Should I invest in Bitcoin or XRP?

>>60622563 (OP)
Bitcoin is more popular and is completely decentralized.
I'm suspicious about XRP being controlled, it was made for banks.

>>60622563 (OP)
Why are you only choosing between those two? XRP to answer your question.

>>60622563 (OP)
Oooooooooooo!!!!!! I'm taking a shit right now....


Yyyeeeeeeessssssssss!!!!!!!!

>>60622570
XRP because it's the crypto that is adopted the most by banks that I know of. Bitcoin is self explanatory. Other cryptos doesn't interest me

>>60622563 (OP)
XRP. It would be good to diversify though. I would consider a mix (in descending order of recommendation) of the following:
XRP, QNT, XDC, ALGO, HBAR, AVAX, XLM, SUI, APT, FLR, ONDO, OMNI, ADA, SOL, POL, ARB, ATOM, DAG, AAVE, DOT, ZRO.

>>60623327
XRP is by far the most important to own some of and best bet. It is the Standard.

>>60622563 (OP)
XRP XRP XRP

XRP

>>60622563 (OP)
LINK

>should I invest in xrp!?!?!?

let's see if you have any verbal IQ, anon.

>>60623419

>>60623422

>>60623429

Bitcoin.

1 BTC = 1/21m of BTC, forever. Realize how revolutionary that is, a trustless, fixed, autonomous, decentralized unit. That is what we've always wanted from money, it's why gold was used, because the natural properties of gold create an approximation of a unit. But gold isn't fixed in supply and is only trustless in physical form. As economies became more complicated gold needed to be abstracted rendering gold entirely trust-based, opening the door to corruption and the current sorry state of money.

What we want from money has always been the unit, by having an economic unit we reduce the number of prices from n^n to n. We cannot engage in complex economic calculation without a unit, but the units we've been forced to use out of necessity do not provide a clean economic signal, with a trustless fixed unit the efficiency of economic calculation is increased massively. BTC will continue to reward adopters as that is what the positive externality of trustless money yields.

>>60623419
AI slop
>>60623422
Stock metric, fees are not the main source of revenue but you keep trying to push that narrative to newfags
>>60623429
Using NFTs as an argument already makes you look like a grasping retard.

Also Forbes is a bunch of hook nosed signaling what to buy by fudding it. Last time you posted Forbes articles it mentioned a bunch of other ''zombie chains''. Have a look at their prices since that article came out.

RLUSD is nearing 500m issued and its been out for less than a year. Once ripple gets their additional licenses RLUSD will stand out as the most legally robust and regulator-approved stablecoin available, unmatched legal certainty and operational transparency for users and institutions.

You will look like a retard as you have been for the past year, fudding the shit out of xrp and xrpl since it was below 50 cent.

>>60623419
You are a low IQ person who never even understood the XRP thesis and literally just parrot heteronomous culture narrative from specific coins you follow like a NPC. The ENTIRE original usecase for XRP was to be a liquidity bridge to walled gardens and asset classes (like RWA tokenized assets, bonds, stocks, etc.) across traditional and blockchain networks etc. The entire XRP community believed that there would be specific currency stablecoins on chain and when USDC and RLUSD were launched, both were celebrated massively by the whole community. David Schwartz has been talking for YEARS about how there will be hundreds of private stablecoins which need to be able to transmit between each other, not to mention if RLUSD is used onchain it burns XRP. It also breaks the global stranglehold of issuance and cross-fx trade and exchange without such a behholden seat at the table and gives the smallest credit unions software that literally allows them to outcompete the largest correspondent eurodollar banks in the world in international payments if they don't themselves join. BNY Mellon is the largest custodial bank in the country and oldest bank as well and they are currently the primary custodian for RLUSD. Ripple are applying for an OCC license and Fed master account which would allow them to park XRPL USD assets at the Fed as collateral even. Ripple's purchase of Hidden Road (broker dealer that already settles trillions annually) led to RLUSD being able to be used in commercial bank collateral transactions and clearing, with XRP being used backend operations. And all of this is only talking about payments, which are 1/30th of the XRP usecase. If you don't see how stablecoins turbocharge XRP adoption and bridging between tradfi and defi etc. you never understood the XRP usecase and never even tried to because this was all 101 stuff talked about by the chief representatives of the community and within the community for literally a decade.

>>60623419
>>60624874
Further, why would Ripple nuke their billions of dollars in treasury in escrow (they wouldn't)?

>>60622569

>>60622563 (OP)
too late, kid

>>60622563 (OP)
Bitcoin has a fixed supply and is therefore a store of value over time
XRP is deflationary and is therefore has appreciating value due to progressively increasing scarcity.
Both are good.
Bitcoin is more popular for now.
XRP has actual adoption outside of being a corporate treasury asset.
Just get a little of both if those are what you are looking at.

XRP for making any money

BTC for security but only after a good pullback which is coming

>>60622563 (OP)
neither buy funkopops

Hello

>>60622563 (OP)
Mmmmh... Digital gold vs an irrelevant dump coin that's only overhyped on /biz/ - Business & Finance... Really hard decision. In all seriousness I can't tell if your question is in good faith, if you want something serious go for btc and if you want to gamble a little go for angels or pepe or something like that. That simple.
>>60623569
This reads like a flowery puke of buzzwords and it kind of is but this dude is simply right, like it or not. Only your average no-coiner r/buttcoin retard can deny Bitcoin's ever growing influence with a straight face and say it's a 'good thing' they own none of it.