The $500 million financing last November pushed Ripple's valuation straight to $40 billion. Traditional finance players like Citadel and Fortress collectively placed their bets, which on the surface seems like favourable information for XRP. However, I am more concerned about another issue—when institutions begin to dominate the rules of the game, is the retail investor's stake still safe?

Three years ago, Ripple's CTO Schwartz said, "Compliance is the way to generate blood," which many people considered to be empty talk at the time. Looking back now, this route has indeed been successful. From the cross-border payment network to the launch of the stablecoin RLUSD, Ripple is transforming itself from a "token project" into "financial infrastructure." This transformation sounds impressive, but from another perspective: the more standardized and institutionalized the assets are, the weaker the voice of individual holders becomes.

Let me clarify this point - I am not downplaying the price potential of XRP. The entry of institutions may indeed push up the market value, but it also means that regulatory scrutiny will be stronger. Think about it, when your holding data and trading records can be traced, how much of the so-called "anonymity" advantage remains? Especially for those old players who are used to operating freely on-chain, it's time to reassess their asset allocation.

Regulation is not a bad thing, but the side effects it brings are often overlooked. Ripple is now serving banks and payment institutions, which inherently require transparency and traceability. As a retail investor, you need to understand: when a project's clients shift from retail investors to institutions, who will the product design prioritize? Once you have clarified this issue, it won't be too late to decide how to adjust your positions.