Chainlink Maxi Shares Why LINK Is A Better Institutional Bet Than XRP

bitcoinistPublicado em 2026-03-21Última atualização em 2026-03-21

Resumo

In a controversial post, Chainlink ambassador Zach Rynes sparked debate by arguing that LINK is a superior institutional investment compared to XRP. He criticized Ripple for prioritizing equity shareholders over XRP token holders, claiming the company uses XRP sale proceeds to fund corporate acquisitions and stock buybacks that don’t benefit token investors. Rynes dismissed the XRP Ledger as an "obsolete ghost chain" with minimal market share in real-world assets and stablecoins, while highlighting Chainlink’s dominance in DeFi, institutional partnerships, and structurally aligned incentives—noting that even Chainlink employees are rewarded in LINK, not equity. Ripple’s former CTO, David Schwartz, countered that Ripple’s consistent XRP sales created lower entry prices for buyers, a claim Rynes rejected as "elite-tier gaslighting."

Chainlink Maxi Zach Rynes has ignited fierce debate across the crypto community after sharing a pointed critique of XRP and Ripple, drawing significant backlash from supporters and former executives. The ambassador has framed Chainlink’s native token LINK as the superior institutional play, labeling XRP a ghost chain. He also criticizes Ripple’s recent share buybacks, suggesting that the company prioritizes shareholders over XRP investors.

Chainlink Maxi Takes Aim At XRP And Ripple

In a recent post on X, Rynes argued that XRP holders are effectively funding a company that has openly stated it will prioritize equity shareholders over token investors. He explained that when a company sells both tokens and equity to investors, it creates two competing stakeholder groups whose economic interests diverge. As a result, when excess revenue is present, equity investors hold superior, legally enforceable rights, leaving XRP holders at a disadvantage.

Rynes argued that Ripple sells XRP and uses proceeds to acquire companies and fund stock buybacks that benefit only shareholders. He also noted that, even under oath in court filings, the crypto company admitted that XRP’s bridge currency use case is demand-neutral and does not affect price.

Furthermore, he dismissed the XRP Ledger (XRPL) as an “obsolete ghost chain” sitting outside the top 40 chains by usage, holding less than 1% market share in real-world assets and less than 0.01% in stablecoins. The Chainlink maxi further noted that Ripple itself issued 90% of the RLUSD stablecoin on Ethereum and has since expanded to additional chains outside the XRP Ledger, including BNY Mellon’s private EVM chain.

Supporting Chainlink, Rynes stated that LINK presented a structurally cleaner investment case compared to XRP because it has no equity investors competing for value. He explained that every layer of network growth focuses primarily on the native token and that even Chainlink Lab employees receive long-term incentive rewards in LINK rather than equity.

He pointed to Chainlink’s more than 70% market share in DeFi with $60 billion in secured TVL, alongside institutional partnerships with SWIFT, the DTCC, Euroclear, JPMorgan, and others as proof of tangible adoption. The Chainlink maxi finally concluded that the LINK token represents the best index bet on institutional blockchain adoption. At the same time, XRP functions as a “bank-themed meme coin” that Ripple sells to retail to fund corporate acquisitions.

Ripple’s Former CTO Fires Back

The debate escalated when Ripple’s former Chief Technology Officer (CTO), David Schwartz, entered the conversation. Schwartz argued that Ripple’s consistent and predictable XRP selling over five years created sustained downward price pressure, which he claimed actually benefited buyers who accumulated tokens at lower prices than they would have otherwise paid.

Rynes sharply rejected the rebuttal, calling it “elite-tier gaslighting,” and questioning whether Schwartz argued that suppressing XRP’s price through Ripple’s own selling activity was a benefit to holders. Schwartz doubled down, criticizing the comment and insisting that a constant factor already priced into the market affects buyers and sellers equally. He said that anyone who purchased XRP benefited from low entry prices just as much as they might be affected on the way out.

LINK trading at $9 on the 1D chart | Source: LINKUSDT on Tradingview.com

Criptomoedas em alta

Perguntas relacionadas

QAccording to Zach Rynes, why is LINK a better institutional investment than XRP?

AZach Rynes argues that LINK is a structurally cleaner investment because it has no equity investors competing for value, all network growth focuses on the native token, and it has dominant market share in DeFi with major institutional partnerships, unlike XRP which he claims is a 'ghost chain' and a 'bank-themed meme coin' sold to fund corporate acquisitions.

QWhat specific criticism did Rynes level against Ripple's financial practices?

ARynes criticized Ripple for selling XRP and using the proceeds to acquire companies and fund stock buybacks that only benefit equity shareholders, while openly prioritizing them over XRP token investors.

QHow did Ripple's former CTO, David Schwartz, respond to the claims about Ripple's XRP sales?

ADavid Schwartz argued that Ripple's consistent and predictable XRP selling over five years created sustained downward price pressure, which he claimed actually benefited buyers by allowing them to accumulate tokens at lower prices than they would have otherwise paid.

QWhat did Rynes cite as evidence of Chainlink's tangible adoption and institutional use?

ARynes cited Chainlink's more than 70% market share in DeFi with $60 billion in secured TVL, alongside institutional partnerships with major entities like SWIFT, the DTCC, Euroclear, and JPMorgan.

QWhat did Rynes claim about the XRP Ledger's (XRPL) usage and market position?

ARynes dismissed the XRP Ledger as an 'obsolete ghost chain' sitting outside the top 40 chains by usage, holding less than 1% market share in real-world assets and less than 0.01% in stablecoins.

Leituras Relacionadas

Agent Race Ends, Super Workbench Takes Over

The era of fragmented AI agents is ending. Over the past month, China's tech giants—Tencent, Alibaba, and ByteDance—have simultaneously shifted strategy: instead of launching new, standalone AI agents, they are consolidating their various agent projects into unified "super workbenches." Tencent integrated its QClaw teams into WorkBuddy, a strategic product hailed as a potential third flagship after QQ and WeChat. Alibaba is merging its QoderWork, Wukong, and MuleRun agents into a new "Qianwen Office" platform under DingTalk's leadership. ByteDance rebranded its TRAE SOLO coding agent to TRAE Work, signaling a broader focus on workflow collaboration. This convergence marks a pivotal industry consensus. The initial exploration phase, where companies rapidly built numerous overlapping agents for different scenarios, proved costly and inefficient. With open-source tools eroding technical barriers, competition has shifted from agent creation to resource consolidation and cost control. Historically, platform wars are won not by creating more products, but by simplifying them—as seen with browsers unifying web access and super-apps consolidating services. Now, the "super workbench" aims to become the unified AI entry point for work. This reflects a deeper market realization: the primary audience for AI is no longer just programmers (a market in the tens of millions) but all knowledge workers (a market of billions). The real opportunity lies in augmenting everyday tasks—managing emails, documents, data, and meetings—across the entire workday. The core battleground is becoming control over the primary AI entry point that employees use daily. Tencent's WorkBuddy leverages WeChat and Tencent Docs; Alibaba's Qianwen Office taps into DingTalk's organizational data; ByteDance's TRAE Work integrates with Feishu's workflows. Whoever owns this "super workbench" gains strategic control over orchestrating enterprise data and APIs. This shift is redefining enterprise software. Traditional SaaS applications, valued for their user interfaces, will recede into the background. Their core functionalities will be exposed as standardized "Skills" or APIs for the super workbench's agents to invoke. Software value will shift from selling user seats to charging based on API calls and outcomes delivered. The evolution of agents is moving through clear stages: first as novel standalone products, then as consolidated primary work entry points, and finally as pervasive, invisible capabilities embedded into the digital fabric. The recent moves by major tech firms signal the transition from the first stage into the second, accelerating toward the third. In the end, the most successful agent technology may become invisible—like electricity or the HTTP protocol—a fundamental, unnamed infrastructure powering work itself.

marsbitHá 3m

Agent Race Ends, Super Workbench Takes Over

marsbitHá 3m

Michael Saylor: 110 Reasons to Oppose BIP-110

Michael Saylor presents 110 arguments against Bitcoin Improvement Proposal (BIP) 110, a soft fork aimed at restricting certain non-monetary data storage uses (like inscriptions) on the Bitcoin blockchain. He acknowledges the proponents' valid concerns—such as node costs, fee pressure, and preserving Bitcoin's monetary focus—but fundamentally disagrees with the proposed solution. Saylor argues that BIP 110 represents a dangerous precedent of using consensus rules to enforce value judgments on transaction validity, moving away from Bitcoin's core principles of neutrality and permissionless innovation. His key objections are organized into eleven categories: 1) It violates neutrality and hard consensus by banning currently valid transactions. 2) It fails to meet the high burden of proof required for a consensus change, lacking concrete data on the alleged crisis. 3) Its seven bundled technical restrictions are overly broad, targeting generic script functionalities and blocking future upgrade paths. 4) It sacrifices compatibility and future optionality by closing off designed upgrade hooks. 5) Its temporary rules add significant complexity (grandfathering, expiry states) without sufficient justification. 6) The economic and security impacts, particularly on miner revenue and fee markets, are uncertain and unmodeled. 7) Superior, market-based tools (fee markets, relay/mining policies) already exist to manage blockchain load. 8) It stifles innovation by creating a chilling effect for developers. 9) Its modified activation mechanism (55% threshold, forced signaling) is aggressive and risks network splits. 10) The precedent it sets—using consensus to suppress disliked but legal uses—is more dangerous than the problem it aims to solve. 11) A better path exists: improving measurements, refining resource-based policies, and allowing market forces to work. Saylor concludes that Bitcoin's strength lies in its neutral rules, open markets, and hard consensus. Changing these foundational elements to target specific use cases is an unnecessary and risky "iatrogenic" intervention. He advocates for guarding Bitcoin's neutrality rather than acting as its redeemer.

marsbitHá 18m

Michael Saylor: 110 Reasons to Oppose BIP-110

marsbitHá 18m

Trading

Spot

Artigos em Destaque

Como comprar LINK

Bem-vindo à HTX.com!Tornámos a compra de ChainLink (LINK) simples e conveniente.Segue o nosso guia passo a passo para iniciar a tua jornada no mundo das criptos.Passo 1: cria a tua conta HTXUtiliza o teu e-mail ou número de telefone para te inscreveres numa conta gratuita na HTX.Desfruta de um processo de inscrição sem complicações e desbloqueia todas as funcionalidades.Obter a minha contaPasso 2: vai para Comprar Cripto e escolhe o teu método de pagamentoCartão de crédito/débito: usa o teu visa ou mastercard para comprar ChainLink (LINK) instantaneamente.Saldo: usa os fundos da tua conta HTX para transacionar sem problemas.Terceiros: adicionamos métodos de pagamento populares, como Google Pay e Apple Pay, para aumentar a conveniência.P2P: transaciona diretamente com outros utilizadores na HTX.Mercado de balcão (OTC): oferecemos serviços personalizados e taxas de câmbio competitivas para os traders.Passo 3: armazena teu ChainLink (LINK)Depois de comprar o teu ChainLink (LINK), armazena-o na tua conta HTX.Alternativamente, podes enviá-lo para outro lugar através de transferência blockchain ou usá-lo para transacionar outras criptomoedas.Passo 4: transaciona ChainLink (LINK)Transaciona facilmente ChainLink (LINK) no mercado à vista da HTX.Acede simplesmente à tua conta, seleciona o teu par de trading, executa as tuas transações e monitoriza em tempo real.Oferecemos uma experiência de fácil utilização tanto para principiantes como para traders experientes.

975 Visualizações TotaisPublicado em {updateTime}Atualizado em 2026.06.02

Como comprar LINK

Discussões

Bem-vindo à Comunidade HTX. Aqui, pode manter-se informado sobre os mais recentes desenvolvimentos da plataforma e obter acesso a análises profissionais de mercado. As opiniões dos utilizadores sobre o preço de LINK (LINK) são apresentadas abaixo.

活动图片