XRP Analyst Dismisses Michael Saylor Investment Claims

XRP has once again become the center of a heated debate within the crypto community after a bold claim surfaced comparing potential returns between Ripple’s XRP and Bitcoin. The crypto world watched as XRP surged in value, prompting discussions about whether MicroStrategy chairman Michael Saylor would have fared better by investing in XRP instead of Bitcoin. However, a prominent market analyst has firmly rejected that notion.

Former RippleX engineer Matt Hamilton recently shared compelling figures suggesting that Saylor’s portfolio might have nearly doubled had he opted for XRP instead of Bitcoin during the early stages of his investment strategy. This hypothetical scenario has sparked considerable curiosity and fueled debates across social platforms.

Hamilton argued that not only would XRP’s exclusion from major investment portfolios have changed had Saylor backed it, but such a high-profile endorsement could have also triggered even more substantial price appreciation for the token. The resulting media coverage and investor sentiment, according to Hamilton, might have created a snowball effect, perhaps even stalling Bitcoin’s momentum by comparison.

However, industry expert Christopher Inks of TexasWest Capital wasted no time in pushing back against the comparison. Inks emphasized that this entire hypothetical scenario is flawed from the outset. According to him, it’s absurd to think that Saylor—widely known for his Bitcoin maximalism—would have even considered touching XRP during that period.

He pointed out a critical factor often overlooked in such comparisons: regulatory risk. Inks reminded the crypto community that Saylor began accumulating Bitcoin while XRP was entangled in legal drama with the SEC, which had labeled the token an «unregistered security.» Following the SEC’s charges, nearly every major U.S.-based exchange suspended the trading of XRP, making it a virtually inaccessible asset for institutional investors at the time.

“No respectable CEO would knowingly expose their firm to that level of legal uncertainty,” Inks stated bluntly. In his view, the regulatory cloud over XRP rendered it off-limits for any high-profile investor seeking long-term stability and legal clarity.

Still, the story doesn’t end there. Saylor’s stance on XRP, though historically resistant, has shown signs of subtle change. Back in 2022, he famously labeled the token as an obvious regulatory issue. But more recently, in a surprising pivot, Saylor entertained the concept of incorporating XRP into a hypothetical multi-token reserve model for the U.S. This marked a noticeable thaw in his public position toward the asset.

This evolution doesn’t imply a complete endorsement of XRP by Saylor, but it does hint at a broader recognition of the project’s relevance in the ecosystem. With ripple effects across the financial and legal landscape, XRP’s resilience continues to merit attention—even from its skeptics.

The conversation around XRP versus Bitcoin isn’t new, but it gains renewed energy every time market movements and legal developments shift the balance. Whether it’s theoretical gains or real-world implications, XRP remains a cornerstone in discussions about the future of digital assets and investor strategy.

Related: XRP Price: $12M Max Pain for Bears

In conclusion, while mathematical models may favor one asset over another under certain conditions, investment decisions—especially for institutional stakeholders—are rarely made in a vacuum. Factors like regulation, public perception, and ecosystem maturity all weigh heavily. As XRP continues to make headlines, one thing remains consistent: its capacity to challenge narratives and stir strong opinions in the world of crypto finance.