Points of Focus

• Ripple reportedly declined an XRP custody request, signaling a focus on institutional infrastructure over holding client assets.
• Metaco and Standard Custody have strengthened Ripple’s custody technology for banks and regulated financial firms.
• While unconfirmed by Ripple, the claim aligns with its strategy of powering institutional custody rather than competing for deposits.

A rejected XRP custody request might have offered a better look at how Ripple views its place in institutional finance. 

Wealth manager Jake Claver said his firm once asked Ripple to custody XRP held on behalf of its clients. According to Claver, Ripple responded: “We hold 4.8 billion XRP. Why would we need yours?”

Blunt response aside, Claver argues that Ripple may have little interest in becoming a retail-facing bank or competing to “collect” XRP deposits. Rather, it might see more value in providing the tech and compliance systems used by banks, custodians, and other financial firms.

This story, of course, comes from Claver and has not been confirmed by Ripple, but it appears to match the direction of the company’s institutional custody business.

Ripple has built the tools behind institutional custody

Ripple entered the institutional custody market through its $250 million acquisition of Swiss custody technology provider Metaco in 2023.

At the time, Ripple said its deal would expand the company’s enterprise products and give customers the technology to custody, issue, and settle tokenized assets. Metaco’s Harmonize platform was developed for banks, global custodians, and other regulated financial institutions.

Ripple later acquired Standard Custody & Trust Company, adding a New York limited-purpose trust charter and more regulatory infrastructure to its business. The entity said its acquisition would help it assist with enterprise tokenization, storage, movement, and exchange value.

These acquisitions are exactly what backs Claver’s claim. Ripple has made investments in its custody capabilities, but its focus appears to be supplying the systems institutions use to protect digital assets.

If one examines Ripple’s current product strategy, Ripple Custody is marketed as a modular infrastructure that can integrate with existing banking systems. The platform offers:

• Private and public key management
• Compliance tools
• Transaction controls
• Support for tokenized assets

Does Ripple want XRP deposits or the institutions holding them?

Now, if Ripple does plan to compete for institutional XRP deposits, how will it do so?

Owning Standard Custody gives Ripple regulated custody capabilities, while Metaco expanded the technology available to banks and other large financial firms. That said, Claver’s account suggests Ripple may not want to become the default custodian for every wealth manager or XRP holder.

Its business may be better served by powering the institutions that hold said assets.

A direct custodian competes for client deposits and earns revenue from the assets it safeguards. An infrastructure provider can supply custody technology to banks, asset managers, and financial platforms that already serve large customer bases.

Ripple has continued expanding around this model. In April 2026, the company described custody as the “foundational governance layer” of institutional digital asset adoption. It also highlighted newer capabilities involving compliance screening, cloud-based key management, staking, and tokenization.

Claver’s reported rejection could reflect a business boundary rather than a lack of interest in custody. Ripple appears focused on building the infrastructure behind institutional digital assets, leaving banks, wealth managers, and other financial firms to manage client relationships themselves.