Behind the Curtain: Why Swift is Pivoting Towards Blockchain While Ripple Remains Steady

Change has long been blowing through the global finance industry, but in the past year, the momentum has become truly unstoppable. While one project has been working tirelessly to create a new medium, another giant suddenly opened a completely new path. The story of Swift and Ripple is not just a technical competition—it’s a fundamental battle for the future of global value transfer.

This Change Is Deeper Than Technology

At the Frankfurt Sibos 2025 conference last month, Swift revealed their strategic pivot. Swift Chief Business Officer Thierry Chilosi and Standard Chartered Bank Transaction Banking Global Head Michael Spiegel jointly announced a groundbreaking development: the launch of a blockchain-based shared ledger that will become part of the Swift infrastructure.

This is not just a software update. It is a structural reinvention of how the global financial system settles transactions. The new ledger is designed to provide a secure, real-time accounting system between banks, using smart contracts to verify transaction sequences and enforce agreements. In theory, it seamlessly integrates traditional money and tokenized assets within a single ecosystem.

But the real surprise came from the Singapore Token2049 conference, where Consensys CEO Joe Lubin announced the technical foundation: Swift is using Linea, the Ethereum Layer 2 network with zk-EVM technology. This revelation signals the magnitude of their commitment—this is not experimental; it is a production-grade infrastructure choice.

Over 30 global financial institutions, including JPMorgan, Bank of America, and Citibank, are ready to join the pilot program of this Linea-based payment rail.

The Real Battle: The Fight Against Fragmentation

To understand the significance of Swift’s move, we need to look at why they chose Linea over other Layer 2 solutions like Optimism or Arbitrum.

The difference lies in verification logic. Optimistic Rollup (used by OP and Arbitrum) has a philosophy: transactions are valid by default, and only challenged transactions are verified. This means a waiting period of several days before asset withdrawals are finalized—an unacceptable time cost for financial settlement relying on liquidity.

Linea, on the other hand, uses zk-EVM (zero-knowledge Ethereum Virtual Machine). This technology provides an instant mathematical proof that a transaction is valid. For Swift and partner banks processing astronomical settlement volumes, this means immediate final confirmation. Moreover, zk-EVM also offers transaction privacy while maintaining compliance verification—a critical requirement for the banking sector.

This choice reflects a fundamental principle: capital should move as fluidly as water. The old flow—slow, with many intermediate layers, large pre-funded reserves in Nostro/Vostro accounts—is becoming a bottleneck. The new flow is fast, low-friction, and real-time.

How Big Is the Stake

Swift handles approximately $150 trillion in global payments annually. If they achieve atomic-level reconciliation and 24/7 real-time settlement using Linea’s technology stack, the implications will be transformative.

The massive amounts of liquidity previously immobilized to hedge settlement risk will become available for real economy activity. Trillions of dollars parked in pre-funded reserves will become active capital. The efficiency gains are not marginal—they are structural.

This is not just an upgrade to the system. It is a transition from the “telegram instruction era” to the “mathematical verification era” of global financial infrastructure.

The Ripple Story: Decade of Determination, Limited Uptake

What Ripple has been discussing remains unchanged. In 2012, they launched the XRP Ledger with a mission to overhaul the inefficient Swift correspondent banking model. Their strategy is straightforward: make XRP a bridge currency, and speed up cross-border settlement from days to seconds.

Their execution has been impressive. They built RippleNet, connecting over 300 financial institutions. In emerging markets like Southeast Asia, their on-demand liquidity (ODL) service has proven its potential—real-time settlement, predictable costs, XRP as a bridge currency eliminating pre-funding requirements.

But the SEC lawsuit in 2020 was a turning point. The five-year legal battle paralyzed market adoption in the US. Despite expanding operations globally and reaching 40 payment markets by 2022, with a total transaction volume of around $30 billion, adoption has been slower than expected.

In August 2025, the legal saga ended when the SEC withdrew its final appeal. XRP spot ETF approval followed, marking its official entry into mainstream institutional asset allocation. It’s a milestone, but with caveats.

On the retail side, we see specific use cases: Japan’s SBI Remit uses XRP for real-time remittance to the Philippines, Vietnam, and Indonesia, reducing pre-funding costs. Santander offers transparent money transfers through One Pay FX. Tranglo in Southeast Asia improves Peso and Baht settlement efficiency using Ripple ODL.

At the enterprise level, American Express and PNC Bank have integrated RippleNet for B2B trade settlement. And in sovereign territories, Ripple has partnered with over 20 countries like Palau, Montenegro, and Bhutan for CBDC platforms.

But the numbers tell the story: Swift is connected to over 11,000 institutions across more than 200 countries. Ripple’s network, even as it grows, remains significantly smaller.

The Achilles’ Heel: Ripple’s Core Weakness

The deepest challenge Ripple faces since its founding is something no technology can decide: asset concentration risk.

Ripple’s ODL model is fundamentally dependent on XRP as a bridge currency. This is powerful in theory—a neutral asset enabling atomic settlement. But in practice, it means thousands of banks on RippleNet must accept the volatility risk of a single asset. Not everyone is willing to assume such exposure.

Swift’s blockchain ledger, by contrast, is designed to be asset-agnostic. It supports fiat currencies, stablecoins, CBDCs—any tokenized asset. Thousands of banks in the Swift ecosystem do not need to hold significant XRP positions. They can simply upgrade their existing rails and enjoy instant settlement without taking on new asset risks.

This is the “stock advantage + technical compliance” combination that leaves Ripple in the most strategic position since its launch.

The New Landscape

2025 marks an inflection point. Swift’s move to Linea is not an isolated decision—it’s part of a larger trend. Coinbase Base is built on OP Stack. Robinhood has launched Robinhood Chain on Arbitrum for RWA tokenization and 24/7 trading. The Layer 2 revolution has become a mainstream financial infrastructure play.

Ripple has a ten-year head start, but the timing of Swift’s entry is critical. Swift’s global reach, regulatory standing, and institutional relationships provide an advantage that is hard to overcome through pure technological innovation. XRP is more volatile, Ripple’s network is more boutique, and adoption is more selective.

In the future of global payments, the gap will not just be opened—it will be built differently.