XRP vs Stellar: Unique Node Lists or Federated Byzantine Agreement?
XRP vs Stellar compared on consensus protocols, burned fee models, ledger limits, and supply mechanics so you know how each payment network operates.
Updated July 2026 · Reviewed by the PipeFlare team
Choosing between XRP vs Stellar comes down to whether you prioritize the Unique Node List trust architecture of the XRP Ledger or the quorum slices of the Stellar Consensus Protocol. At PipeFlare, what we see readers get wrong most often is assuming every payment network runs identical consensus rules and token supply schedules. XRP operates on a decentralized ledger where validators verify transactions using publisher-curated lists of trusted nodes, burning every fee directly upon execution. Stellar operates as an open network powered by Federated Byzantine Agreement, where validators choose their own quorum slices to confirm transactions every few seconds. Both networks provide alternatives to traditional proof-of-work settlement systems. You pay for network usage through tiny fractions of a token that protect the ledger from spam attacks. The XRP Ledger burns every transaction cost irrevocably from its fixed supply. Stellar burns its base inclusion fees during surge pricing while enforcing a base reserve requirement for every active account. Understanding these concrete technical distinctions allows you to select the ledger structure that fits your operational needs. If you are comparing other major networks, review our [XRP vs Ethereum](/compare/xrp-vs-ethereum) analysis.
Evaluating whether to process payments using XRP or Stellar? Review long-term valuation trends and market developments before submitting transactions.
XRP vs Stellar (XLM) at a glance
| Dimension | XRP | Stellar (XLM) |
|---|---|---|
| Consensus mechanism | XRPL Consensus Protocol using Unique Node Lists | Stellar Consensus Protocol using Federated Byzantine Agreement |
| Trust model | Consensus continues if fewer than 20% of trusted validators are faulty; network halts between 20% and 80% faulty | Validators select individual quorum slices; protocol prioritizes safety over liveness |
| Fee mechanics | Minimum transaction cost is 10 drops (0.00001 XRP) and rises under load | Minimum base inclusion fee is 100 stroops (0.0000001 XLM) per operation with surge pricing under congestion |
| Fee destination | Irrevocably destroyed and not paid to any party | Collected on the network per operation |
| Supply history | Created with 100 billion XRP in 2011 to 2012; 80 billion given to Ripple Labs, 20 billion kept by founders, 55 billion placed in escrow in 2017 | Original supply was 100 billion XLM; inflation created about 5.44 billion XLM before ending October 28, 2019; about 55.44 billion XLM was burned |
| Account reserve | Not published on the sources we checked; verify at the official page | Base reserve is 0.5 XLM; minimum account balance is 1 XLM plus 0.5 XLM per subentry |
| Ledger limits and settlement time | Ledger close time and throughput limits are not published on the sources we checked; verify at the official page | Ledgers close about every 5 to 7 seconds; mainnet limits are 1,000 non-smart-contract operations and 2,000 smart-contract transactions as of July 2026 |
| Governance and foundations | The XRP trademark is registered to the XRPL Foundation | The Stellar Development Foundation is a nonprofit; DTCC plans to tokenize real-world assets on Stellar |
XRP vs Stellar Consensus and Network Design
XRP runs on the XRP Ledger using Unique Node Lists, while Stellar uses the Stellar Consensus Protocol to achieve finality across quorum slices. The [XRP Ledger consensus protocol](https://xrpl.org/docs/concepts/consensus-protocol) does not rely on mining or proof-of-stake validation. Instead, the network relies on validators that evaluate transaction sets in structured rounds. Each participant configures a Unique Node List (UNL) representing the specific set of validators they trust not to collude against them. Trust is explicit. Consensus continues uninterrupted as long as fewer than 20% of trusted validators in the UNL are faulty. If between 20% and 80% of trusted validators become faulty or unreachable, the network halts to protect state integrity rather than diverging into split chains. Furthermore, confirming an invalid transaction requires over 80% of trusted validators colluding simultaneously. The network chooses halting over divergence. Stellar approaches distributed consensus through a Federated Byzantine Agreement system defined in the [Stellar Consensus Protocol](https://developers.stellar.org/docs/learn/fundamentals/stellar-consensus-protocol). Rather than relying on a globally uniform list of trusted validators, individual nodes choose which specific validator groupings they trust to form consensus. These groupings are called quorum slices. Overlapping quorum slices unite the global network into a functional quorum. The protocol explicitly prioritizes safety over liveness. Blocks can get stuck. If nodes cannot establish agreement within their trusted quorum slices, the ledger halts progress until nodes resolve the disagreement. You can explore how these consensus models compare to traditional proof-of-work systems in our [XRP vs Bitcoin](/compare/xrp-vs-bitcoin) breakdown. Settlement cadences and execution capacity highlight key differences across the two codebases. On Stellar, ledgers close about every 5 to 7 seconds. As of July 2026 on mainnet, ledger limits stand at 1,000 non-smart-contract operations and 2,000 smart-contract transactions according to the [Stellar developer documentation](https://developers.stellar.org/docs/learn/fundamentals/stellar-stack). These hard operational limits prevent ledger bloat while maintaining predictable processing boundaries. In contrast, the official documentation for the XRP Ledger does not publish official transaction-per-second ceilings or precise ledger close intervals. Users must evaluate each system based on documented specifications rather than unverified network claims.
Fee Mechanics and Spam Prevention Models
Both payment networks charge minimal fees to prevent ledger spam, but they handle fee destruction and congestion pricing through distinct mechanisms. On the XRP Ledger, every submitted transaction must consume a minimum transaction cost as outlined in the [XRP Ledger transaction cost guide](https://xrpl.org/docs/concepts/transactions/transaction-cost). The minimum transaction cost is 10 drops, which equals 0.00001 XRP. This cost is not paid to validators, node operators, or any central entity. The XRP is irrevocably destroyed. When network load increases, the required transaction cost rises dynamically to de-prioritize non-critical submissions. Burning fees removes tokens from circulation forever. This permanent destruction ensures that malicious actors cannot flood the network with automated transactions without incurring substantial capital losses. For comparisons with other networks that burn assets, read our [XRP vs Solana](/compare/xrp-vs-solana) article. Stellar applies fee mechanics based on discrete operations contained inside submitted transaction envelopes. According to the [Stellar fees and resource limits documentation](https://developers.stellar.org/docs/learn/fundamentals/fees-resource-limits-metering), the minimum base inclusion fee is 100 stroops per operation, which equals 0.0000001 XLM. A single transaction may hold multiple operations, multiplying the total base inclusion fee required. When the network experiences congestion, surge pricing activates. Bidders offer higher fees to secure execution slots within the mainnet ledger capacity. Costs escalate under demand. Unlike XRP, Stellar does not state on its fees documentation page that regular base transaction fees are permanently destroyed. Account reserve rules further separate the operational costs of maintaining balances on these networks. Stellar requires users to maintain a base reserve of 0.5 XLM on every active account. The minimum account balance is 1 XLM plus an additional 0.5 XLM per subentry, such as trustlines or data entries. This lockup protects ledger state storage from unbounded expansion. The XRP Ledger documentation checked for this guide does not publish its account reserve figures on its primary fee pages. Users evaluating deployment budgets must account for these reserve minimums before opening accounts on either ledger.
Token Supply History and Organizational Governance
Token distribution histories and governance entities reflect differing organizational structures behind XRP and Stellar. The XRP Ledger was created with a fixed supply of 100 billion XRP in 2011 to 2012 as documented on the [XRPL official introduction](https://xrpl.org/docs/introduction/what-is-xrp). The founders gave 80 billion XRP to Ripple Labs and kept 20 billion XRP for themselves. In 2017, Ripple placed 55 billion XRP into cryptographic escrow to create predictability around potential circulating supply additions. The XRP trademark itself is registered to the XRPL Foundation, an entity distinct from commercial software developers. For traders tracking token valuation projections, our [XRP price prediction](/price/xrp-price-prediction) provides additional context around market historical milestones. Network consensus remains governed by independent node operators who select their preferred Unique Node Lists. Stellar has undergone structural supply adjustments since its inception, as detailed in the [Stellar lumens fundamentals](https://developers.stellar.org/docs/learn/fundamentals/lumens). The network launched with an original supply of 100 billion XLM. A built-in inflation mechanism created about 5.44 billion XLM over several years before the community voted to end inflation on October 28, 2019. In November 2019, about 55.44 billion XLM was burned. As of July 21, 2026, the total supply of XLM is 50,001,786,839.9124767, with a circulating supply of 34,169,177,737.45 XLM. Supply metrics remain documented on official ledger trackers. Users tracking smart contract platforms can also compare network profiles via our [XRP vs Cardano](/compare/xrp-vs-cardano) guide. Governance and organizational missions diverge across the two ecosystems. Stellar development is led by the [Stellar Development Foundation](https://stellar.org/foundation), which operates as a nonprofit organization. The foundation works directly with financial institutions and technology providers, and its official web portal notes that DTCC plans to tokenize real-world assets on Stellar. Meanwhile, the XRP Ledger ecosystem features independent development supported by the XRPL Foundation alongside corporate software contributions from Ripple Labs. Neither network uses on-chain token voting to adjust core consensus rules, relying instead on validator software updates.
The verdict
Pick XRP if you want fees burned. It fits users who want fees completely destroyed rather than redirected, starting at a minimum transaction cost of 10 drops. Consensus continues safely as long as fewer than 20% of trusted validators on the Unique Node List are faulty. It also suits participants who accept that the network halts rather than diverges if faults reach between 20% and 80%. Choose Stellar for smart contracts. Ledgers close every 5 to 7 seconds, with mainnet limits of 1,000 non-smart-contract operations and 2,000 smart-contract transactions. The base inclusion fee starts at 100 stroops per operation, and accounts require a 1 XLM minimum balance plus 0.5 XLM per subentry. It fits teams tracking real-world asset tokenization, including DTCC plans announced on the Stellar Development Foundation site. Neither fits users seeking an uncapped supply, since Stellar burned about 55.44 billion XLM and XRP began with a fixed 100 billion supply. Our verdict would flip if Stellar removes account base reserves, or if XRPL alters its validator fault thresholds. Review current network conditions before moving funds.
Frequently asked questions
Is XRP or Stellar faster?
Stellar ledgers close about every 5 to 7 seconds according to its official developer documentation. The XRP Ledger documentation does not publish official ledger close intervals or transaction-per-second ceilings on the sources we checked. Because official XRPL sources do not state their exact settlement time metrics, a verified side-by-side speed comparison cannot be confirmed from primary technical references.
Is Stellar the same as XRP?
Stellar is not the same as XRP, though both networks target low-cost digital payments. XRP runs on the XRP Ledger using Unique Node Lists where transaction fees are irrevocably destroyed from a fixed 100 billion supply. Stellar operates using the Stellar Consensus Protocol under a Federated Byzantine Agreement model, closing ledgers every 5 to 7 seconds with a supply that had roughly 55.44 billion XLM burned in 2019.
Which has lower fees, XRP or Stellar?
Both networks feature minimal base fees, but they calculate them differently. The XRP Ledger charges a minimum transaction cost of 10 drops (0.00001 XRP), which is permanently burned upon execution. Stellar requires a minimum base inclusion fee of 100 stroops (0.0000001 XLM) per operation, with surge pricing adjusting costs when ledger demand exceeds capacity.
What is the supply of XRP versus XLM?
XRP was created with a fixed supply of 100 billion tokens, with 55 billion placed into escrow by Ripple Labs in 2017. Stellar launched with an original supply of 100 billion XLM, generated roughly 5.44 billion XLM via inflation, and burned about 55.44 billion XLM in 2019. As of July 21, 2026, XLM total supply is 50,001,786,839.9124767 and circulating supply is 34,169,177,737.45 XLM.
What consensus does each network use?
XRP uses the XRPL Consensus Protocol based on Unique Node Lists of trusted validators, halting rather than diverging if 20% to 80% of trusted nodes become faulty. Stellar uses the Stellar Consensus Protocol, which relies on Federated Byzantine Agreement and individual quorum slices, explicitly prioritizing safety over liveness so blocks can get stuck if consensus cannot be reached.
Which is better for payments, XRP or Stellar?
The better payment network depends on your trust assumptions and fee preferences. XRP provides an irrevocably destroyed fee model where no participant collects transaction costs, backed by a fixed token issuance. Stellar offers flexible quorum slices, documented 5 to 7 second close times, and mainnet limits of 1,000 non-smart-contract operations and 2,000 smart-contract transactions as of July 2026.
Sources
Related guides
Ready to get started?
Compare regulated exchange sign-up bonuses — they pay you and a referrer after a qualifying trade.