XRPL validator Vet (Hussein Zangana) has argued that the $XRP Ledger’s consensus mechanism is better suited for long-term sustainability than Bitcoin’s proof-of-work (PoW) model.
According to Vet, Bitcoin’s mining system was highly effective at distributing $BTC in the network’s early years. However, he believes it could face economic challenges as block rewards continue to decline.
In a post on X and an accompanying video presentation, Vet compared the supply dynamics of Bitcoin and $XRP. He argued that “supply distribution is only a short-term challenge, while consensus algorithms are permanent.”
Bitcoin Early Success Came With Long-Term Trade-Offs
Zangana explained that Bitcoin’s PoW mechanism originally served two purposes. It secured the blockchain while distributing new $BTC through mining rewards.
Bitcoin launched with a 50 $BTC block reward, which halves roughly every four years. Vet noted that about 95.5% of Bitcoin’s fixed 21 million supply has already been distributed, leaving relatively little new issuance over the coming decades.
He acknowledged that PoW helped democratize Bitcoin’s early distribution because users could mine coins with relatively modest hardware. However, he argued that the system becomes more expensive and less efficient as new issuance declines.
According to Vet, Bitcoin will increasingly rely on transaction fees to incentivize miners once block rewards become negligible. He also argued that wider adoption of Layer-2 networks could reduce on-chain activity, making it harder for miners to earn enough fee revenue over the long term.
$XRP Ledger Was Built for Long-Term Efficiency
Meanwhile, Vet contrasted this with the $XRP Ledger, which did not use its consensus mechanism to distribute $XRP. Instead, the network created its entire 100 billion $XRP supply at genesis, with tokens distributed over time.
Because XRPL has no mining rewards, Vet said its consensus mechanism focuses solely on validating and settling transactions. This allows for low costs, fast confirmations, and minimal transaction fees.
He argued that this approach made $XRP’s early distribution more difficult. However, it also removed the long-term burden of maintaining an expensive mining incentive once token distribution is complete.
According to Zangana, Bitcoin prioritized efficient early distribution, while the $XRP Ledger accepted a more challenging launch in exchange for a consensus model built for long-term operation.
Network Performance Will Matter More Than Launch History
Vet also argued that future users will care less about how a cryptocurrency was originally distributed.
Whether Bitcoin relied on mining rewards or Ripple distributed $XRP over time, he said most new users will judge a network by how well it works today rather than by its launch history.
He added that the $XRP Ledger has grown into a mature ecosystem with numerous developers and applications. As a result, he believes it is now well positioned to benefit from its consensus design after overcoming its initial distribution challenges.
Concluding his analysis, Vet said the next five to ten years will be a key test for Bitcoin as block rewards continue to shrink and the network relies more heavily on transaction fees.
By contrast, he argued that the $XRP Ledger can continue operating efficiently without facing the same structural pressures.
