Provider at a glance
- Category
- Stablecoins
- Entity
- Not verified
- Official website
- ripple.com
Independent rankingchecked How it works
Details
Scored 75 out of 100 under methodology 2026.10.18, from the evidence read in September 2026.
Ripple USD (RLUSD)
Ripple's dollar stablecoin
Stablecoins
#3 Overall
Ranked #3 of 11 stablecoins in the published ranking
75
ChainChoice Score
The ChainChoice Score, shown against 100: published scores run from 41 to 99.- High evidence confidence
Is Ripple USD (RLUSD) right for you?
Right for you if these matter most
- Reserves and assurance8/10, the category best
Look elsewhere if these come first
- Who owes you the dollar5/10 here; PayPal USD (PYUSD) scores 7
- Redemption at par5/10 here; PayPal USD (PYUSD) scores 8
- Freeze and burn powers5/10 here; PayPal USD (PYUSD) scores 6
Not yet tested for your country. Markets it lists: Global.
to test where you can use it.
The rank above is the published one, the same for every reader. Find my best stablecoin shows where it lands for you.
What will Ripple USD (RLUSD) cost you?
Not priced on this basis
- Your monthly volume
- $1k
How safe is Ripple USD (RLUSD)?
- Evidence: verified4 of 4 criteria rest on quoted, sourced receipts. Read September 2026.
- LicenceMiCA (EU): no register record on file here.
- On the registersMiCA: authorised, Ripple Payments Europe S.A. (LU, since 2026-06-29). Read 3 November 2026. Open the register
Alternatives to Ripple USD (RLUSD)
Compare all 4- 1PayPal USD (PYUSD)4 points above · stronger on redemption at par (8 against 5)79$0.00
- 2USDC2 points above · stronger on who owes you the dollar (7 against 5)77
- 4FDUSD (First Digital USD)13 points below · weaker on who owes you the dollar (2 against 5)62
For your setup
Find out if Ripple USD (RLUSD) fits you
The rank above is the published one — the same for every visitor. Answer the category's questions and this section shows where Ripple USD (RLUSD) lands for you, which criteria your answers weight up, and which stated needs the record does or does not meet. The published rank stays beside it.
- A few questions
- No account required
- Ranking-blind: no commercial input
- Personalised in under 60 seconds
Find my best stablecoinNothing is inferred from clicks, popularity or commercial value.
Why this rank
Why Ripple USD (RLUSD) ranks #3
Each strength is read from evidence on a 0–10 ladder and weighted as the published methodology states. The 32 objective points these produce (18.3 here) sit inside the score; availability, friction, trust record and measured data add the rest. Best in this ranking on 1 of 4.
4 published criteria · Σ weight 100
CriterionWeightStrength · 0–10ScoreContrib.MedianBestRankEvidence
305+4.802.07#3/11Loading evidence…
285+4.483.08#2/11Loading evidence…
248+6.143.08#1/11Loading evidence…
185+2.885.07#4/11Loading evidence…
Hairline = best in this ranking · tick = its median · a missing bar is "not scored", never zero
Margin−2behind USDC, #2
RobustnessHoldsacross a one-point change to each of its 4 criterion scores, the re-run scores 73–77 and stays #3
Evidence4 of 4 scored4 quoted, 4 with a source link
What would move the rank
Each line is the ranking run again with one of Ripple USD (RLUSD)’s criterion scores changed and every other value held: the smallest whole-point change on that criterion that moves its rank, and where the re-run puts it. Up to 4 climbs and 3 falls are listed, smallest change first. Nothing here is a forecast.
Who exactly owes you the dollar, and where do you rank when they fail? 5 → 7 on its ladder · passes USDC+279#3 → #2
Can the person actually holding it get a dollar back at par — and has anyone, at size? 5 → 7 on its ladder · passes USDC+278#3 → #2
What is really behind it, and what did the third party actually opine on? 8 → 10 on its ladder · passes USDC+278#3 → #2
Who can freeze, burn or replace your balance — and have they? 5 → 8 on its ladder · passes USDC+378#3 → #2
Smallest climb: “Who exactly owes you the dollar, and where do you rank when they fail?” 5 → 7 passes USDC, #2.
Strengths
1 from the score dataWhere it leads
Best for readers who weight
- What is really behind it, and what did the third party actually opine on? — 8/10, the category best
Tradeoffs
3 from the score dataWhere it trails
Not for readers who put first
- Who exactly owes you the dollar, and where do you rank when they fail? — 5/10 against a category best of 7/10
- Can the person actually holding it get a dollar back at par — and has anyone, at size? — 5/10 against a category best of 8/10
- Who can freeze, burn or replace your balance — and have they? — 5/10 against a category best of 7/10
Record watch-outs
- The regulatory scaffolding around RLUSD is genuinely better than most of this pool, and the reserve disclosure is the best in it — CUSIP-level, Deloitte-examined, monthly, with a named custodian. None of that is the same thing as a claim you can enforce, and the gap between the two is this record's whole point. The binding RLUSD User Terms say the reserve is “segregated from SCTC's other assets” and then say, in the same subsection, “RLUSD does not convey any direct or indirect property interest in or right to withdraw any assets held in the Reserve”, and later that “Ripple does not provide any trust or fiduciary services to any User under these Terms.” Meanwhile the whitepaper says deposits are “held specifically for the benefit of RLUSD holders”, the attestation criteria say the Reserve holds assets “on behalf of RLUSD holders”, and the OCC letter describes “collateral trustee services for the benefit of RLUSD holders on a fiduciary basis” — for a bank that does not yet exist, under an approval the OCC expressly labels preliminary. The contract governs, and it gives the holder a segregation covenant with no stated insolvency rank, no property interest and no fiduciary duty. Second caveat, on comparability: the 2026-09-29 re-read raised criterion 2 from 4 to 5, the bottom of the band the methodology names for RLUSD, and level with USDC. The terms grant every holder a redemption right and then condition it on becoming a Customer, and the 2026 whitepaper's gate is the same shape as Circle Mint's closure to individuals, which the ladder already weighs for USDC in that band: “Ripple will not conduct B2C transactions.” Third: the terms are stale in a way that matters. They are stamped “Last updated: October 3, 2024” — and still so on 2026-09-29, almost two years on — and in the interim the OCC preliminarily approved a Ripple national trust bank intended to hold the reserve as collateral trustee. If that bank opens, the custody architecture behind this coin changes and the binding document describing it will not have moved. Finally, one number that is not a defect but should not be misread: the LEI on the current whitepaper resolves to the right company with entity status ACTIVE, but its GLEIF REGISTRATION status is LAPSED. Those are different fields; a lapsed identifier registration is not a lapsed charter, and it is scored as nothing more. Two things changed when every document was read again. First, the NYDFS redeemability question is settled, in Ripple's favour on the gate itself: the June 8, 2022 guidance, retrieved this session as bytes from the Internet Archive's raw replay of the dfs.ny.gov URL, confers a par redemption right on “any lawful holder” but expressly subjects it to “reasonable, non-burdensome conditions … such as the ability of the stablecoin holder to onboard successfully with the Issuer before redeeming.” The regulator permits the onboarding gate. What the regulator also requires — “clear, conspicuous redemption policies, approved in advance by DFS in writing”, with a default of T+2 where the issuer does not state its own — Ripple does not publish, which is why criterion 2 goes no higher than 5, the bottom of its band. Second, criterion 4 scores 5, not 6: the chain has twenty role grants; the MINTER and BURNER roles are held not only behind the multisig but also by a Wormhole NttManager proxy that appears in no Ripple document; and because MultiSign weights signatures, replacing the code takes three signatures, not seven. The freeze power had been exercised 192 times by August 2026; the 2026-09-29 re-read counts 214 against 214 distinct addresses since August 2024, 22 of them new and most on 2026-08-25, with not a single reversal and no published record of any of it. Nothing in the reserve or the attestation changed; the CUSIP schedule was re-read position by position and every figure reproduced.
Competitive position
Where Ripple USD (RLUSD) leads and where it trails
Rank on every objective dimension among the rows scored on it. A criterion in the top third of its pool is listed as a lead, the bottom third as a trail; the middle is neither. Popularity, size and commercial terms are not dimensions.
Availability#1 / 1114.0 of 20 · constant here
Published criteria#3 / 1113.7 of 30 · best 15.3
Friction#1 / 112.7 of 10 · constant here
Trust record#1 / 113.2 of 8 · constant here
Measured data#1 / 118.3 of 18 · constant here
Where Ripple USD (RLUSD) leads
- Who exactly owes you the dollar, and where do you rank when they fail?#3 / 11
- Can the person actually holding it get a dollar back at par — and has anyone, at size?#2 / 11
- What is really behind it, and what did the third party actually opine on?#1 / 11
- Who can freeze, burn or replace your balance — and have they?#4 / 11
Where it trailsNo criterion in the bottom third of its pool.
Closest alternatives
The 3 nearest rows by score
Nearest by published score in either direction. Each card states the criteria on which the two rows differ and the cost difference under the same scenario inputs; the compare arithmetic below shows why the higher one ranks higher.
USDC#2 of 11 · score 77 · 2.0 points ahead
Ripple USD (RLUSD) leads on
- Who can freeze, burn or replace your balance — and have they?5 vs 4
USDC leads on
- Who exactly owes you the dollar, and where do you rank when they fail?7 vs 5
Largest single reason USDC is ahead: published criteria (+2.6 display points).Scenario cost: USDC has no verified pricing for this scenario.
PayPal USD (PYUSD)#1 of 11 · score 79 · 4.0 points ahead
Ripple USD (RLUSD) leads on
- What is really behind it, and what did the third party actually opine on?8 vs 4
PayPal USD (PYUSD) leads on
- Who exactly owes you the dollar, and where do you rank when they fail?7 vs 5
- Can the person actually holding it get a dollar back at par — and has anyone, at size?8 vs 5
- Who can freeze, burn or replace your balance — and have they?6 vs 5
Largest single reason PayPal USD (PYUSD) is ahead: published criteria (+4.2 display points).Scenario cost: Ripple USD (RLUSD) has no verified pricing for this scenario.
FDUSD (First Digital USD)#4 of 11 · score 62 · 13.0 points behind
Ripple USD (RLUSD) leads on
- Who exactly owes you the dollar, and where do you rank when they fail?5 vs 2
- Can the person actually holding it get a dollar back at par — and has anyone, at size?5 vs 3
- What is really behind it, and what did the third party actually opine on?8 vs 6
FDUSD (First Digital USD) leads onNo scored criterion
Largest single reason Ripple USD (RLUSD) is ahead: published criteria (+13.3 display points).Scenario cost: FDUSD (First Digital USD) has no verified pricing for this scenario.
Against the leader
79 vs 75 · gap 4.0Why PayPal USD (PYUSD) ranks above Ripple USD (RLUSD)
The compare workspace's arithmetic applied to these two rows. Each dimension's share of the gap is its weight × the difference, on the displayed scale — it reproduces the displayed gap of 4.0 to within rounding.
DimensionThisPayPal USD (PYUSD)Gap share
Availability · 23% weight · constant here14.014.0same
Published criteria · 35% weight13.715.3−4.2, worse
Friction · 12% weight · constant here2.72.7same
Trust record · 9% weight · constant here3.23.2same
Measured data · 21% weight · constant here8.38.3same
Published criterionThisPayPal USD (PYUSD)Points
Who exactly owes you the dollar, and where do you rank when they fail? · w3057−1.92, worse
Can the person actually holding it get a dollar back at par — and has anyone, at size? · w2858−2.69, worse
What is really behind it, and what did the third party actually opine on? · w2484+3.07, better
Who can freeze, burn or replace your balance — and have they? · w1856−0.58, worse
Net7579−4.0
Your scenario
Ripple USD (RLUSD) is not priced for this scenario
Conversion spread on your volume for a year. Excludes network gas and any withdrawal fee. Change an input and every figure recomputes from the published rate; the published rank does not move.
your cost/yr · default scenario — set your own
Your monthly volume · your input$1k
Rate read from the provider’s published pricing ↗ on 29 September 2026.
your cost/yrCost is stated as your cost/yr in USD; it is never a yield, never annualised, and it does not enter the score.
Not priced on this basis
Under the default inputs · USDCategory median and cheapestNot statedOnly 2 of 11 rows publish a comparable price; a median and a cheapest row need at least 3.
8 of 11 rows in this ranking have no verified rate for this scenario and are absent from the median, not counted as free.
1 of 11 quote a zero fee that leaves costs out, so they are absent from the median and the cheapest row, not counted as free.
Evidence
Evidence read 29 September 2026
One row per published criterion: the page each strength was read from, its source type by domain, the reading date and whether the file and the published table agree. Open a row for the quote and the receipt.
4 of 4 cells scored
Score evidenceVerified4 of 4 criteria reconstruct from receipts
4 of 4 criteria reconstruct from a quoted, sourced receipt equal to the published strength.Public receiptsReading…4 quoted with a source URL
The receipt file has not been read yet.Evidence confidenceHighcoverage and corroboration, never freshness
4/4 criteria scored, with 4 dated sources quoted.RobustnessHoldsrank #3 across every one-point re-run
Whether the position holds when one criterion score is changed by one point and the ranking is run again. It is always a re-run of the ranking, never an estimate.The newest evidence read on the platform is 3 November 2026; this category's reading is older. The scores stand as read on 29 September 2026.
Reading the evidence ledger…
CriterionSourceTypeReadFreshnessStatusReceipt
Who exactly owes you the dollar, and where do you rank when they fail?strength 5 · weight 30Report an error—29 September 2026*
Unknown
No reading date is recorded for this cell or its category.No receipt
A strength is published but no quote or source page is on file for it.Can the person actually holding it get a dollar back at par — and has anyone, at size?strength 5 · weight 28Report an error—29 September 2026*
Unknown
No reading date is recorded for this cell or its category.No receipt
A strength is published but no quote or source page is on file for it.What is really behind it, and what did the third party actually opine on?strength 8 · weight 24Report an error—29 September 2026*
Unknown
No reading date is recorded for this cell or its category.No receipt
A strength is published but no quote or source page is on file for it.Who can freeze, burn or replace your balance — and have they?strength 5 · weight 18Report an error—29 September 2026*
Unknown
No reading date is recorded for this cell or its category.No receipt
A strength is published but no quote or source page is on file for it.How you can lose money here, and what the ranking scores
- Control failure (Ripple USD (RLUSD) 5/10): a key or vote changes the rules, freezes or mints.Scored by Who can freeze, burn or replace your balance — and have they? · 18%
- Insolvency failure: the firm or issuer that owes you cannot pay.Scored by Who exactly owes you the dollar, and where do you rank when they fail? · 30% (Ripple USD (RLUSD) 5/10)Scored by What is really behind it, and what did the third party actually opine on? · 24% (Ripple USD (RLUSD) 8/10)
- Exit failure (Ripple USD (RLUSD) 5/10): you cannot get out at par, on time, or with what is yours.Scored by Can the person actually holding it get a dollar back at par — and has anyone, at size? · 28%
Not assessed by this ranking: Contract failure, Custody failure, Regulatory failure, Information failure. A high place says nothing about these; the Methodology tab says what each means.
Facts
facts, not scoresWhat the record publishes
- Pricing
- NO FEE SCHEDULE AND NO MINIMUM IS PUBLISHED ANYWHERE — a silence finding, re-established on 29 September 2026. (1) THE BINDING TERMS, https://
ripple .com /legal /stablecoin / (still stamped "Last updated: October 3, 2024", fetched 29 September 2026): the string "Fee" appears exactly once, in §11.10: "Although a Customer can always redeem one (1) RLUSD for 1 U.S. dollar ($1) with Ripple, less Fees, Ripple cannot control how third parties quote or value RLUSD, and Ripple is not responsible for any losses or other issues that may result from fluctuations in the value of RLUSD." "Fees" is capitalised as a defined term and defined nowhere in this document; the definition belongs to the RLUSD Customer Agreement. "minimum" also occurs once, about the Reserve's market value, not about redemption. (2) THE GOVERNING DOCUMENT IS UNREACHABLE: https:// ripple .com /legal / returns HTTP 404; the legal navigation on the terms page still lists eleven documents and the RLUSD Customer Agreement is not among them; https:// ripple .com /legal /rlusd-customer-agreement / and https:// ripple .com /legal /stablecoin-customer-agreement / both returned HTTP 404 on 29 September 2026. (3) THE OTHER ISSUER SURFACES ARE SILENT: the whitepaper (https:// ripple .com /reports /rlusd-whitepaper .pdf, "Version date — June 4, 2026") describes the issuance and redemption flows and states no fee, no minimum ticket and no settlement deadline; the transparency page (https:// ripple .com /products /stablecoin /transparency /) says "redemptions with strict SLAs" and publishes no SLA, fee or minimum. (4) WHAT IS PUBLISHED INSTEAD, AND IT IS NOT A PRICE: the whitepaper's eligibility rule, "RLUSD is distributed to enterprise partners only. Ripple will not conduct B2C transactions", and its reserve buffer, "to ensure the total value of RLUSD reserve assets always equals at least 103% of the total RLUSD in circulation". An undisclosed price is not the same as a low one; this record scores it as an absence, not a benefit — no list price is published, so cost cannot be compared before a sales conversation.Ripple USD (RLUSD) — official page at ripple.com ↗ · 29 September 2026 - Prices published in
- USDRipple USD (RLUSD) — official page at ripple.com ↗ · 29 September 2026
- Licences held
- Not published
- Compliance level
- partial
- Regulatory note
- READ THIS SESSION (19 August 2026); every quote below was taken from the raw HTML/PDF byte stream, not from a summariser, and matched character-exact. ON THE RUBRIC'S CALIBRATION READING, A MODEL RUN FOUND IT CONFIRMED ON BOTH LITERAL POINTS AND REFUTED ON THE CONCLUSION DRAWN FROM THEM.
- Supported chains
- Not published
- Markets served
- global
- Primary markets
- Not published
- Restricted markets
- Not published
- Operating limits
- Not published
- Availability note
- Not published
No confirmed legal entity is on file for this record. Nothing is inferred from the brand name.
If something goes wrong with Ripple USD (RLUSD): where to complain, and where to report a scam
Loading the routes for your country.
How this page is reviewed
Reviewed means this product in this category was read against its sources on or after that date; every ranked category is re-read at least every 45 days. Models research, extract and parse. A deterministic engine ranks. Every quote passes an adversarial refute pass.
Accountable for this review: Mathias Siemonsmeier, Founder.
How we review · Review calendar · Corrections log · How we make money
History
What the record carries
Changes to published ranks are recorded in a ledger; every step and its cause is listed on the rank-history page. The entries below begin with the current verified snapshot, then the methodology versions whose changes applied to this category, newest first.
10 methodology entries
- 29 September 2026Current verified snapshot · methodology 2026.10.18Score 75, #3 of 11. 4 of 4 criteria scored. History starts here; earlier values are not interpolated.
- 10 October 2026
2026.10.8When nothing serves your country, the list shown for reference is the published ranking · platform-wide- fixed The reference list shown when nothing serves your country is the published order with the published scores, and a build check now fails any such list out of that order or with a score the ranking does not publish.
- fixed The explorer prints an overall rank only for a row the published ranking holds; a country entrant such as Coinbase Commerce for US merchants shows no overall rank.
- changed Published orders do not move. Country results change only where nothing serves the country: in India bill pay keeps Bitcoin Well first and now shows Strike second, as published; 35 such runs across all categories and countries now match the published list exactly.
- 10 October 2026
2026.10.6A criterion you require re-scores the rows that meet it · platform-wide- changed The explorer sends each criterion you require, at any band, as fit_required with your other answers; region, licence, chain and fact filters stay filters. On /best, a required criterion joins For you as a marked preference does, which needs your country; Overall stays the published ranking, filtered.
- added Every published criterion has a golden case as the explorer sends it (require:<criterion>), so the order a requirement gives is replayed and gated as the published order is, and a change to it needs an entry here.
- 1 October 2026
2026.10.0Layer-2 chains are ranked on whether you can leave with your funds- added Four l2_chains criteria with published band ladders: proof system (18), withdrawals if the operator stops (18), rollup stage (14) and exit window before an upgrade (6). EVM equivalence moves 40 to 17, Ethereum data availability 25 to 15 and maturity 35 to 12. Every chain's emergency exit window reads None, so the exit-window ladder also reads L2BEAT's regular, non-emergency upgrade path (Arbitrum One 10 days, Starknet and Arbitrum Nova 7, zkSync Era 4 days 3 hours); data availability separates full transaction data (10) from state diffs only (9, L2BEAT: Onchain (SD)). A stage L2BEAT marks Under review keeps its last score for at most one 45-day cycle and is never interpolated.
- changed l2_chains ranks through scoreCriterionObjective on fitStrength, like the other criterion-ranked categories; the hand-written structural scorer is deleted. All 105 criterion scores across 15 rows carry a quote and source in research-pending/rereads/2026-10-01-l2_chains.json; 131 of 135 quotes re-fetched verbatim on the read date, and the four behind a bot wall or a JavaScript shell were read by the adversarial model run.
- fixed Four facts corrected on the read: Scroll, Mantle and Blast are EVM-compatible, not equivalent (their own documentation, and for Blast live RPC probes); Starknet's public mainnet opened to users in 2022, not 2021. Arbitrum Nova's data has gone to Ethereum as blobs since 31 August 2026, and the row now leads with the Arbitrum DAO's decision to minimise it.
- fixed The old scorer credited Ethereum data availability whenever the data-availability text contained the word "ethereum", so Arbitrum Nova's committee ("…Ethereum L1 rollup fallback") and Polygon zkEVM's off-chain data ("…Ethereum L1 before the sunset") both scored full marks. Data availability is now a quoted L2BEAT reading.
Methodology 2026.10.18, the same published run every visitor sees · receipt stablecoins:rlusd:2026.10.18:1e2308e3f28a
Are you Ripple USD (RLUSD)? Reply to this verdict, or send evidence, ask for a correction or claim the listing. Every message gets a public ticket number; none of it changes a rank unless a public page or a signed statement supports it.