- Matt Hamilton argues XRP and LINK serve fundamentally different purposes.
- XRP holds $173.35B market cap versus Chainlink’s $14.6B valuation.
- Debate centers on native blockchain asset versus protocol token economics.
Former Ripple director Matt Hamilton has addressed questions about the valuation gap between XRP and Chainlink following renewed discussions in the cryptocurrency community. The debate intensified after Swift announced plans to integrate blockchain-based shared ledger technology into its infrastructure.
Swift stated it has enlisted over 30 financial institutions to assist in designing the new system. Chainlink highlighted its collaboration with Swift in response to the announcement, pointing to the practical applications of oracle networks in financial infrastructure upgrades.
Former Coinroutes Chairman Dave Weisberger raised questions about the current market capitalization differences between the two assets. He noted that Chainlink’s Swift partnership and revenue-sharing model with token holders present a case for higher valuation relative to XRP.
Market capitalization comparison reveals major gap
XRP currently ranks as the fourth-largest cryptocurrency with a market capitalization of approximately $173.35 billion. Chainlink holds the twelfth position with a $14.6 billion valuation, placing XRP’s market cap nearly 12 times higher.
For LINK to surpass XRP’s current valuation, the token price would need to increase over 1,000% to reach approximately $255 per token. Weisberger questioned why this substantial gap exists given Chainlink’s partnership developments and tokenomics structure.
Hamilton responded by stating the comparison fails to account for fundamental differences between the assets. He explained that XRP functions as the native asset of the XRP Ledger, which operates as a complete blockchain network with its own consensus mechanism and infrastructure.
Chainlink, by contrast, serves as a protocol where the token plays a more limited role in the overall ecosystem. Hamilton argued these structural differences make direct valuation comparisons problematic.
Community debate reveals competing value propositions
One XRP community member attempted to clarify Hamilton’s position by comparing LINK to a platform like LinkedIn while describing XRP as a currency with its own operating system. This analogy aimed to illustrate the different utility models.
Weisberger countered that LinkedIn generates profits benefiting shareholders, and Chainlink has established mechanisms for sharing revenue with token holders. He suggested XRP derives value primarily from scarcity and minimal transaction burns.
The former chairman added that XRP’s strength lies in low transaction costs, but rising prices could potentially undermine this affordability advantage. WrathofKahneman, a prominent community figure, disputed this assessment.
