Stellar and Ripple: siblings, not twins

XLM vs XRP is one of crypto’s oldest rivalries, and for good reason: both are fast, cheap payment networks, and both trace back to the same person, Jed McCaleb. The short version of Stellar vs Ripple is this. Stellar (XLM) runs on the Stellar Consensus Protocol and is stewarded by the non-profit Stellar Development Foundation (SDF). The XRP Ledger (XRP) runs on its own consensus protocol and is closely associated with Ripple Labs, a for-profit company. Fees and speed are remarkably similar; governance, supply design and programmability are where they part ways.

Neither one “wins”. This Stellar Lumens vs XRP comparison sets out the facts side by side, explains where the differences actually matter, and ends with a guide to which network fits which use case. If you are new to Stellar, start with our explainer on what Stellar Lumens is.

Stellar vs Ripple: a shared history

The XRP Ledger was created in 2011–2012, and its founders gave 80 billion XRP to the company now known as Ripple Labs in 2012, according to xrpl.org. Jed McCaleb, already known as the founder of Mt. Gox, co-founded Ripple. He went on to launch Stellar with former lawyer Joyce Kim on 31 July 2014, backed by seed funding from Stripe.

That shared DNA is why the two are so often confused. At launch, Stellar did use a consensus algorithm derived from Ripple’s, but it was not a fork of the Ripple network. In 2015, Stanford professor David Mazières published the Stellar Consensus Protocol, and the upgraded network went live in November 2015. Since then the two codebases, communities and organisations have developed independently. A small modern echo of the link: LOBSTR, one of the most popular Stellar wallets, now supports the XRP Ledger as well.

XLM vs XRP comparison table

Supply and reserve figures are at our latest check; see each section below for sources. We left XRPL’s smart-contract status out of the table because we could not confirm its current mainnet state from a primary source.

Consensus: federated quorums vs Unique Node Lists

Both networks rely on validators agreeing on each ledger, but they choose whom to trust differently.

On Stellar, each validator picks its own quorum set: the nodes it trusts and how many of them must agree. Overlapping sets across the network produce agreement, a design called federated Byzantine agreement. SDF says SCP prioritises safety over liveness: if validators cannot agree, the network pauses rather than splitting into two histories. Validators earn nothing from the protocol; they run nodes because their businesses depend on the network.

On the XRP Ledger, each server keeps a Unique Node List (UNL) of validators it trusts. Per the XRPL consensus documentation, the network keeps making progress as long as fewer than 20% of trusted validators are faulty, and stops making progress if more than 20% but less than 80% are faulty. Once a ledger version is validated, it is final.

In everyday use, the practical difference is small: both give fast, final settlement. The design difference is larger. Stellar’s model is built around each participant defining its own quorum slices, while XRPL’s model centres on each server’s list of trusted validators.

Supply and tokenomics: a burn versus an escrow

Stellar created 100 billion XLM at launch. A 1% annual inflation then added about 5.44 billion until validators switched it off in October 2019. Weeks later, SDF burned about 55.4 billion XLM by sending it to an account that can never spend. The result, at our latest check of SDF’s dashboard, is about 50 billion XLM in total supply and about 35.25 billion circulating. Inflation is off, but there is no hard-coded maximum. SDF still holds roughly 29% of total supply in mandate accounts and sells from its development account to fund operations, as detailed in our XLM supply and tokenomics guide.

XRP took a different path. All 100 billion XRP were created with the ledger. In 2017, Ripple placed 55 billion XRP in escrow, per xrpl.org. At our latest check, CoinGecko showed about 99.99 billion XRP in total supply, a maximum of 100 billion and about 63.35 billion circulating. Because XRP fees are destroyed rather than collected, total supply edges down slowly over time.

The headline numbers mean less than they appear to. Neither token’s price can be read from its supply alone, and comparing “per-coin” prices across tokens with different supplies is meaningless. Market cap and liquidity matter more; for XLM, check the live XLM price page.

Fees, reserves and finality

On fees, the two are almost mirror images. Stellar’s minimum is 100 stroops, or 0.00001 XLM, per operation. The XRP Ledger’s minimum for a standard transaction is 10 drops, or 0.00001 XRP, according to its transaction cost documentation. Both rise during congestion. The difference is where the money goes: Stellar sends fees to a locked pool that nobody can spend, while XRPL destroys them.

Both networks also require a minimum balance to stop spam accounts. Stellar requires 1 XLM plus 0.5 XLM per subentry such as a trustline or offer. XRPL requires a base reserve of 1 XRP plus 0.2 XRP per owned object, per its reserves page.

Speed is a near tie. Stellar ledgers close in about 5 seconds, and XRPL ledger versions “usually close about every 3 to 5 seconds”, per xrpl.org. In both cases there is no waiting for extra confirmations. For a deeper look at Stellar’s fee mechanics, memos and failed transactions, read our guide to XLM fees and transfer speed.

Pan-chan says

On fees and speed, these two are basically twins. Choose based on what you want to build or hold, not on a second here or a fraction of a cent there.

Smart contracts, stablecoins and tokenized assets

Stellar’s biggest change in recent years is Soroban, its smart-contract platform. It went live on mainnet in phases between 20 February and 19 March 2024; contracts are written in Rust and compiled to WebAssembly. Soroban now powers lending, AMMs and wallets, and our Soroban smart contracts page explains how it works.

Stellar has also become a home for regulated tokenized assets. Franklin Templeton has run its tokenized US government money fund on Stellar since 2021, and rwa.xyz showed about $3.9 billion in distributed real-world assets on Stellar at our latest check, much of it tokenized money market funds. USDC is the largest stablecoin on the network, alongside PayPal’s PYUSD and MoneyGram’s MGUSD. See our guides to tokenized real-world assets and stablecoins on Stellar for the details.

We are not comparing XRPL’s smart-contract or tokenization features here, because we could not verify their current mainnet status from primary sources at our latest check. If programmability is your deciding factor, compare Soroban’s documentation against xrpl.org’s current docs before committing.

Company vs foundation: who stands behind each network

This is the clearest structural difference. SDF describes itself as a non-profit whose mission is “creating equitable access to the global financial system”. It was set up in 2014 with authority over the XLM supply to grow the network, and it is led by CEO Denelle Dixon.

Ripple Labs is a for-profit company. It received 80 billion XRP from the ledger’s founders in 2012 and placed 55 billion XRP in escrow in 2017. The XRP Ledger is a public network with its own validators, but Ripple’s business is closely tied to XRP’s story in a way that has no direct equivalent on Stellar.

Neither model is automatically better. A company can move quickly and sell products directly to banks; a foundation can position itself as a neutral steward of open infrastructure. Both structures concentrate influence, however: SDF through its large XLM holdings, Ripple through its XRP holdings and escrow.

Regulatory history: Ripple’s SEC case vs Stellar

Here the stories diverge sharply. On 22 December 2020, the SEC sued Ripple Labs and two executives, alleging they raised over $1.3 billion through an unregistered securities offering involving XRP. The court entered a final judgment in August 2024 that included a civil penalty of $125,035,150 and an injunction relating to securities registration. In August 2025 the SEC and Ripple dismissed their cross-appeals, and the SEC’s litigation release states that the final judgment remains in effect.

We found no SEC enforcement action against SDF and no court ruling on XLM’s status. XLM was not named in the SEC’s 2023 complaints against Coinbase or Binance. Most recently, the SEC and CFTC interpretive release of 17 March 2026 (Release 33-11412) lists both XLM and XRP among its examples of digital commodities. That release is guidance, not a statute, and the SEC said it may revise it. For the wider picture, including rules in Asia, see our page on XLM regulation and safety.

XLM and XRP in Asia

Both tokens have deep roots with Asian traders. In Japan, the industry body JVCEA’s September 2026 data ranked XRP third and XLM sixth by domestic spot trading volume, and Japanese exchanges held more XLM for customers than a year earlier; our Japan guide has the details. In South Korea, the won was the largest fiat currency for XLM trading on CoinGecko-tracked markets at our latest check, led by Upbit; see our South Korea guide.

Stellar’s institutional footprint in Asia is still early but concrete. Franklin Templeton’s sgBENJI, a retail tokenized fund authorised in Singapore, runs on Stellar. SDF invested in Singapore’s Marketnode in October 2026, and AEON Pay announced acceptance of XLM and Stellar USDC in Southeast Asia in 2025. SDF has said it plans anchor networks in Indonesia, the Philippines and Vietnam, but these are plans rather than live services.

Which is better, XRP or Stellar Lumens? Match the network to the job

There is no universal winner, but there are clearer fits:

• Stablecoin payments and cash-out: Stellar’s anchors, USDC and MoneyGram’s network are built for moving dollars across borders; see our guide to cross-border payments.
• Tokenized funds and RWAs: Stellar hosts several tokenized money market funds, including Franklin Templeton’s and Spiko’s.
• Building smart contracts: Soroban offers Rust and WebAssembly with resource-based fees and a mature payments layer underneath.
• Exposure to Ripple’s business: XRP is the more direct link to Ripple’s products and strategy.
• Price exposure: both are volatile assets with different supply dynamics and steward risks; never size a position on fees or speed alone.

Ryu says

I’d rather own something I understand than pick a side in a fan war. Read both docs, then decide.

Stellar vs Ethereum, Solana and Algorand

Stellar vs Ethereum. Ethereum is a general-purpose smart-contract platform. Its proof-of-stake design uses 12-second slots and 32-slot epochs, so finality takes about two epochs, roughly 12.8 minutes based on ethereum.org’s figures, and fees vary with demand. Stellar finalises in about 5 seconds with a tiny fixed minimum, but its DeFi ecosystem is far smaller, about $226M of TVL on DefiLlama at our latest check.

Stellar vs Solana. Solana charges a base fee of 5,000 lamports (0.000005 SOL) per signature, half of which is burned, plus optional priority fees that go entirely to validators, per Solana’s fee documentation. Both chains are cheap to use; Solana is a general-purpose smart-contract chain, while Stellar’s protocol is built around payments and asset issuance, with Soroban added on top.

Stellar vs Algorand. Algorand’s minimum fee is 0.001 ALGO when the network is not congested, per its developer docs, and Algorand describes its finality as instant. Nominal fee amounts across different tokens say little on their own, though; what you pay in your own currency depends on each token’s price, and the bigger differences lie in consensus design, ecosystems and institutional users.

Keep exploring

📘 What is XLMStellar and XLM explained, from history to fees.Read guide 🌏 PaymentsHow Stellar remittances and payouts really workRead guide ⚡ Fees & speedFees, finality and a step-by-step send guide.Read guide 📈 XLM priceLive chart, market cap and converter.Read guide