Former Ripple director Matt Hamilton believes comparing XRP to Chainlink misses the point, as the protocols housing both assets are inherently different.
His remarks came as discussions about why XRP commands such a large lead in market value recently resurfaced.
Chainlink Spotlights Swift’s Blockchain Ambitions
For context, the discussions started after Swift announced yesterday that it would add a blockchain-based shared ledger to its infrastructure. According to Swift, it has already brought in more than 30 financial institutions to help design the system.
SWIFT partners with 30+ institutions to develop a blockchain ledger for real-time, 24/7 cross-border payments using tokenized value. pic.twitter.com/fO90DAzNSH
— TheCryptoBasic (@thecryptobasic) September 29, 2025
Notably, its first use case will focus on 24/7 international payments, with Consensys developing the initial prototype. Swift said it will move quickly to deliver the first phase before expanding into future stages.
Interestingly, Chainlink welcomed the news, using the opportunity to point out its collaboration with Swift. The oracle provider said the move confirmed the real-world value of blockchains and oracle networks in upgrading financial infrastructure.
“Why is XRP Much Larger Than Chainlink?”
Responding to this, former Coinroutes Chairman Dave Weisberger challenged the current market gap between XRP and Chainlink.
Can someone from the XRP army ( @xrpmickle ) explain how XRP is more than TEN times LINK's value, when LINK has a REAL partnership with SWIFT, AND a clear path to revenue to be shared with Token holders… https://t.co/V1xnn3BgYN
— Dave W (@daveweisberger1) September 29, 2025
Specifically, he argued that Chainlink’s partnership with Swift and its plan to share revenue with token holders give LINK a strong case for a higher valuation. Weisberger questioned why XRP’s market cap stood at more than ten times LINK’s, despite those factors.
For context, XRP ranks as the fourth-largest crypto asset with a market cap of about $173.35 billion. Meanwhile, Chainlink sits in twelfth place with $14.6 billion. This shows XRP’s valuation is nearly 12 times higher. For LINK to surpass XRP, its price would need to jump more than 1,000% to reach $255.
Ex Ripple Director Responds
Replying to Weisberger’s question, Hamilton suggested that the comparison is amiss. According to Hamilton, XRP is the native asset of the XRP Ledger, which serves as a full blockchain network. This justifies its larger valuation.
Trying to compare their value is sort of meaningless. Link is a protocol, the XRP Ledger is an actual network. XRP is the native asset of that entire network. Link is just the token used within the link protocol.
— Matt Hamilton (@HammerToe) September 29, 2025
Meanwhile, he explained that, by contrast, Chainlink is only a protocol where its token plays a limited role. For this reason, comparing the two valuations directly doesn’t make sense.
One XRP supporter tried to simplify Hamilton’s point by saying LINK functions like a platform such as LinkedIn, while XRP acts more like a currency with its own operating system.
Weisberger countered that even LinkedIn generates profits and that shareholders benefit from those earnings. He said Chainlink, although less straightforward, has set up a way to share revenues with its token holders.
On the other hand, he said XRP derives value from its scarcity and small transaction burn. He added that XRP’s strength lies in its low cost of use, and if its price climbs too high, that affordability could weaken.
WrathofKahneman, a well-known figure in the XRP community, disagreed. He said XRP’s burn rate is so small it barely matters.
WOK argued that a higher XRP price actually makes it more efficient as a settlement asset. He also pointed out that transaction fees remain adjustable and minimal, which keeps the network affordable even if the token’s value rises.
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.
