According to XRP analyst Zach Rector, a common misconception in the market is that if XRP is to rise to $100, billions of dollars of new money must flow directly. According to the article, price increases do not correspond to additional funds in terms of the structure and historical fluctuations of encrypted assets.

Let's see the scale.

Rector compares the potential valuation of the XRP to a number of broad asset classes, including British Weeda, gold, Japanese yen and United States M2 currency supply. His core statement was that hundreds of trillions of United States dollars of assets already existed in the market, and that, given the market value scale alone, it was not entirely unprecedented for XRP to reach a higher valuation.

  • Based on 100 billion in circulation, the market value of $5 trillion corresponds to approximately $50 million.
  • Based on the same caliber, $8 trillion equals about $80.
  • If it corresponds to the market value of about $10 trillion, the price is about $100.

It was also mentioned that the same market value would have been higher if it had been calculated at approximately 62 billion current flows.

The article emphasizes the market value multiplier

The focus of this review is not on giving high-price targets, but on explaining the concept of “market value multiplier”. The market value multiplier refers to a small net inflow of funds, which may result in more substantial changes in total market value.

For example, in November 2025, the market value of XRP had been reduced by $41 billion due to a net outflow of about $808 million, which was about 50 times amplified; in a period of eight hours in April 2025, the net inflow of about $12.87 million had resulted in a market value increase of $7.74 billion, which was about 601 times amplified.

How do you calculate $100?

According to the article, if estimated at a conservative multiplier of 50, XRP would reach a market value of about $10 trillion, or about $100 million, the corresponding net inflow would be about 1980 billion; if the multiplier increased to 100 times, the required net inflow could be reduced to about $99 billion.

The article concludes by comparing this scale with the flow of funds from the early days of the Bitcoin ETF listing, and considers that the volume of funds required, while not small, is not completely isolated from the historical boundaries of global capital markets.

Additional information:It is a draft view based on analogies and historical samples, with a central focus on explaining the relationship between financial flows and changes in market value, without disclosing new institutional buy-in, regulatory progress or fundamental changes in the chain.