XRP is flooding Ethereum and Solana, but this invisible layer exposes your wallet to a $1.5 billion risk

Hex Trust 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 accessible throughout a number of ecosystems provides to Coinbase’s cbXRP on Base and Axelar’s eXRP on the XRPL EVM sidechain.

Within months, XRP will exist in at the very least 4 distinct wrapped codecs throughout a dozen networks, every with totally different custody preparations and bridge infrastructure.

Additionally, 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.

But the enlargement trades one risk 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 good contracts managing the artificial token.

The query is whether or not the liquidity good points compensate for the brand new layers of belief, operational complexity, and assault floor.

What really launched

Hex Trust issues wXRP tokens 1:1 with native XRP held in segregated institutional custody, with minting and redemption restricted to approved contributors by way of a KYC/AML-compliant circulation.

The token makes use of LayerZero’s Omnichain Fungible Token commonplace, synchronizing provide by way of message-passing contracts throughout a number of chains. Hex Trust 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 Trust 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 circulation.

Ripple’s XRPL EVM Sidechain, dwell on mainnet since June 2025, supplies a totally different on-ramp. Users lock XRP on the XRP Ledger and obtain eXRP on the EVM sidechain via Axelar’s bridge.

The sidechain makes use of eXRP as its fuel token, and Axelar’s interoperability layer connects it to 80 further 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 fast, as every product targets a totally different use case, but all exchange native XRPL settlement with a trusted middleman.

Liquidity good points are actual but conditional

RLUSD reached $1 billion in circulation inside a 12 months of launch, with most issued on Ethereum moderately than XRPL.

That offers XRP a giant, liquid stablecoin counterpart on chains the place buying and selling quantity already concentrates. Hex Trust’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 practical DEX, but its liquidity is skinny in contrast to Uniswap, Curve, or Raydium. A wrapped token on these platforms good points entry to higher 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 immediately.

But the liquidity enchancment assumes wrappers keep tight pegs, custodians course of redemptions reliably, and bridges don’t turn out to be assault vectors. Each assumption introduces new factors of failure that native XRPL doesn’t have.

Where risk migrates

The shift from native XRP to wrapped representations transfers risk from protocol-level consensus to custodial and bridge infrastructure.

Custodian and issuer risk comes first. Every wrapped XRP product requires somebody to maintain the underlying asset. For wXRP, that is Hex Trust. For cbXRP, Coinbase. For eXRP, Axelar’s validator community controls the bridge state and mint/burn logic.

XRP wrappers add one other layer of risk on high of the XRP Ledger’s consensus, as they’re centralized entities that promise to maintain 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 risk is the second layer. Hex Trust’s wXRP makes use of LayerZero’s OFT commonplace for cross-chain coordination, managing provide by way of off-chain message-passing and on-chain validation.

Axelar’s eXRP depends upon validators relaying state between XRPL and the EVM sidechain.

Bridges have been the one largest goal in DeFi exploits. Hacken’s 2025 Web3 Security Report confirmed that over $1.5 billion of the $3.1 billion stolen from crypto providers in this 12 months’s first half relates to bridges, accounting for over 50% of DeFi losses.

Vitalik Buterin’s argument in opposition to cross-chain architectures emphasizes that bridges don’t diversify risk but moderately focus it. A bug in a bridge contract can drain reserves throughout all related chains concurrently.

Redemption mechanics kind the third risk area. Hex Trust’s wXRP restricts minting and redemption to approved contributors, not finish customers. If these retailers turn out to be bancrupt or halt operations, liquidity suppliers holding wXRP haven’t any direct path to redeem for native XRP.

The token can commerce freely on secondary markets, but its convertibility depends upon intermediaries remaining practical.

XRP already displays fragmentation: Wrapped.com’s Ethereum wXRP, Hex Trust’s multi-chain wXRP, Coinbase’s cbXRP on Base, and Axelar’s eXRP all declare 1:1 backing but 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.

Risk sort	What it is (plain English)	Where it exhibits up in XRP’s multi-chain setup
Custody / issuer risk	Someone has to maintain the true XRP and promise 1:1 backing for the wrapped token. If they fail, the wrapper will be under-collateralized or unrecoverable.	Hex Trust for wXRP; Coinbase for cbXRP; any custodian behind older ERC-20 wXRP; entities holding locked XRP for bridges or sidechains.
Bridge / messaging risk	Cross-chain worth strikes by way of bridge contracts and message relayers. Bugs or assaults can mint additional 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.
Smart-contract / protocol risk	Wrapped tokens and bridges depend on good 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 record these belongings as collateral or LP tokens.
Redemption and peg risk	The promise that 1 wrapped token all the time redeems 1 native XRP depends upon clean mint/burn flows and cooperative issuers/retailers. Stress occasions can break that.	Authorized-merchant mannequin for wXRP; institution-only redemption flows at Coinbase; bridge withdrawal queues when transferring again to XRPL.
Liquidity fragmentation	Multiple totally different “XRP” tickers throughout chains break up order books and depth. Some wrappers could also be deep and tight, others skinny and fragile.	Native XRP on XRPL; Hex Trust wXRP; legacy ERC-20 wXRP; cbXRP on Base; eXRP on XRPL EVM; any future competing wrappers.
Regulatory / compliance risk	Wrapped belongings and custodial bridges sit squarely in regulated territory. Enforcement or licensing adjustments can pressure abrupt pauses or wind-downs.	Hex Trust’s regulated custody; Coinbase’s cbXRP; RLUSD–wXRP pairs on KYC venues; any wrapper issued underneath a particular jurisdiction’s guidelines.
Operational / key-management risk	Custodians, bridge operators, and protocols all rely upon ops processes and key safety. Human error or compromised keys will be deadly.	Custody setups for the underlying XRP; multisigs or HSMs securing bridge and token contracts; relayer and oracle infrastructure that experiences cross-chain state.
Narrative / practical drift	Once XRP is wrapped and paired with RLUSD or different stables, its function 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 will 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 risk.

First, who holds the XRP, and underneath what regime? Hex Trust and Coinbase place themselves as regulated custodians with segregated shopper belongings.

RLUSD is regulated by the New York Department of Financial Services, and Ripple simply obtained 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 establish its custodian, audit path, and reserve attestation is not infrastructure, it is an unregulated promise.

Second, what number of dependencies sit between the consumer and native XRP? A Solana DeFi consumer holding wXRP depends upon XRP remaining on XRPL, Hex Trust sustaining reserves, LayerZero OFT messages propagating appropriately, and Solana good contracts executing as designed.

Native XRPL settlement depends upon XRPL’s consensus. Wrapped XRP has 4 or 5.

Third, what financial function does XRP serve as soon as wrapped? RLUSD’s $1 billion circulation and positioning as a funds stablecoin create rigidity. A secure, regulated greenback token could also be higher fitted to institutional settlement than risky XRP.

If true, wrapped XRP ceases to operate as a transactional medium and turns into collateral sitting atop a stablecoin-based funds layer.

Fourth, is the risk compensated and clear? Bridges stay the business’s most popular assault floor, with billions in losses since 2022. If a wrapper gives marginal comfort but depends upon an opaque custodian or experimental bridge design, the trade-off is uneven.

By distinction, if wXRP/RLUSD pairs develop deep liquidity on audited protocols with circuit breakers, the risk/return calculation turns into defensible.

Risk reallocation

XRP’s enlargement throughout Ethereum, Solana, Base, and the XRPL EVM sidechain is not a decentralization narrative. It is a liquidity-for-custody commerce.

The wrapped tokens enhance entry to deeper markets and richer protocol integrations. However, 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 is not “does this broaden XRP’s attain?” but “does the custodial and bridge infrastructure meet the identical reliability commonplace because the native ledger it wraps?”

The present structure works so long as nothing breaks. The query is what occurs when one thing does.

The publish XRP is flooding Ethereum and Solana, but this invisible layer exposes your wallet to a $1.5 billion risk appeared first on CryptoSlate.