The XRP Ledger has emerged as a leading venue for the issuance of tokenized U.S. Treasuries, yet on chain data suggests that most trading activity for these assets continues to take place on Ethereum and its layer two networks. The divergence between supply concentration and transaction volume is shaping debate over which blockchain infrastructures are best positioned to support institutional real world asset markets.
Blockchain analytics platform RWA.xyz indicates that the XRP Ledger accounts for roughly 63 percent of the total tokenized U.S. Treasury bill supply currently outstanding. This places XRPL ahead of competing networks in terms of issuance share. However, transfer volumes and secondary market activity remain significantly more active on Ethereum based ecosystems, where liquidity pools, institutional market makers and collateral integrations are more mature.
The imbalance highlights a broader structural pattern in tokenization. Some networks are increasingly used as issuance and custody layers, while others function as primary trading rails with deeper liquidity and composability. For institutional participants evaluating settlement efficiency and collateral mobility, the distinction is becoming more important than headline supply figures.
Recent announcements have strengthened XRPL’s position in issuance. Aviva Investors disclosed a partnership with Ripple aimed at exploring tokenization of traditional fund structures on the ledger. The initiative has been described as a multi year effort focused on integrating blockchain infrastructure into established asset management workflows. While no live tokenized fund product has yet been formally launched under the arrangement, the move signals institutional willingness to test XRPL for regulated asset structures beyond pilot scale.
OpenEden’s TBILL vault token provides another example. The token represents exposure to short dated U.S. Treasuries through a one to one backed structure. According to available data, a majority of TBILL supply resides on XRPL. Nevertheless, a larger share of active transfers and utilization has been observed on Ethereum and select layer two networks, suggesting that investors may be moving tokens to environments where liquidity and DeFi integrations are more established.
XRPL proponents emphasize built in compliance features and near instant settlement as advantages for regulated distribution channels. In contrast, Ethereum’s ecosystem continues to offer broader liquidity access and integration with lending and collateral platforms. For institutions designing tokenized treasury strategies, network choice increasingly depends on how easily assets can move between custody, trading and collateral management systems.
Stablecoin activity on XRPL has also grown alongside treasury token issuance, supporting a potential model in which settlement and yield bearing instruments coexist on a single ledger. Even so, Ethereum and its scaling networks maintain larger pools of capital and more developed on chain market infrastructure for tokenized assets.
Over the coming quarters, analysts will monitor whether transfer volumes on XRPL begin to align more closely with its dominant supply share and whether additional regulated issuers launch products directly on the ledger.
