•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
A market structure analysis circulating on X this week made a specific claim about XRP: retail investors are not necessarily pushing the price higher, but they may be a key reason it has not fallen further.
The analysis cites April 2026 on-chain estimates. It says around 50% to 55% of all XRP is held in self-custody or on exchange wallets. By contrast, institutions and ETFs are estimated to hold just 1% to 2% of the total supply. The analysis also claims market makers account for 60% to 70% of actual price movement on any given day.
Based on those figures, the analysis argues that XRP’s “price floor” is supported less by active buying and more by holders simply refusing to sell. It points to seven to eight million activated wallets and a growing number of multi-year holders, suggesting a large portion of supply has been effectively removed from active trading through inaction rather than demand.
At current prices, the analysis estimates that retail conviction accounts for roughly 40% to 60% of XRP’s effective price floor.
Bill Morgan challenged the retail supply thesis after reading the analysis. He argued that Ripple remains the largest single seller of XRP, offloading hundreds of millions of tokens every month. In his view, if supply dynamics were the primary driver of price behavior, those sales should translate into consistent downward pressure—which, he said, is not evident.
He also highlighted a factor the analysis does not fully address: XRP’s price tends to track Bitcoin. Morgan’s point is that when Bitcoin rises, XRP rises, and when Bitcoin falls, XRP falls, regardless of how much Ripple sells or how tightly retail holders hold their tokens.
“The predominant explanatory factor remains Bitcoin price movement,” Morgan wrote.
The dispute centers on a split between ownership and price influence. The analysis frames XRP as being in a phase where retail holders dominate ownership, while institutions and market structure participants dominate price movement.
Whether retail belief and holding behavior are truly supporting the floor—or whether Bitcoin is effectively doing most of the work—remains unresolved by the data presented. Morgan’s critique is that the retail conviction argument needs to address the Bitcoin linkage more directly before it can make the stronger case.
Premium gym chains are entering a “golden era” that is ending or already in decline, as rising operating costs collide with shifting consumer preferences toward more flexible, community-based ways to exercise. Long-term memberships are shrinking, margins are pressured by higher rents and facility expenses, and competition from smaller, more personalized…
