadmap for the market that, in the event of a decline, leads straight to the $0.51 mark.

Right now, the coin is undergoing a tough strength test, attacking a major volume block at $1.06. Investors should watch this level closely: more than 830 million XRP changed hands there in the past, so this threshold may define the trend for the coming weeks. If it holds, XRP may move higher; a close below it would open the door to a prolonged correction.

HOT Stories

XRP's UTXO Realized Price Distribution (URPD), Source: Ali Martinez citing GlassnodeIf bears do manage to break through this defense, the transaction history chart points to three main zones where billion-scale volumes were previously accumulated and where the price is likely to be bought most aggressively:

$0.80 — the first stop on the way down, where 923 million XRP was historically traded.$0.62 — the densest liquidity node, with an impressive turnover of 1.16 billion XRP.$0.51 — the final and strongest support target, which could become an ideal bottom. The cost basis of 1.06 billion coins is concentrated here, making this level a key reference point for smart money.Bottom line: the blockchain shows a clear picture — major players have already marked their price interests with real capital. XRP's next move will depend on whether the market has enough liquidity to hold the current psychological barrier or whether a gradual descent toward long-term accumulation levels is ahead.

2024 whale awakens: $2.5 million in SHIB on the moveAt the same time, on-chain monitoring recorded a large movement of funds on the Shiba Inu network. A major holder that had been inactive since 2024 transferred 600 billion SHIB tokens worth $2.51 million, as Arkham data indicates.

Behind this transfer is a chain of several addresses. The original wallet, "0x34596…", sent a tranche of 486.98 billion SHIB through an intermediate address to the "0x3Ece6…" hub, where the funds were merged with other flows and redirected to the final address, "0x9999f…". As a result, the recipient's balance accumulated more than $3.24 million in SHIB and stablecoins.

Shiba Inu (SHIB) from 2024 whale being tunneled through the chain of unidentified wallets, Source: ArkhamThe transaction structure itself points to the involvement of large players rather than retail traders. The sending hub regularly processes billion-token blocks, from 113 billion to 1.25 trillion SHIB, through ForwarderV4 smart contracts. This node can be linked to the infrastructure of over-the-counter, or OTC, desks or market makers providing liquidity for Binance and OKX.

This transfer fits into the broader trend of large holders locking in positions. Over the past month alone, more than 3.8 trillion SHIB, or about $20 million, has been moved through similar on-chain channels. The capital movement is taking place against the backdrop of a local decline in the meme token's value: over the past 30 days, SHIB has lost about 23% of its value and is trading near $0.0000042.

The use of OTC channels allows large players to move volume without direct pressure on exchange order books. However, the trend of funds being moved out still forces the market to remain cautious.

Singapore takes aim at HyperliquidAn even bigger surprise, however, was the decision by Singapore's regulator, MAS, to add the DeFi protocol Hyperliquid to its Investor Alert List, or IAL, which is designed to protect consumers from unlicensed entities.

The Hyperliquid team quickly clarified the situation and tried to calm the market. There is no panic, because inclusion on this list does not mean a ban, enforcement action, or identified violations. The project was originally created as open, permissionless infrastructure and never claimed to be authorized by MAS, so users still retain full self-custody, while all transactions continue to pass transparently through the blockchain as usual.

Moreover, Hyperliquid emphasized its willingness to work constructively with regulators around the world to help create clear rules for on-chain finance.

Nevertheless, the platform's public statement triggered criticism from professional market participants over its terminology. Well-known investor Kyle Samani of Multicoin sharply criticized the platform's statement and directly accused the team of gaslighting the industry. 

Hyperliquid is not permissionless. Stop gaslighting the public

Being permissionless would require, at the very least

1) being open source
2) mainnet validators operating around the world as opposed to in a single building

— Kyle Samani (@KyleSamani) June 26, 2026 According to him, Hyperliquid simply has no right to call itself "permissionless" while the project's source code is closed and its mainnet validators are physically located almost in the same building instead of being distributed around the world.

Against this wave of criticism, Bitwise CEO Hunter Horsley unexpectedly came to the defense of the protocol's business model, urging skeptics to look at the situation more broadly. 

Horsley believes the era of tying value to the relative market capitalization of Bitcoin or Ethereum has passed. A new generation of platforms is emerging, where real products, revenue, fees, and the volume of tokens held by users matter. By these fundamental metrics, Hyperliquid has enormous value.

Crypto market outlook: Bitcoin holds the line at $58,000 as Q2 pressure peaksBitcoin is testing the psychological $58,000–$60,000 zone as the market remains overloaded with selling pressure. Quarter-end positioning, ETF loss-taking, and tough U.S. macro data have all converged. Excessive margin leverage has been washed out by a wave of liquidations, sentiment has moved into deep risk-off mode, but the technical removal of the derivatives overhang opens a window for stabilization.

Key checkpoints:

Bitcoin price: Bitcoin is testing a local low at $58,100. The current spot range is trapped within a daily decline of 5.81%. A sustained move below $58,000 would open the way to a strong order block at $54,000.ETF outflows at $1.34 billion: Funds are recording their seventh week of net outflows. BlackRock's IBIT saw $265.2 million withdrawn in one day. The secondary hit is coming from Ethereum ETFs, which have been losing liquidity for six consecutive days, with $81.87 million in outflows as of June 25.Liquidations at $900 million: A cascade of forced long-position closures occurred as the price was squeezed toward $58,000. The derivatives market has been fully cleared of speculative leverage, and open interest has fallen to multi-month lows.Macro and PCE inflation: The U.S. Personal Consumption Expenditures index exceeded the Federal Reserve's 2% target. Hawkish rhetoric from the Fed's new leadership wiped out the chances of a rate cut in Q3, triggering a capital shift into U.S. Treasuries.$10.6 billion options expiry: Quarterly Deribit options expired today at 16:00 UTC+4. Around 80% of call positions expired out of the money, as the price remained far from the maximum pain point of $72,000. Market makers completed their hedging.MiCA on June 30: Four days remain before strict EU rules come into force. Binance is reducing operations in Greece and several eurozone countries. A local sell-off in altcoins and unauthorized stablecoins by European retail investors is being observed. You Might Also Like

XRP is facing fresh selling pressure, with its price dropping close to the $1 psychological level and sparking a long liquidation frenzy.

XRP has continued to slide lower in the past 24 hours. It fell deeper than Bitcoin and other large-cap altcoins during this period, except for Ethereum.

The asset is down 4%, only lower than Ether’s 5.4% in the top 10 cryptocurrencies by market cap. XRP slumped to a low of $1.008 before buyers stepped in to spark a rebound to $1.036. Now, bulls are fighting to keep the $1 psychological price mark, as the dip is the closest XRP has come to breaking below this level.

XRP Correction Spikes Long Liquidation As expected, leveraged long positions suffered severe losses. Amid the 4% drop, $43.18 million worth of XRP bull bets were liquidated from the market. This accounted for 97% of the total XRP positions forced to exit the market in the past 24 hours.

The total figure is $44.3 million, with XRP short positions accounting for just $1.13 million.

Notably, this trend temporarily changed in the past 4 hours, as shorts dominated XRP liquidations. Out of the $398,100 leveraged positions wiped out, $325,470 were shorts, and just $72,620 belonged to longs. This change aligned with the period where XRP rebounded from the intraday low to its current price, wrecking late shorts.

XRP Liquidations/Coinglass Meanwhile, in the past hour, the market has returned to hunting long positions as they top the liquidation chart again. Specifically, $56,510 in long liquidations of the total $56,530 tells the whole story.

The XRP liquidation is just a fraction of the total positions wiped out from the broader crypto market. Over the past 24 hours, $1.09 billion worth of positions have been forcefully closed, with $846 million being long positions and $244 million short positions.

XRP Dip Buying Efforts Amid the dip, market users appear to be accumulating. The Coinglass XRP spot flows show that outflows have surpassed inflows to exchanges, indicating withdrawals from platforms where XRP is easily sold to third-party and self-custody wallets.

Inflows stood at $159.9 million and outflows at $167.8 million. This means that a net of $7.85 million left crypto exchanges in the past 24 hours, culminating in about 7.62 million XRP tokens at the current market price.

XRP Spot Flows/Coinglass Nonetheless, the dip buying is not supported by futures enthusiasm. The growing liquidation has forced a cautious stance among derivative traders, with open interest dropping 8.7% to $2.3 billion. Futures flows also reflect this trend, with outflows surpassing inflows by $44 million in the past 24 hours.

Key Supports as $1 Grip Is Loosening With bears consistently testing the $1 support, their persistence could pay off, especially if the current market conditions endure. Per the UTXO Realized Price Distribution (URPD), XRP recently broke the $1.06 support, where over 830 million XRP changed hands.

For the uninitiated, the URPD metric measures the amount of an asset’s supply last moved at a particular price. The higher the volume moved, the more significant a level becomes, offering either support or resistance, depending on the price direction.

According to the URPD, the next core support level is $0.80, where wallets transacted 923 million XRP. After this is the $0.62 level, with 1.16 billion XRP moved there. A deeper correction could take XRP to $0.51, where 1.06 billion XRP changed hands.

XRP URPD Supports per Ali Martinez DisClamier: This content is informational and should not be considered financial advice. The views expressed in this article may include the author's personal opinions and do not reflect The Crypto Basic opinion. Readers are encouraged to do thorough research before making any investment decisions. The Crypto Basic is not responsible for any financial losses.

The XRP Ledger (XRPL) community is witnessing a controversy owing to an on-chain analyst’s recent allegations. They accused that yield protocol SOIL enabled its insider wallets to profit by selling its own tokens using XRP liquidity during its XRP Ledger launch.

XRP Ledger’s New Yield Protocol In Crosshairs An on-chain analyst named “Skeptic” on X argued that the blockchain data suggested that there was no strong selling pressure for SOIL token from average investors. Rather, the user claimed the sell pressure came from wallets that had received SOIL tokens directly from the issuer.

“The main sell pressure is not coming from random holders. It is coming from wallets that received SOIL directly from the issuer and then quickly sold into the AMM,” Skeptic wrote. His comments grabbed market attention, especially since the XRP Ledger v3.2.0 was released recently.

The post states that one wallet was involved in 20 transactions receiving approximately 68,766 SOIL. This stack was then sold for approximately 11,457 XRP. Another wallet allegedly received 17,098 SOIL before selling around 17,998 SOIL for 6,769 XRP. Meanwhile, a third received 20,000 SOIL. Out of this, it offloaded approximately 17,628 SOIL for 6,683 XRP.

SOIL on XRPL is already showing a very ugly on-chain pattern.

I checked the flow around the XRPL SOIL issuer address the @soil_farm itself published for trustlines and trading:
rfmS3zqrQrka8wVyhXifEeyTwe8AMz2Yhw

The main sell pressure is not coming from random holders.
It is… pic.twitter.com/jJ6s3s9Czx

— Skeptic (@skeptic589) June 26, 2026

Skeptic said that the pattern “does not look like healthy price discovery” and instead “looks like issuer distribution followed by immediate dumping.” The user also asserted that the XRP community was “used as exit liquidity.”

Apart from that, the analyst noted that SOIL was trading in the Ethereum, Polygon, MEXC, Gate.io, BitMart and BVOX markets prior to its XRP Ledger launch. The post says while the tokens were sold on the XRPL, CoinMarketCap data showed a massive surge in the price of SOIL. The token price skyrocketed by about 53% in the last 24 hours from approximately $0.06147 to $0.09861.

Meanwhile, MEXC has also reported positive performance in the past 24 hours. Thus, Skeptic pointed out that “XRPL was not joining a fair, balanced market. XRPL liquidity was effectively used to absorb supply distributed from the issuer while price action elsewhere stayed stronger.”

The post concluded that what happened on XRP Ledger was “blatant unprofessionalism.”

What Did The SOIL Team Respond? The team of SOIL on XRP Ledger vehemently denied the charges. They claimed the price surge came about due to “high demand on thin liquidity” rather than insider selling.

“The price spike on XRPL DEXes happened because high demand hit thin liquidity. Simple as that,” the team wrote. It added that “SOIL team doesn’t influence the token price, the market arbitrages on its own.” Moreover, they accused that Skeptic was fueling FUD in the community.

Skeptic went on to say, “At the time of launch, you were the only ones who had the tokens needed to provide liquidity.” Soil then replied, “The wallet addresses you shared are bridge addresses, not team/project wallets.”

The protocol also mentioned that the difference in prices is frequent between decentralized and centralized exchanges when the market making is limited. “The liquidity that was in place worked fine… It only became an issue when demand spiked hard and fast,” SOIL said. They added that arbitrage between exchanges was “literally the mechanism working as intended.”

Skeptic was still not satisfied. Hence, he ended up responding, “In other words, you weren’t prepared for that level of demand and didn’t provide enough liquidity.” Now, Soil’s XRP Ledger lending protocol upgrade is also under fire.

After another user inquired if locked up RLUSD deposits were in danger, the discussion further heated up. Skeptic said there was no proof for that and emphasized the criticism was only about the token launch. He concluded, “Simply put, they screwed up.”

Meanwhile, in another update, it’s worth noting that XRP Ledger overtook Ethereum in terms of RLUSD supply.

For those looking for crypto-backed borrowing, visit our page on Crypto Loan Platforms.

Critical Moment for Ripple (XRP), Important Pi Network (PI) Updates, and More: Bits Recap June 26

Crypto market recovery signs are flashing amid buy-the-dip sentiment following a crash. Traders brace for volatility as over $10.5 billion in Bitcoin (BTC), Ethereum (ETH), XRP, and Solana (SOL) options are expiring today.

BTC price has jumped more than 2% above $60K in Asia trading hours, following a drop to $58K lows. In the last few hours, the crypto market recorded nearly $35 million in short liquidations.

Crypto Market Recovery or Crash as $9.3 Billion in Bitcoin Options Expire Today? According to Deribit data, 151K BTC options with a notional value of are set to expire on June 26. The put/call ratio of 0.63. However, the 24-hour put volume is significantly higher than the 24-hour call volume. The put/call ratio has increased to 1.24, indicating traders are bearish.

However, crypto market traders are adjusting their positions to rise in BTC implied volatility and 25 delta skew. This indicates traders are hedging for downside protection and expect a recovery phase after the quarterly crypto market options expiry.

Moreover, the max pain price is $70,000, above the current Bitcoin price of nearly $59,900. However, data shows a high probability of expiring below the $59,500 strike price, with 50% for $60,000 at press time.

Traders are buying $65K call options for the July 3 expiry, flashing signs of a crypto market recovery in the coming days. Notably, Core PCE inflation coming in line with expectations, falling oil prices, and plunging US dollar index (DXY) and treasury yield could reset the crypto market for an early recovery phase.

Bitcoin Options Open Interest. Source: Deribit As per GreeksLive, the crypto market’s risk is building up, but institutions and whales haven’t continued betting on further downside yet. They are awaiting the settlement for further cues on market direction.

Bitcoin Options Open Interest Gex. Source: GreeksLive What’s Next for ETH Price After Expiry? Crypto market participants also expect a potential recovery amid quarterly Ethereum options expiry. 1,002K ETH options with a notional value of over $1.5 billion are set to expire, with a put/call ratio of 0.50.

In the last 24 hours, put volume exceeded call volume, with a put/call ratio of 1.33. It shows bearish sentiment among traders as puts dominated calls. However, implied volatility and 25-delta skew indicate a potential rebound in the coming days.

Also, the max pain point is at $2,000, significantly above the current price. Options traders are betting on short-term ETH trading after the crypto market crash. The probability of ETH options expiring above the current market price of $1,550 is at 58%.

ETH price rebounded 3% after falling more than 8% in the past 24 hours, currently trading at $1,553. The 24-hour low and high are $1,510 and $1,656, respectively. However, trading volume has increased by 14% amid buy-the-dip sentiment.

ETH Options Open Interest. Source: Deribit Ethereum treasuries Tom Lee-backed Bitmine Immersion (BMNR) and SharpLink (SBET) are buying ETH at dips. ShapLink purchased 5,000 ETH from FalconX today after 8 months, increasing its holdings to 876,285 ETH.

XRP Under Pressure, Buy Whales Buy amid Crypto Market Recovery Signs More than 41K XRP options with a notional value of almost $43 million are set to expire today. The put/call ratio is 0.71. Call volume is still higher than put volume in last 24 hours, with a put/call ratio of 1.25.

The max pain point is at $1.30, above XRP price of $1.03 at the time of writing. However, traders are betting on XRP to recover above $1.10 despite significant selling pressure.

XRP Options Expiry Moreover, XRP on-chain data indicates a rise in positive whale flows amid the recent drop in prices. If whale accumulation remains in the positive region in the coming days, it could trigger a recovery amid Ripple securing MiCA compliance.

XRP Whale Flow. Source: CryptoQuant $57 Million SOL Options Expiry 83K SOL options with a notional value of over $57 million to expire, with a put/call ratio of 0.50. In the last 24 hours, call volume remained higher than put volume, with a put/call ratio of 0.99. This signals that options traders are overall bullish and awaiting the expiry of Bitcoin and Ethereum crypto options for cues on market direction.

Also, the max pain point is at $80, with traders targeting SOL at $70 in the coming weeks. SOL price has rebounded 6% to $68 over the past few hours. Trading volume has increased by 15% over the past 24 hours.

SOL Options Expiry

XRP crashes to price point last seen in November 2024.

XRP's price crashed to another new low of $1.02 on June 25 as the sixth-largest cryptocurrency hit a level it last touched in mid-November 2024.

However, that was a different time as Donald Trump had just won the presidential election for the second time and the crypto market was rallying as a consequence.

In 2024, XRP was trading at $0.50 in early November and aggressively rallied to $2.70 in early December.

When the legal battle regarding the regularity status of XRP in the United States was nearing its end, its price hit as high as $3.65 in mid-July 2025.

But then, the flash crash on Oct. 10 ruined everything for the crypto market, and XRP couldn't escape the heat either. This June, the cryptocurrency has been struggling to hold the $1 price level.

Even the leading cryptocurrency, Bitcoin (BTC), crashed below $58,200 on June 25—a price range it had last touched in September 2024.

Trending on TheStreet Roundtable:Analyst compares Saylor's Strategy to bankrupt crypto companyStandard Chartered predicts 5,000% upside for struggling tokenBlackRock's iconic fund hits new yearly lowXRP ETFs show weak performanceOver the last 24 hours, crypto positions worth $915 million have been liquidated as per CoinGlass.

Scroll to Continue

Recommended Articles

XRP liquidations stood at $42 million, including $40.7 million in long and $1.5 million in short positions.

Liquidation Heatmap, Source: CoinGlass

U.S. spot exchange-traded funds (ETFs) linked to XRP, launched in 2025, have also seen a weak performance over the last few months.

The first few months saw stunning performance, with the ETFs posting net inflows of $666.61 million in November and $499.91 million in December even amidst a bearish market.

But 2026 has been very rough for the funds, with inflows of $15.59 million in January and $58 million in February. 

Total XRP Spot ETF Net Inflow, Source: SoSoValue

March was worse, with the funds bleeding $31 million in outflows. April, May, and June have brought in inflows of $81.59 million, $131.94 million, and $31.32 million, but the figures have been declining.

XRP was trading at $1.03 at the time of writing.

XRP is attempting to hold the key support region around $1.02 following a recent sell-off, as market attention turns to the progress of the CLARITY Act for digital assets in the United States. Analysts indicate that whether this technical level is maintained could determine the short-term direction for the cryptocurrency.

XRP holds at crucial support regionAccording to recent technical assessments shared in the market, XRP currently trades within one of the most significant support zones of this cycle. Analyst ChartNerdTA highlights that the 200-week exponential moving average and the 300-week simple moving average intersect close to $1.02. These averages are commonly used to monitor medium- and long-term price trends.

Mini glossary: POC, or Point of Control, refers to the price level with the highest trading volume over a certain period. EMA (Exponential Moving Average) responds more quickly to price changes, while SMA (Simple Moving Average) calculates the average price evenly across the selected period.

The analysis draws parallels with the bear market low of 2022, when XRP slipped about 23% below the 200 EMA on the biweekly chart before rebounding as a cycle bottom formed. Should a similar scenario unfold, the price could theoretically approach the $0.80 region, though this is not presented as a definite outcome.

According to ChartNerdTA’s assessment, market focus now centers on the Point of Control at current levels: a sustained hold could spark a recovery, but a breakdown may lead to deeper corrections.

In the short term, while some investors continue to anticipate a last wave of weakness following the recent sell-off, others argue that underlying fundamentals remain stronger than the technical picture suggests.

US CLARITY Act brings regulatory debates back to focusAmid ongoing price pressure, the CLARITY Act—a US legal proposal on digital asset regulation—is also shaping industry sentiment. The bill seeks to place investment contract-type assets under SEC oversight, while assets classified as digital commodities would fall mainly under CFTC supervision.

The bill cleared the Senate Banking Committee in May with a 15-to-9 vote and has been scheduled on the Senate calendar since early June. However, further progress remains uncertain due to ongoing debates over ethical guidelines, developer liability protections, and other wider regulatory provisions.

Ripple, through its “Clarity Truck” campaign in Washington, has called on policymakers to establish clear and consistent rules for digital assets, lending support to regulatory clarity.

Ripple, a US-based blockchain company known for its cross-border payments infrastructure built on the XRP Ledger, stands among the most prominent supporters of this regulatory move. The special field hearing scheduled by the House Financial Services Committee in New York on July 17 is expected to increase political momentum around the bill.

Technical indicators flash mixed signalsBased on TradingView data, the overall technical outlook for XRP remains neutral, though most sub-indicators suggest ongoing weakness. Of the signals monitored, 16 point to sell, eight to neutral, and only two to buy. Over the last 24 hours, XRP declined by 2.86%, trading again near $1.02 at the time of reporting.

IndicatorLevelCommentMain support$1.00 to $1.02Critical for the short termImmediate resistance$1.14 to $1.15Needs to be reclaimed for improved outlookDeeper support$0.81132Lower support regionMoving averages suggest the downward trend remains intact. The 10-day EMA stands at $1.12065, the 20-day EMA at $1.15322, the 50-day EMA at $1.23333, and the 200-day EMA at $1.54315. In contrast, the Relative Strength Index (RSI) is nearing the oversold threshold at 33.89, with Stochastic RSI at 14.16 and the Williams %R indicator at minus 88.51. The MACD indicator continues to hold negative at minus 0.04456.

This data suggests selling pressure may have eased somewhat, yet there is not enough confirmation for a strong recovery. Market participants are now watching to see if the $1.00 to $1.02 band can be maintained and whether the $1.14 to $1.15 range can be regained on the upside.

Disclaimer: The information contained in this article does not constitute investment advice. Investors should be aware that cryptocurrencies carry high volatility and therefore risk, and should conduct their own research.

XRP Quietly Loses Its Last Line of Support

For the first time ever, the supply of Ripple’s US dollar-backed stablecoin, RLUSD, on the XRP Ledger (XRPL) has overtaken that on Ethereum. The total RLUSD circulating on XRPL has reached $801 million, edging ahead of Ethereum’s $795 million supply. This shift marks a significant development in the competitive landscape of stablecoins and highlights an evolving dynamic within the sector.

Changing landscape in stablecoin supplyObservers note that the rise in RLUSD on XRPL is not merely a numerical difference between two major blockchains, but signals a broader transformation in stablecoin adoption. RLUSD, designed as a dollar-backed stablecoin within the Ripple ecosystem, distinguishes itself with its emphasis on regulatory compliance and an institutional use case focus. According to sector data, RLUSD has also been recognized as the first US dollar-backed stablecoin regulated in Japan, further bolstering its credentials.

With RLUSD supply on XRPL reaching $801 million and surpassing Ethereum’s $795 million level, market participants interpret this as a signal of a possible shift in institutional stablecoin preferences.

Because RLUSD is issued directly on the XRP Ledger, institutions integrating this asset inherently connect their systems to the XRPL infrastructure. This creates a compelling network effect, making it easier for organizations already on XRPL to explore and deploy other XRP Ledger-based assets and services in the future.

Expanding institutional applicationsThe rising interest in RLUSD is driven by strong institutional demand from banks, payment service providers, custody firms, and exchanges, who are seeking a reliable, regulated digital dollar platform. This demand is underpinned by RLUSD’s technical architecture, specifically tailored for compliance and robust institutional use.

Mini glossary: A custody firm is a financial institution that provides secure storage and protection of digital assets on behalf of institutional clients. Tokenization refers to creating a digital representation of a traditional asset on a blockchain.

Developments behind the scenes are viewed as having an impact beyond increasing network liquidity. Observers point out that RLUSD has accelerated adoption in areas such as payments, tokenization, and real-world asset integration, prompting major exchanges and financial service providers to step up their XRPL integrations.

A new reality challenging Ethereum’s dominanceFor years, Ethereum has been the dominant blockchain for token issuance, supported by its ERC-20 ecosystem’s extensive integrations with exchanges, custody solutions, and institutions. This made Ethereum the preferred choice for institutional projects seeking broad compatibility and support.

However, the fact that XRP Ledger now hosts a larger RLUSD supply than Ethereum suggests that institutional attention may be gradually shifting. Large institutions are known for conducting thorough compliance reviews and technical evaluations before adopting emerging infrastructures; RLUSD appears to be a catalyst for accelerating this transition.

Should this trend continue, it is believed RLUSD could help position the XRP Ledger beyond a payments-focused network, elevating it to a more central role in the digital asset industry for institutional-grade use cases.

Disclaimer: The information contained in this article does not constitute investment advice. Investors should be aware that cryptocurrencies carry high volatility and therefore risk, and should conduct their own research.

Bitcoin has fallen below $60,000, triggering a wave of liquidations that exceeded $1 billion across the crypto market.

Notable Statistics:

Coinglass data shows 148,895 traders were liquidated in the past 24 hours for $1.08 billion.        SoSoValue data shows net outflows of $469.08 million from spot Bitcoin ETFs on Wednesday. Spot Ethereum ETFs saw net outflows of $30.2 million. In the past 24 hours, top losers include MemeCore, Mantle and Pump.fun. Notable Developments:

Trader Notes:

Trader Jelle warned that Bitcoin is approaching a key technical level, saying, "Bears are knocking on a door bulls would rather not see opened," suggesting that a break below current support could trigger further downside pressure for BTC.

Luke Martin noted that Bitcoin has historically turned the previous cycle’s peak into support during the following bull market, a pattern seen since the 2013 top around $150–$200, which became the 2015 bear-market floor.

He said the current retest feels different because of concerns surrounding Michael Saylor and Strategy, leaving the market at a critical “sink or swim” moment.

Byzantine General said Bitcoin’s drop to $58,000 swept liquidity and triggered a wave of long liquidations while attracting fresh short positions. He added that a daily close above $60,000 would likely confirm that BTC established a local bottom.

Image: Shutterstock

Market News and Data brought to you by Benzinga APIs

© 2026 Benzinga.com. Benzinga does not provide investment advice. All rights reserved.

To add Benzinga News as your preferred source on Google, click here.

Cover image via depositphotos.com Disclaimer: The opinions expressed by our writers are their own and do not represent the views of U.Today. The financial and market information provided on U.Today is intended for informational purposes only. U.Today is not liable for any financial losses incurred while trading cryptocurrencies. Conduct your own research by contacting financial experts before making any investment decisions. We believe that all content is accurate as of the date of publication, but certain offers mentioned may no longer be available.

With sellers retaining control following the breakdown below the long-standing support zone around $1.30, XRP is still trading in a strongly bearish structure. The daily chart demonstrates a distinct series of lower highs and lower lows, indicating that the overall downward trend is still present. 

Following a brief attempt at recovery in mid-June, XRP resumed its decline after failing to regain the 50-day moving average. Currently, the asset is close to the psychologically significant $1.00 level. Although the significance of this area may draw buyers, there is currently little indication of sustained accumulation. During selloffs, volume stays high, indicating that investors are still reducing their exposure rather than actively buying the dip. 

XRP/USDT Chart by TradingViewThere is a greater chance of a brief relief bounce because the RSI is close to oversold territory. However, during significant downtrends, oversold conditions alone seldom indicate a lasting bottom. XRP would need to regain the $1.15-$1.20 range and establish support above the short-term moving averages in order for bulls to pick up steam. 

HOT Stories

Until then, any recovery should not be seen as the beginning of a new bullish phase but rather as a countertrend rally. Despite increasingly stretched momentum indicators, downside risks remain high in the current structure, which warrants caution.

Shiba Inu sellers dominateShiba Inu is displaying an even more subpar technical picture. The most recent attempt at recovery was invalidated when the meme coin recently broke below a short-term ascending support line that had developed following the June selloff. The breakdown occurred while SHIB continued to trade below all significant moving averages, further solidifying the sellers' dominance. 

The market is struggling to generate significant buying pressure, and prices are currently trading close to annual lows. The intensity of recent selling activity is reflected in the RSI, which has fallen near oversold territory. Although these readings have historically preceded rebounds, the overall trend remains overwhelmingly negative. The persistent inability of SHIB to sustain breakout attempts is noteworthy. 

You Might Also Like

Every recovery rally over the last few months has stalled below critical resistance levels before rolling over into a lower leg. This pattern implies that investors are still taking advantage of strength to close positions. 

SHIB would need to rebound above the adjacent moving-average cluster and reclaim the former support zone around $0.0000049–$0.0000050 in order for a significant reversal to occur. Until then, despite increasingly oversold conditions, the path of least resistance continues to be downward, giving bears a definite advantage. 

Bitcoin strugglesAfter failing to maintain its recovery attempt above the $80,000 area, Bitcoin remains under significant pressure. Lower highs and lower lows continue to dominate price action on the daily chart, which displays a classic bearish structure.

BTC began to decline again after being rejected near the 200-day moving average, and it has since returned to the crucial $58,000-$60,000 support range. The fact that Bitcoin is approaching a level where buyers previously intervened forcefully during the June crash makes the current setup especially important. 

You Might Also Like

A relief rally could be sparked by a successful defense of this range, particularly since the RSI has moved dangerously close to oversold territory. Historically, when selling momentum wanes, these conditions frequently result in brief recoveries. 

The overall trend, however, remains unfavorable. Bitcoin is trading below every significant moving average, including the 50-, 100-, and 200-day indicators. Long-term momentum is still bearish, as evidenced by the moving averages' continued downward slope. During recent downturns, volume has also increased, suggesting that sellers are still active. 

Bitcoin would need to retake the $65,000 area and eventually break above the moving-average cluster around $70,000 in order for bulls to regain control. Until then, any increase is likely to be viewed more as a corrective bounce than a confirmed reversal of the trend. 

The upcoming trading sessions will be critical. The market may experience another round of liquidation pressure if support around $58,000 fails. However, a strong reaction from current levels could be the first significant indication that a bottom is beginning to form. 

Dogecoin's temporary underperformanceDogecoin is still underperforming as bearish momentum in the meme coin sector picks up speed. DOGE is currently trading close to $0.073, one of its lowest levels of the year, after losing significant support levels earlier this month. The multi-month support structure that had been developing since February is clearly broken down on the chart. 

DOGE/USDT Chart by TradingViewSellers swiftly seized control after that trendline broke, driving the asset below all significant moving averages. There is a significant resistance cluster overhead because the 50-day, 100-day, and 200-day averages are all above the current price and are still trending lower. The RSI's decline near oversold levels suggests that selling pressure may be becoming stretched in the near term. 

However, during DOGE's broader decline, oversold readings have frequently failed to produce lasting reversals. Over the past few months, every bounce has eventually led to a new low. The $0.07 region remains the key level to watch. A breakdown below this support could trigger another leg lower and additional panic selling. On the other hand, if buyers are able to hold current levels, DOGE may experience a brief rebound toward the $0.085-$0.09 area. 

For the time being, however, the trend remains clearly negative. Investors have little technical evidence that a long-term recovery is underway until Dogecoin reclaims its moving averages and begins to produce higher highs.

Binance will delist the IPUSDT and IPUSDC USDT-margined perpetual contracts due to the rebranding of the Story brand.

Per an official announcement, following the rebranding of the Story (IP) brand to Data Network, Binance will automatically liquidate IPUSDT and IPUSDC U-margined perpetual contracts at 17:00 CST (UTC+8) on June 28, 2026, and remove these perpetual contract trading pairs after liquidation concludes. Users are advised to close their positions voluntarily before trading is suspended to avoid automatic settlement of their positions. Starting from 16:30 CST (UTC+8) on June 28, 2026, users will no longer be able to submit new non-reduce-only orders for the aforementioned perpetual contracts. A separate announcement will be released when the new contract goes live.

2 hours ago

Sources: Israeli military withdrawal from Lebanon is an important "red line" for Iran.

Local time on June 25, a source close to the negotiation team said that Israel's withdrawal from Lebanese territory is one of the conditions for a final Iran-US agreement, and is regarded as an important "red line" by Iran's negotiation team. The source further stated that the final memorandum of understanding will guarantee Lebanon's sovereignty and territorial integrity. The agreement text previously reached in Switzerland already emphasized a "conflict resolution mechanism" that is participated in and uniformly implemented by Iran. Iran is currently following up on the specific implementation timeline. (CCTV)

2 hours ago

Apple's stock price fell by 6%, marking its largest decline since April 2025.

According to Bitget's market data, Apple's stock price fell by 6%, marking its largest decline since April 2025.

2 hours ago

Analyst: Bitcoin falls below $60,000, but institutions and whales are not continuing to bet on further declines.

Greeks.live macro researcher Adam posted on X: "Tomorrow is the quarterly expiry, and Bitcoin has dipped below $60,000. As seen in the GEX chart, $60,000 is clearly the highest open interest price point. Meanwhile, large positions are also starting to accumulate at $58,000 and $59,000, signaling rising market risk. Institutional investors and major holders have not continued to bet on a downward move; they are just waiting for the expiry."

2 hours ago

TD Cowen Analyst: SpaceX May Acquire T-Mobile

TD Cowen analysts said SpaceX could acquire T-Mobile to accelerate its wireless communication ambitions if a network sharing agreement cannot be reached. The report points to Starlink’s existing partnership with T-Mobile US as a strategic fit. This idea is purely speculative, but it underscores the growing competitive pressure the space exploration firm faces in the telecom industry.

2 hours ago

A newly unveiled climate finance proposal in the United Kingdom has placed the XRP Ledger (XRPL) at the core of a bold model designed to mobilize private capital for renewable energy projects. The plan marks a significant leap toward adopting blockchain infrastructure in institutional finance, catching the attention of both environmental and crypto market circles.

XRPL emerges as preferred blockchain in UK Parliament proposalDrafted by Dr. Chris Cormack and presented to the UK Parliament’s Environmental Audit Committee, the proposal puts forward a finance structure known as Climate Contingent Convertible Notes—or CloCos for short. This model aims to direct private sector funding into clean energy infrastructure with minimal reliance on direct public subsidies.

A standout feature of the proposal is the explicit mention of XRPL as the ideal blockchain to power a potential pilot project involving regulated financial institutions and institutional investors. The XRPL network would serve as a transparent, immutable record-keeping system for every phase of the investment process, from issuance to monitoring, and from triggering events to the deployment of capital.

The proposal states that XRPL has the capacity to meticulously record ownership rights, project performance milestones, investor entitlements, settlement instructions, and the allocation of funds to renewable energy projects, all in an auditable and transparent manner.

Mini glossary: XRPL is an open-source blockchain network associated with the Ripple ecosystem. With its low transaction fees and rapid settlement, XRPL stands out as a record-keeping infrastructure for payments, asset tokenization, and institutional finance applications.

Four-step model targets verified records through XRPLThe proposed funding mechanism unfolds in four steps: issuance, monitoring, triggering, and distribution. XRPL is positioned to offer verifiable tracking for ownership records and project milestones, while also enabling real-time validation of investor rights, payment instructions, and fund deployment to underlying projects.

According to the proposal, this approach would deliver higher levels of transparency and accountability for regulators, issuers, and investors alike. Tokenized ownership and instant verification could raise reporting standards, reduce administrative burdens, and boost investor confidence in the sector.

StageObjectiveXRPL’s functionIssuanceCreation of investment vehicleRecording ownership and entitlementsMonitoringTracking project performanceVerification of milestonesTriggerRecording specific developmentsTransparent documentation of eventsDistributionAllocating capital to projectsProof of fund movementXRPL’s institutional use cases widenThis recommendation signals a shift in blockchain’s role—from a purely technical tool to a practical solution for administering complex financial assets. Key attributes like XRPL’s low-cost settlement, transparent ledger, and real-time verification capabilities have propelled it into the spotlight for institutional applications.

The report also highlights XRPL’s growing presence beyond cross-border payments, noting its visibility in fields like asset tokenization, lending, and institutional finance. Ripple’s Chief Technology Officer, David Schwartz, has also recently named tokenized loans, securities, and repurchase agreements as major avenues for platform growth.

If the proposal moves into a pilot phase, the CloCos model could become one of the most prominent demonstrations of integrating blockchain into climate finance.

Should a pilot program get underway, this framework could further cement XRPL’s evolution from a payment-focused network into a platform capable of supporting large-scale investment securities, tokenized assets, and institutional-grade financial markets.

Disclaimer: The information contained in this article does not constitute investment advice. Investors should be aware that cryptocurrencies carry high volatility and therefore risk, and should conduct their own research.

Thu, 25/06/2026 - 15:13

While retail traders track XRP's $1 milestone during a $1.48 billion liquidation storm, monthly Bollinger Bands point to a deeper, technically justified bottom at $0.91.

Cover image via depositphotos.com Disclaimer: The opinions expressed by our writers are their own and do not represent the views of U.Today. The financial and market information provided on U.Today is intended for informational purposes only. U.Today is not liable for any financial losses incurred while trading cryptocurrencies. Conduct your own research by contacting financial experts before making any investment decisions. We believe that all content is accurate as of the date of publication, but certain offers mentioned may no longer be available.

While retail investors are holding their breath as they watch XRP's psychological $1.00 threshold, higher timeframes point to an entirely different point of tectonic shift. Against the backdrop of a global storm that has dragged the crypto market's capitalization below $2 trillion, XRP is desperately balancing near $1.03, losing around 4% over the past 24 hours.

However, technical analysis of the monthly chart clearly illustrates that the real battlefield lies lower. The Bollinger Bands indicator on TradingView shows that the actual support level has shifted toward $0.91, stripping the magical $1 figure of its former strength.

Why XRP's real make-or-break level is $0.91, not $1Psychological levels often turn out to be an illusion when a cascade of forced liquidations comes into play. The latest daily liquidation wave of $1.48 billion, according to CoinGlass, which wiped out the positions of 217,000 traders and saw $1.21 billion come from longs, clearly proved this.

HOT Stories

Monthly XRP price chart within Bollinger Bands, Source: TradingViewThe symbol of this collapse was the drama of a major whale using the "0xf79C" wallet on Hyperliquid, who lost $8.42 million in an instant when their BTC longs worth $47.7 million and XRP longs worth $28.5 million were forcibly closed. The overall CoinGlass statistics also point to a total washout of buyers: out of $39 million in total XRP liquidations, almost all of it — $38.8 million — came from bull-side liquidations.

You Might Also Like

Under these conditions, holding current positions looks like only a temporary dam. After breaking below the range's middle line at $2.05, XRP is moving by inertia toward its lower historical volatility boundary at $0.91.

If the current pressure from sellers pushes the price below one dollar, it will not be an anomaly, but merely the completion of a technically justified move toward the true bottom, where major players may finally find the long-awaited zone of certainty.

Related articles