Solana Foundation executive Vibhu Norby has publicly questioned the ongoing enthusiasm surrounding XRP, urging its supporters to rely on concrete data instead of speculative optimism. In a string of pointed posts on X (formerly Twitter), Norby underscored a growing disconnect between XRP’s community narrative and verifiable blockchain activity metrics — particularly when compared to Solana’s own performance.
While emphasizing that he genuinely wants to see Ripple and XRP thrive, Norby expressed concern over what he perceives as a lack of data-driven discussion within the XRP community. “The facts are out there, but the community seems unwilling to engage with them,” he wrote, highlighting his background as an engineer and a “truth seeker” in search of measurable outcomes over aspirational slogans.
Norby’s primary argument centers around the XRP Ledger’s stagnation in user activity. Referencing data from XRPScan, he pointed out that daily active accounts on the XRP Ledger have hovered around 25,000 for the past three years, indicating no substantial growth. In contrast, Solana has been averaging over 2.5 million daily active accounts in 2024 — a staggering 100-fold advantage, according to Norby.
The disparity in user engagement is just one part of the story. Norby also contrasted transaction volumes between the two blockchains. While XRP processes about 1 to 1.5 million transactions per day, Solana consistently handles around 100 million transactions daily. Though fluctuations in transaction counts can occur across different data sources and market conditions, independent analytics platforms largely confirm the trend: Solana’s transaction throughput far surpasses that of XRP.
On a technical level, Norby cited real-time performance data to make his point. According to XRPScan, the XRP Ledger currently manages approximately 17 transactions per second (TPS), while Solana handles more than 1,000 TPS for non-voting transactions on its mainnet — with even higher peaks during periods of intense activity. This edge in raw throughput, Norby argues, is a reflection of superior technological infrastructure.
Norby also brought attention to the value being transferred across networks. While XRP’s current monthly transfer volume is around $50–60 billion, Solana’s stablecoin transfer volume in October alone approached $2 trillion — and that’s just for stablecoins, a fraction of the assets moving across the Solana network.
Anticipating criticism that Solana’s figures might be inflated by bots or artificial activity, Norby preemptively addressed this concern. He emphasized that the stablecoin data he cited excludes wash trading activity, and noted that both Solana and XRP have low transaction fees — a factor that should theoretically make both equally susceptible to bot activity. Despite this, Solana’s transactional dominance remains “a huge measurable margin,” even after filtering out obvious noise.
The conversation soon expanded into broader questions of relevance and use case. One XRP supporter argued that XRP isn’t designed for retail usage or meme coin speculation, but rather for institutional finance, which is slower to adopt new technologies. Norby countered this by stating that financial institutions are not slow – they are simply choosing stablecoins over XRP. “They haven’t been slow to adopt – lol. They’re just adopting stablecoins, not XRP,” he quipped.
When asked what’s driving Solana’s apparent outperformance, Norby’s answer was succinct: “Technology.” He dismissed counterarguments that focus on future roadmaps or hypothetical regulatory breakthroughs, asserting that current product-market fit and user adoption are more meaningful indicators of success.
Norby also questioned the frequently cited link between RippleNet’s business activity and XRP’s blockchain usage. He drew a clear distinction between Ripple’s private enterprise solutions and the XRP Ledger’s public chain, suggesting that RippleNet’s growth doesn’t necessarily translate into on-chain traction for XRP. “You can’t really have a view on RippleNet — it’s a private business. So how can it meaningfully impact XRP?” he asked. He further argued that off-chain integrations are becoming increasingly commoditized, making relationships with banks or governments less of a competitive edge in the blockchain space.
In broader terms, Norby’s critique touches on an important dynamic within the crypto ecosystem: the gap between narrative and metrics. In the case of XRP, long-standing community optimism often hinges on potential institutional adoption, legal victories, or future financial utility. However, Norby contends that such narratives frequently ignore the reality of on-chain data, which paints a more muted picture of XRP’s current utility and adoption.
This debate also underscores a deeper philosophical divide in how different blockchain communities measure success. For some, it’s about long-term vision and strategic partnerships. For others, it’s the hard numbers — transactions, users, volume — that signal real-world traction. Norby clearly aligns with the latter.
Another layer to consider is the evolving role of stablecoins in the broader crypto economy. The fact that Solana is seeing trillions of dollars in stablecoin volume suggests a growing preference among users and institutions for dollar-pegged assets over native tokens like XRP. This trend challenges XRP’s original value proposition as a bridge currency for cross-border payments, especially when faster and more versatile chains like Solana are offering similar or superior functionality with greater adoption.
Moreover, Solana’s ability to support a wide range of decentralized applications — from DeFi to NFTs to gaming — has helped it cultivate a vibrant ecosystem that attracts both developers and users. This multidimensional growth contrasts with XRP’s more singular focus on payments and finance, which may be limiting its scope in a rapidly diversifying blockchain landscape.
Norby’s criticism also raises important questions about transparency and data access. While XRP proponents often cite Ripple’s partnerships and legal victories as signs of momentum, public blockchain activity suggests a disconnect between corporate developments and decentralized network usage. This divergence may become increasingly problematic as investors and users look for evidence-based performance indicators.
In sum, Norby’s remarks serve as both a critique of XRP’s current standing and a broader call for accountability within the crypto space. His message is clear: narratives must be grounded in data. For XRP to maintain relevance in a competitive environment dominated by high-performance blockchains like Solana, it may need to focus more on measurable growth and less on speculative potential.