Stellar excels at multi-asset interoperability and low-cost microtransactions because of its built-in decentralized exchange (DEX) and Stellar Asset Protocol. For example, its network fee is a fixed 0.00001 XLM (~$0.000001), enabling cost-effective settlement for diverse tokenized assets like stablecoins (USDC) and CBDC prototypes. Its consensus protocol (SCP) is designed for open participation, making it a strong choice for projects requiring public verifiability and direct integration with decentralized finance (DeFi) applications.
LABS
Comparisons
Stellar vs Ripple (XRP Ledger) for CBDC and Bank Settlement
A technical analysis comparing Stellar and the XRP Ledger as foundational protocols for central bank digital currencies and interbank settlement, focusing on transaction finality, compliance tooling, and existing institutional infrastructure.
Chainscore © 2026
introduction
THE ANALYSIS
Introduction: The Institutional Settlement Layer Battle
A data-driven comparison of Stellar and Ripple's XRP Ledger for CBDC and interbank settlement infrastructure.
Ripple (XRP Ledger) takes a different approach by optimizing for speed and finality in high-value institutional payments. This results in a trade-off of a more permissioned validator set favoring known financial institutions. The XRP Ledger consistently achieves 1,500 TPS with 3-5 second settlement times, a benchmark proven in production by RippleNet's ODL corridors. Its native digital asset, XRP, acts as a bridge currency to minimize liquidity costs in cross-border transactions, a model validated by partnerships with banks like Santander and SBI Remit.
The key trade-off: If your priority is an open, multi-asset network for retail-facing CBDCs or tokenized asset settlement, choose Stellar. Its low fixed cost and built-in DEX support complex financial products. If you prioritize ultra-fast, high-throughput settlement for interbank and cross-border wholesale payments, choose Ripple. Its proven performance with major financial institutions and dedicated bridge asset (XRP) minimizes friction in large-scale liquidity management.
tldr-summary
Stellar vs. XRP Ledger
TL;DR: Core Differentiators for Decision Makers
A data-driven breakdown of architectural and governance trade-offs for institutional settlement and CBDC pilots.
01
Choose Stellar for Multi-Asset CBDC Pilots
Architecture for interoperability: Stellar's built-in decentralized exchange (DEX) and Stellar Asset Contract (SAC) standard enable seamless, atomic swaps between CBDCs, stablecoins, and tokenized assets. This is critical for cross-border corridors and multi-currency wallets.
Real-world traction: Successfully piloted with Ukraine's Digital Hryvnia and serves as the backbone for MoneyGram's stablecoin settlement. The Stellar Disbursement Platform offers a ready-made tool for targeted distribution.
02
Choose XRP Ledger for High-Volume Interbank Settlement
Optimized for liquidity: The XRP native asset acts as a bridge currency, minimizing nostro/vostro account needs. Its Consensus Protocol (not PoW/PoS) finalizes transactions in 3-5 seconds with negligible cost (<$0.0001), proven by RippleNet's ODL handling billions.
Institutional focus: Designed for compliance with ISO 20022 messaging and integrates with enterprise systems via Ripple's Liquidity Hub. Major bank pilots include Bank of America and SBI Holdings.
03
Stellar's Trade-off: Decentralization vs. Throughput
Strength: More decentralized validator set (~100 nodes) and a non-profit foundation (SDF) governing protocol upgrades. Appeals to sovereign entities wary of single points of control.
Consideration: Theoretical throughput (~1,000-3,000 TPS) is lower than XRPL's. While sufficient for many CBDC models, it may require sharding for mass retail adoption at a national scale.
04
XRPL's Trade-off: Speed vs. Regulatory Scrutiny
Strength: Unmatched settlement speed and efficiency for bulk payments, with a mature decentralized identity (DID) framework for KYC/AML.
Consideration: Ongoing SEC litigation (though largely resolved) has created perceived regulatory uncertainty for some institutions. The network is also more permissioned, with core validators historically influenced by Ripple.
TECHNICAL COMPARISON FOR SETTLEMENT
Head-to-Head: Stellar vs XRP Ledger Feature Matrix
Direct comparison of key technical and operational metrics for CBDC and bank settlement use cases.
| Metric | Stellar | XRP Ledger |
|---|---|---|
Consensus Mechanism | Federated Byzantine Agreement (FBA) | XRP Ledger Consensus Protocol (XRPL-CP) |
Settlement Finality | 3-5 seconds | 3-5 seconds |
Max Theoretical TPS | 1,000 - 10,000 | 65,000+ |
Avg. Transaction Cost | ~0.00001 XLM (< $0.0001) | ~0.00001 XRP (< $0.0001) |
Native Asset for Fees & Spam Prevention | XLM | XRP |
Built-in DEX for Asset Issuance | ||
Primary Regulatory Focus | Cross-border payments, asset tokenization | Institutional settlement, CBDCs |
Key CBDC Partners/Projects | Ukraine (e-hryvnia pilot), Franklin Templeton | Republic of Palau, Montenegro, Bhutan |
HEAD-TO-HEAD COMPARISON
Stellar vs XRP Ledger: Performance & Settlement Benchmarks
Direct comparison of key metrics for CBDC and institutional settlement use cases.
| Metric | Stellar (XLM) | Ripple (XRP Ledger) |
|---|---|---|
Consensus Mechanism | Federated Byzantine Agreement (FBA) | Unique Node List (UNL) Consensus |
Settlement Finality | 3-5 seconds | 3-5 seconds |
Peak TPS (Theoretical) | 1,000 - 3,000 | 1,500 - 3,300 |
Avg. Transaction Cost | ~0.00001 XLM (<$0.000001) | ~0.00001 XRP (<$0.000005) |
Native Asset Issuance | ||
CBDC-Specific Features | CBDC Sandbox, Level 1/2 Stellar | Private Ledgers, CBDC Platform |
Primary Settlement Focus | Cross-border retail & remittances | Institutional & interbank transfers |
pros-cons-a
ARCHITECTURE COMPARISON
Stellar vs. Ripple (XRP Ledger): CBDC & Bank Settlement
A technical breakdown of Stellar and XRP Ledger for institutional settlement, focusing on consensus, asset issuance, and regulatory positioning.
01
Choose Stellar for Multi-Asset Issuance & Interoperability
Native asset flexibility: Built-in protocol for issuing and managing digital representations of any currency (CBDCs, stablecoins, tokenized assets) via the Stellar Asset Contract (SAC). This matters for central banks needing a multi-currency network.
Interoperability focus: Stellar's Horizon API and Stellar Disbursement Platform are designed for seamless integration with existing banking rails and compliance tools, supporting direct fiat anchors like USDC.
~5 sec
Settlement Finality
< $0.01
Avg. Transaction Cost
02
Choose XRP Ledger for High-Volume FX & Liquidity
Optimized for liquidity: The native XRP asset acts as a bridge currency with deep, established liquidity pools in corridors like USD/MXN. This matters for banks executing high-frequency, cross-border payments.
Established bank network: RippleNet provides a proven, closed-loop network of over 300 financial institutions, with tools like On-Demand Liquidity (ODL) for pre-funded capital efficiency.
1,500+ TPS
Sustained Throughput
$10B+
XRP Daily Volume
03
Stellar Trade-off: Decentralization vs. Speed
Federated Byzantine Agreement (FBA) consensus is more decentralized than XRPL's UNL model but can be slower to upgrade and requires careful quorum selection. This matters for projects prioritizing censorship resistance over absolute top-tier throughput.
Smaller institutional footprint: While growing (e.g., MoneyGram Access), it lacks the same depth of Tier-1 bank integrations as RippleNet.
04
XRP Ledger Trade-off: Regulatory Scrutiny & Native Asset Dependency
Regulatory overhang: Ongoing SEC litigation creates legal uncertainty for U.S.-based institutions, potentially delaying CBDC projects.
XRP-centric model: Settlement efficiency is tied to the XRP bridge asset. This introduces volatility risk and requires managing XRP reserves, unlike Stellar's direct asset-to-asset path payments.
pros-cons-b
XRPL vs Stellar for CBDC & Settlement
Ripple (XRP Ledger): Strengths and Trade-offs
A technical breakdown of two leading enterprise blockchains for cross-border payments, central bank digital currencies (CBDCs), and institutional settlement.
01
Choose XRP Ledger for High-Volume Settlement
Proven institutional throughput: Processes 3,400+ TPS with ~0.0002 XRP average fee (<$0.001). The Federated Consensus model provides deterministic finality in 3-5 seconds, critical for high-value, time-sensitive interbank transfers. This is validated by RippleNet's live corridors and partnerships with banks like Bank of America and SBI Holdings.
3,400+ TPS
Sustained Throughput
3-5 sec
Finality
02
Choose XRP Ledger for Regulatory Clarity & Liquidity
Deep liquidity pools: XRP's ~$30B market cap provides a robust bridge asset for cross-currency flows. The ledger offers Issued Currencies and a built-in decentralized exchange (DEX). While the SEC lawsuit created uncertainty, recent legal clarity (programmatic sales not securities) and established relationships with global regulators (e.g., UK FCA, MAS) strengthen its position for compliant CBDC issuance.
03
Choose Stellar for Flexible CBDC & Inclusive Finance
Designed for multi-currency rails: Stellar's Anchors model excels at connecting traditional finance to the blockchain, ideal for tokenizing and settling multiple CBDCs or stablecoins (e.g., USDC). Its Stellar Consensus Protocol (SCP) is energy-efficient and supports fine-grained asset control, making it a top choice for projects like Ukraine's digital hryvnia pilot and MoneyGram's consumer payout corridors.
1,000-5,000 TPS
Network Capacity
3-5 sec
Latency
04
Choose Stellar for Developer Agility & Compliance Tools
Superior smart contract flexibility: While both are not Turing-complete like Ethereum, Stellar's Soroban smart contracts (live on mainnet) offer more programmability for complex CBDC logic than XRPL's native features. Combined with compliance tools like SEP-8 (regulated assets) and SEP-24 (KYC/AML), it provides a more adaptable framework for regulated financial innovation.
CHOOSE YOUR PRIORITY
Decision Framework: When to Choose Which Ledger
Stellar for CBDCs
Verdict: The superior choice for retail-focused, multi-currency CBDCs. Strengths: Stellar's architecture is purpose-built for multi-asset issuance and cross-border payments. Its Stellar Asset Issuance standard simplifies creating and managing digital currencies with configurable compliance (e.g., authorized trustlines). The Stellar Disbursement Platform (SDP) provides a turnkey toolset for airdrops and targeted distribution, crucial for monetary policy. Its consensus protocol (SCP) offers predictable, low-cost finality (~3-5 seconds) ideal for high-volume retail transactions. Key Differentiator: Native integration with MoneyGram and other payment rails provides a clear path to fiat off-ramps, a critical requirement for a functional CBDC.
Ripple (XRPL) for CBDCs
Verdict: A strong contender for wholesale and interbank settlement layers. Strengths: The XRPL excels in high-value, institutional-grade settlements. Its Issued Currencies feature, combined with the XRP Ledger's Decentralized Exchange (DEX), allows for efficient liquidity pools between CBDCs. The On-Ledger Escrow and Checks features enable sophisticated, programmable settlement logic. Ripple's extensive RippleNet partnerships with banks (e.g., Santander, SBI) offer a ready-made network for pilot programs. Key Differentiator: Proven track record in real-time gross settlement (RTGS) systems through its work with central banks like the Republic of Palau and the Digital Euro Association.
verdict
THE ANALYSIS
Final Verdict and Strategic Recommendation
A strategic breakdown of Stellar and XRP Ledger for central bank and institutional settlement, focusing on their core architectural trade-offs.
Stellar excels at multi-asset interoperability and financial inclusion because of its built-in decentralized exchange (DEX) and Anchor system for fiat on/off-ramps. For example, its partnership with MoneyGram for cross-border payments in Latin America leverages its ability to bridge traditional currencies and stablecoins like USDC on-chain. With a focus on low-cost, accessible transactions (average fee of ~0.00001 XLM), Stellar is optimized for creating and settling a diverse ecosystem of digital assets, a key feature for a multi-currency CBDC pilot.
Ripple (XRP Ledger) takes a different approach by optimizing for speed and finality in high-value institutional settlements. Its consensus protocol (XRP Ledger Consensus Protocol) achieves 3-5 second settlement finality and can handle over 1,500 TPS, making it highly predictable for treasury operations. This results in a trade-off: while less decentralized than Stellar's SCP, it offers the deterministic performance and deep liquidity (via the native XRP asset) that large financial institutions like Bank of America and SBI Holdings require for real-time gross settlement (RTGS) systems.
The key trade-off: If your priority is building a flexible, multi-currency CBDC platform with built-in DeFi-like features (e.g., programmable compliance, asset issuance) and a focus on retail accessibility, choose Stellar. If you prioritize ultra-fast, predictable, and high-throughput settlement between large financial institutions with a primary focus on FX and liquidity management, choose Ripple and the XRP Ledger. For a hybrid model, some projects, like the Digital Euro prototype, evaluate both to stress-test different layers of a potential CBDC stack.
ENQUIRY
Get In Touch
today.
Our experts will offer a free quote and a 30min call to discuss your project.
NDA Protected
Confidentiality24h Response
Time to ValueDirectly to Engineering Team
No Sales Fluff10+
Protocols Shipped
$20M+
TVL Overall