Hex Belief launched wrapped XRP throughout Ethereum, Solana, Optimism, and HyperEVM on Dec. 12 with $100 million in preliminary liquidity, positioning the token as a buying and selling pair for Ripple’s RLUSD stablecoin.
This newest transfer to make XRP out there throughout a number of ecosystems provides to Coinbase’s cbXRP on Base and Axelar’s eXRP on the XRPL EVM sidechain.
Inside months, XRP will exist in a minimum of 4 distinct wrapped codecs throughout a dozen networks, every with totally different custody preparations and bridge infrastructure.
Moreover, RLUSD has over $1 billion in circulation, totally on Ethereum, and deep XRP/RLUSD pairs on chains the place capital already sits, increasing XRP’s addressable market past XRPL’s native orderbooks.
However the enlargement trades one danger profile for one more. Native XRP operates as a trustless protocol asset, whereas wrapped XRP replaces that mannequin with a custodian holding actual XRP, a bridge coordinating cross-chain state, and sensible contracts managing the artificial token.
The query is whether or not the liquidity beneficial properties compensate for the brand new layers of belief, operational complexity, and assault floor.
What truly launched
Hex Belief points wXRP tokens 1:1 with native XRP held in segregated institutional custody, with minting and redemption restricted to licensed individuals through a KYC/AML-compliant circulate.
The token makes use of LayerZero’s Omnichain Fungible Token normal, synchronizing provide through message-passing contracts throughout a number of chains. Hex Belief seeded the launch with $100 million in TVL and positioned wXRP as a counterpart to RLUSD on EVM chains.
Wrapped.com has supplied Wrapped XRP as an ERC-20 token on Ethereum since December 2021, with Hex Belief because the custodian.
Coinbase’s cbXRP on Base follows the identical construction: 1:1 backing by XRP held in Coinbase custody, redeemable by means of Coinbase’s operational circulate.
Ripple’s XRPL EVM Sidechain, dwell on mainnet since June 2025, gives a special on-ramp. Customers lock XRP on the XRP Ledger and obtain eXRP on the EVM sidechain through Axelar’s bridge.
The sidechain makes use of eXRP as its fuel token, and Axelar’s interoperability layer connects it to 80 extra chains, routing eXRP into broader EVM DeFi.
Firelight’s stXRP provides one other artificial layer: customers stake XRP on Flare and obtain a liquid staking by-product.
The proliferation is speedy, as every product targets a special use case, however all exchange native XRPL settlement with a trusted middleman.
Liquidity beneficial properties are actual however conditional
RLUSD reached $1 billion in circulation inside a 12 months of launch, with most issued on Ethereum fairly than XRPL.
That provides XRP a big, liquid stablecoin counterpart on chains the place buying and selling quantity already concentrates. Hex Belief’s $100 million preliminary TVL seeds deep orderbooks from day one.
Wrapping XRP on Ethereum, Solana, and Base plugs it into the deepest on-chain buying and selling venues.
Native XRPL has a purposeful DEX, however its liquidity is skinny in comparison with Uniswap, Curve, or Raydium. A wrapped token on these platforms beneficial properties entry to raised execution, tighter spreads, and integration into lending and yield protocols that don’t exist on XRPL.
The XRPL EVM sidechain and Axelar bridge create a direct path from XRPL into multi-chain DeFi. Lock XRP, mint eXRP, route it by means of Axelar to Arbitrum or Polygon, and XRP features as collateral in protocols which have by no means built-in XRPL instantly.
However the liquidity enchancment assumes wrappers keep tight pegs, custodians course of redemptions reliably, and bridges don’t grow to be assault vectors. Every assumption introduces new factors of failure that native XRPL doesn’t have.
The place danger migrates
The shift from native XRP to wrapped representations transfers danger from protocol-level consensus to custodial and bridge infrastructure.
Custodian and issuer danger comes first. Each wrapped XRP product requires somebody to carry the underlying asset. For wXRP, that’s Hex Belief. For cbXRP, Coinbase. For eXRP, Axelar’s validator community controls the bridge state and mint/burn logic.
XRP wrappers add one other layer of danger on high of the XRP Ledger’s consensus, as they’re centralized entities that promise to carry and redeem XRP. If the custodian halts withdrawals, declares insolvency, or suffers a hack, the wrapped token’s backing disappears no matter what occurs on XRPL.
Bridge and interoperability danger is the second layer. Hex Belief’s wXRP makes use of LayerZero’s OFT normal for cross-chain coordination, managing provide through off-chain message-passing and on-chain validation.
Axelar’s eXRP is dependent upon validators relaying state between XRPL and the EVM sidechain.
Bridges have been the only largest goal in DeFi exploits. Hacken’s 2025 Web3 Safety Report confirmed that over $1.5 billion of the $3.1 billion stolen from crypto companies on this 12 months’s first half pertains to bridges, accounting for over 50% of DeFi losses.
Vitalik Buterin’s argument towards cross-chain architectures emphasizes that bridges don’t diversify danger however fairly focus it. A bug in a bridge contract can drain reserves throughout all linked chains concurrently.
Redemption mechanics type the third danger area. Hex Belief’s wXRP restricts minting and redemption to licensed individuals, not finish customers. If these retailers grow to be bancrupt or halt operations, liquidity suppliers holding wXRP don’t have any direct path to redeem for native XRP.
The token can commerce freely on secondary markets, however its convertibility is dependent upon intermediaries remaining purposeful.
XRP already reveals fragmentation: Wrapped.com’s Ethereum wXRP, Hex Belief’s multi-chain wXRP, Coinbase’s cbXRP on Base, and Axelar’s eXRP all declare 1:1 backing however function on separate infrastructure.
A liquidity shock or operational pause in a single model creates arbitrage gaps, short-term de-pegs, and consumer confusion about which wrapper holds worth.
| Danger sort | What it’s (plain English) | The place it reveals up in XRP’s multi-chain setup |
|---|---|---|
| Custody / issuer danger | Somebody has to carry the true XRP and promise 1:1 backing for the wrapped token. In the event that they fail, the wrapper might be under-collateralized or unrecoverable. | Hex Belief for wXRP; Coinbase for cbXRP; any custodian behind older ERC-20 wXRP; entities holding locked XRP for bridges or sidechains. |
| Bridge / messaging danger | Cross-chain worth strikes through bridge contracts and message relayers. Bugs or assaults can mint further wrapped tokens, block redemptions, or steal locked XRP. | LayerZero OFT stack for multi-chain wXRP; Axelar bridge for XRPL EVM eXRP; any third-party bridges linking XRP to EVM or Solana. |
| Good-contract / protocol danger | Wrapped tokens and bridges depend on sensible contracts with improve keys and governance. A bug, admin error, or malicious improve can break the wrapper. | wXRP contracts on Ethereum, Solana, Optimism, HyperEVM; cbXRP contracts on Base; eXRP contracts on XRPL EVM; DeFi protocols that listing these belongings as collateral or LP tokens. |
| Redemption and peg danger | The promise that 1 wrapped token at all times redeems 1 native XRP is dependent upon easy mint/burn flows and cooperative issuers/retailers. Stress occasions can break that. | Licensed-merchant mannequin for wXRP; institution-only redemption flows at Coinbase; bridge withdrawal queues when shifting again to XRPL. |
| Liquidity fragmentation | A number of totally different “XRP” tickers throughout chains cut up order books and depth. Some wrappers could also be deep and tight, others skinny and fragile. | Native XRP on XRPL; Hex Belief wXRP; legacy ERC-20 wXRP; cbXRP on Base; eXRP on XRPL EVM; any future competing wrappers. |
| Regulatory / compliance danger | Wrapped belongings and custodial bridges sit squarely in regulated territory. Enforcement or licensing adjustments can drive abrupt pauses or wind-downs. | Hex Belief’s regulated custody; Coinbase’s cbXRP; RLUSD–wXRP pairs on KYC venues; any wrapper issued beneath a particular jurisdiction’s guidelines. |
| Operational / key-management danger | Custodians, bridge operators, and protocols all rely upon ops processes and key safety. Human error or compromised keys might be deadly. | Custody setups for the underlying XRP; multisigs or HSMs securing bridge and token contracts; relayer and oracle infrastructure that studies cross-chain state. |
| Narrative / purposeful drift | As soon as XRP is wrapped and paired with RLUSD or different stables, its position can shift from “funds asset” to “risky DeFi collateral,” altering who makes use of it and why. | wXRP–RLUSD pairs on Ethereum/Solana; DeFi protocols that deal with wrapped XRP primarily as yield collateral, not as a settlement rail. |
Testing for infrastructure versus wrapper theater
The enlargement might be evaluated by means of 4 questions that reveal whether or not the product improves market plumbing or provides artificial layers with out decreasing systemic danger.
First, who holds the XRP, and beneath what regime? Hex Belief and Coinbase place themselves as regulated custodians with segregated shopper belongings.
RLUSD is regulated by the New York Division of Monetary Providers, and Ripple simply bought a nationwide financial institution constitution. That regulatory scaffolding determines whether or not customers have authorized recourse if custody fails.
A wrapper that can’t clearly determine its custodian, audit path, and reserve attestation shouldn’t be infrastructure, it’s an unregulated promise.
Second, what number of dependencies sit between the consumer and native XRP? A Solana DeFi consumer holding wXRP is dependent upon XRP remaining on XRPL, Hex Belief sustaining reserves, LayerZero OFT messages propagating accurately, and Solana sensible contracts executing as designed.
Native XRPL settlement is dependent upon XRPL’s consensus. Wrapped XRP has 4 or 5.
Third, what financial position does XRP serve as soon as wrapped? RLUSD’s $1 billion circulation and positioning as a funds stablecoin create stress. A secure, regulated greenback token could also be higher fitted to institutional settlement than risky XRP.
If true, wrapped XRP ceases to perform as a transactional medium and turns into collateral sitting atop a stablecoin-based funds layer.
Fourth, is the danger compensated and clear? Bridges stay the business’s most well-liked assault floor, with billions in losses since 2022. If a wrapper provides marginal comfort however is dependent upon an opaque custodian or experimental bridge design, the trade-off is uneven.
Against this, if wXRP/RLUSD pairs develop deep liquidity on audited protocols with circuit breakers, the danger/return calculation turns into defensible.
Danger reallocation
XRP’s enlargement throughout Ethereum, Solana, Base, and the XRPL EVM sidechain shouldn’t be a decentralization narrative. It’s a liquidity-for-custody commerce.
The wrapped tokens enhance entry to deeper markets and richer protocol integrations. Nonetheless, they exchange the XRP Ledger’s trustless settlement with trusted custodians, experimental bridges, and fragmented redemption flows.
For establishments evaluating whether or not to deploy capital into wrapped XRP, the calculus shouldn’t be “does this develop XRP’s attain?” however “does the custodial and bridge infrastructure meet the identical reliability normal because the native ledger it wraps?”
The present structure works so long as nothing breaks. The query is what occurs when one thing does.