In 2023, developers created a new version of the XRP Ledger because the original network wasn’t embracing smart contracts. Now, three years later, the original XRP Ledger is adding its own smart contract capabilities, and the plans for this upgrade actually borrow ideas from the new version. This raises the question of why there are now three different approaches all trying to solve the same problem, and what this means for XAH.
Summary
- Xahau launched in 2023 as a fork of the XRP Ledger’s rippled codebase, carrying the Hooks amendment that XRPL validators never adopted, with its own token, its own validator set, and a governance system run through a genesis account hook.
- The XRP Ledger is now building programmability natively: XLS-100d Smart Escrows, using WebAssembly, sits among known amendments with a devnet live, and XLS-101 Smart Contracts is a drafted specification that cites both Hooks and the Ethereum Virtual Machine as influences.
- Xahau rejects the sidechain framing entirely, positioning itself as an independent Layer 1 that diverged in its own direction, with features the parent lacks and vice versa, and describing the borrowing as mutual.
- Three architectures now answer the same question for one ecosystem: Hooks on Xahau, Solidity through the EVM sidechain whose first year this publication audited at $25,741 in total value locked, and WebAssembly natively on the main ledger.
- The open question is what a fork is worth once the chain it left ships the capability it forked for, and XAH is the asset where that question gets priced.
Cryptocurrency splits often stem from disagreements about money or core beliefs. However, this particular split happened because of a difference in opinion over adding new features. For years, those who verify transactions on the XRP Ledger resisted adopting “Hooks,” a simple system for running small programs directly within accounts to control how they send and receive funds. Eventually, the developers decided not to wait any longer. They created Xahau – a new network based on the original XRP Ledger code but *with* Hooks included – along with its own digital currency and verifiers. Ripple’s top technology officer even publicly backed this move, believing it was the best way forward for the technology. Now, three years later, the original XRP Ledger is finally starting to add similar programming capabilities itself. A new update called XLS-100d, based on WebAssembly Smart Escrows, is being tested, and another planned update, XLS-101d (for general smart contracts), draws inspiration from both Hooks *and* Ethereum’s technology. This article explores what this coming together of the two chains means: for the original XRP Ledger that initially said no, for Xahau which forged ahead independently, and for the broader cryptocurrency world now facing three different approaches to adding programming features to payment systems.
Ripple has invested in Squid’s latest funding round of $6 million. Squid, which uses technology from Axelar, helps move funds between over 100 different blockchains – it’s already processed more than $6 billion in cross-chain transactions and works with the XRP Ledger.
— crypto.news (@cryptodotnews) May 24, 2026
What Xahau took, and what it built
To grasp the purpose of this new version, it’s important to know what elements it preserved from the original. Xahau isn’t a radical change from how the XRP Ledger works; instead, it builds upon that existing foundation.
The network maintained its essential features: the system for reaching agreement, its built-in exchange, and the method for preventing network abuse by requiring and destroying small fees paid in its native currency. What was added was a system called Hooks – small programs attached to accounts that enforce rules on transactions *before* they happen. This allows for features like delayed transfers, account recovery through trusted contacts, and automatic, secure payments. The design is intentionally focused; Hooks weren’t created to be a full computer system. They’re simple programs that respond to network activity, fast enough to keep transactions quick and inexpensive for everyday payments.
Xahau differs from its original platform in two key ways. First, it uses a more streamlined token standard instead of the complex NFT system used previously. Second, it features a unique governance structure: the initial account is managed by a program that controls important functions like creating new XAH tokens. This process involves up to twenty independent validators. It’s logical for a blockchain built on smart contracts to be governed by them too. Finally, XAH serves as the network’s primary currency and reserve asset, with a reward system not found on the original chain.
As a researcher following this development, the launch of Xahau was definitely met with some friction, which is typical when a blockchain splits. I observed a lot of discussion within the XRP community – some were concerned about the lack of official backing, while others felt it was necessary because existing validators hadn’t approved updates for a long time. What’s really interesting to me is that Xahau continued to develop, building up a network of validators, getting listed on exchanges, and proving it could offer something the original XRP ledger couldn’t.
What the parent is shipping now
The XRP Ledger’s plan for the future has changed, but it still aims for the same goals, and the details are available for anyone to see.
XLS-100d, called Smart Escrows, lets you use code to control when money is released from an escrow account. It’s now available on a special testing network (devnet) so developers can build and experiment with this new feature.
As a researcher, I’ve been looking into how we can add more functionality to this system. Currently, the programmability is quite limited – it’s really focused on payments and allows for things like escrows with specific conditions, using a standard coding language. However, a broader proposal, called XLS-101d or Smart Contracts, was developed in 2025. This aims to bring full smart contract capabilities to the ledger, and it’s been inspired by designs like Hooks and the Ethereum Virtual Machine (EVM).
Opting for WebAssembly instead of building a custom virtual machine was a key technical choice. It allows developers to use familiar tools and skills rather than requiring them to learn something new and specific to the project. This decision also signals a shift: the system, which previously limited programming capabilities, is now embracing a widely used execution standard – even acknowledging its connection to the technology it once diverged from over similar principles.
Currently, three different technologies are being developed within the same blockchain environment. Hooks are operating on Xahau, Solidity is running on the XRPL EVM sidechain (which we audited and found had $25,741 locked in its first year), and WebAssembly is being integrated directly into the main ledger. Despite these compatible technologies, there’s no indication developers are flocking to a single platform – they’re all being pursued independently. Essentially, we have three solutions, one ecosystem, and no clear leader emerging.
According to Evernorth, XRP and RLUSD have distinct roles within the XRPL network, and both are benefiting from the increasing activity in on-chain financial services.
— crypto.news (@cryptodotnews) May 21, 2026
The fork refuses the frame
Xahau directly challenges the idea that successful innovations are simply adopted by the original project they branched from, and this viewpoint should be considered carefully as it adds a valuable layer of complexity to understanding how things develop.
Xahau maintains it’s a completely separate blockchain – a Layer 1 network – and never functioned as a sidechain to XRPL. While originally built using some of XRPL’s code, Xahau has since grown independently with its own rules for validating transactions, making decisions about the network (governance), and managing its economy. Though the two networks sometimes share ideas, they are now developing separately, each with unique features the other doesn’t have. The idea that Xahau is a sidechain stems from older marketing materials, not how it operates today.
The way this project is presented is understandable given the technical details, and it’s natural for any project to highlight its own benefits. It truly operates independently – with its own decision-making process, validator network, and token with its own economic rules. Collaboration happens in both directions, as developers often work together and share ideas. However, a clear imbalance remains, and no amount of explanation can hide it. Once the main platform gains full programming capabilities, developers will consider Xahau’s early progress and Hooks’ user-friendliness, but also the main platform’s larger user base, established partnerships, exchange listings, and overall market influence. Projects created to fill a gap face their biggest challenge when that gap disappears, and no matter how much they emphasize independence, developers will ultimately base their decisions on practical considerations and market realities.
The threshold that decides everything
The success of this system relies heavily on how it’s governed, something people outside often don’t fully appreciate. Recent events within the system itself demonstrate why understanding this governance is so important.
Changes to the XRP Ledger only become active when at least 80% of validators on the standard list show their support, and this support needs to continue consistently for two full weeks. If that support drops at any time during those two weeks, the process restarts. No single entity can force these changes to happen – there’s no override from the development team, and no set deadline. An amendment can remain listed indefinitely without ever reaching enough support to activate. The ‘Hooks’ feature is a perfect example: the technical specifications were complete, the code worked as expected, and even the ledger’s CTO publicly supported the related fork, but it still never received enough validator support on the main XRP Ledger network. The fact that it remained inactive for years is the primary reason the Xahau network was created.
Past events should guide our expectations for XLS-100d and XLS-101d. Proposals listed as potential amendments aren’t guaranteed to be approved by validators, and early drafts are even less certain. These proposals could be implemented this year, or they could take up to three years – both scenarios are possible given the history of the network. Recent experience also shows things can change rapidly: a maintenance update initially stalled with around 48% support, but quickly gained enough votes to pass once a majority agreed. Therefore, making predictions about the timing of these changes is unreliable.
The activation threshold also influences how these two blockchains compete with each other, though this aspect isn’t often talked about publicly. Xahau operates using a different system than its parent chain – it’s governed by up to twenty validators through a specific account setup, compared to the parent chain’s requirement of an eighty percent supermajority for changes. This gives Xahau the ability to quickly implement new features, which is a significant benefit for a network built around being programmable. Essentially, a blockchain that can readily adapt has a fundamental advantage over one that needs to convince others to allow updates. The real competition isn’t about technical details like how transactions are processed; it’s about whether Xahau’s faster development cycle outweighs the parent chain’s larger user base and trading volume – and that comes down to their differing governance structures.
If you’re following the development of XRP Ledger, the best approach is to disregard any announcements about future plans and instead focus on the ongoing validator vote count for each proposed change. Announcements simply state what developers *intend* to do. Ultimately, the validator vote is the only factor that determines what actually happens on the XRP Ledger.
What it means for XAH
As a researcher, I’ve found that when we really dig in and honestly evaluate the situation, two distinct scenarios emerge – one pessimistic (‘bear case’) and one optimistic (‘bull case’). Surprisingly, both of these possibilities are more compelling than what’s typically discussed within this field.
Okay, here’s how I’m looking at the downside for XAH as an investor. Basically, my investment was based on the idea that Xahau would be *the* place for smart contracts within the XRPL ecosystem. But if XLS-100d and XLS-101d actually launch and work well, that advantage shrinks. Suddenly, Xahau is just one option for simpler, account-level smart contracts, competing with more powerful WebAssembly contracts on a much bigger, more active chain. That means any value from transaction fees being ‘burned’ might not matter as much if the activity shifts elsewhere. It’s the same problem I’ve seen with other projects – trying to build value in a smaller ecosystem that doesn’t have a lot of room for error.
The optimistic outlook for this project hinges on three key points. First, regarding implementation timelines: while the proposed changes are drafted, they require widespread validator approval – at least eighty percent consistently for two weeks. Past experience with similar updates on the network shows these can easily get stuck, and that’s the most reliable indicator we have. Xahau is currently functional; the other is still in the planning and testing phase. Second, the designs are different: the current approach and future smart contracts aren’t interchangeable for all uses. Simple, event-based logic directly on accounts offers benefits that a full smart contract system doesn’t. Finally, and often overlooked, is the innovative governance model. This network is actively testing on-chain governance with a unique system managing its initial setup and emissions – something the other network hasn’t tried. If this system proves successful at scale, it’s a compelling reason for this network to exist independently.
Ultimately, it’s too early to accurately value this fork. The original reasons for considering it have shifted, but the technology that would make its benefits real isn’t yet active. Once XLS-100d is implemented, we can get a clearer picture of the fork’s actual worth – XAH will then be the most reliable indicator of its value after the initial issue driving the split has been resolved.
What to watch
The vote on XLS-100d is what matters. Once Smart Escrows gains support from at least eighty percent of validators and the two-week activation period finishes, it will officially be live and competitive. Focus on the actual vote tally, not just any announcements about it.
The development of XLS-101d is ongoing, but a written plan is just the first step toward actual implementation. Whether this proposal for improving smart contracts on the XRP Ledger becomes an official candidate this year – or ends up like many other proposals that never get voted on – will significantly impact the difficulty Xahau faces in achieving its goals.
As a crypto investor, I’m always watching where developers are going – it’s a huge signal of where projects are actually building. Right now, I’m looking at new projects launching, the tools they’re investing in, and any grants being awarded across different blockchain environments. Honestly, the experience with one of the EVM sidechains last year taught me a valuable lesson: just being compatible with Ethereum isn’t enough to attract developers or users. Real activity is what matters.
Xahau is setting itself apart by focusing on areas the original project won’t. Specifically, this means its system of governance, how it distributes rewards, and the user-friendly design of its ‘Hooks’ feature. The key to understanding where this project is headed lies in whether it emphasizes these unique aspects or tries to compete directly with the original project’s core functionality.
Looking at this whole situation, it really highlights how decisions get made in crypto. The XRP Ledger’s rules for changes are genuinely about being decentralized – something I appreciate because it means validators aren’t just blindly following Ripple. But that same decentralization is *also* why a feature we all wanted took six years and a hard fork to finally implement! It’s a bit of a trade-off, honestly. Fast-moving chains can jump on opportunities quickly but also make errors; XRP prioritizes avoiding mistakes by making changes difficult. I don’t think either approach is inherently wrong – it’s just different. Each has its own pros and cons.
The situation with Xahau highlights that in open-source systems, a slow pace of development doesn’t stop new features from being created – it just shifts where and by whom they’re built, and who ultimately benefits. The developers who wanted to implement “Hooks” didn’t wait for approval; they created them elsewhere, and the original platform’s hesitation cost it three years of innovation and inadvertently gave a competitor a clear focus. Now, the original platform is developing the same capability, using the work done by others as a guide. This could be seen as the system working as intended – allowing safe experimentation outside the main network before integrating successful ideas. Alternatively, it could be a costly detour, as the ecosystem might have reached the same point more directly. People disagree about which interpretation is correct, and the upcoming vote won’t resolve the debate.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is Xahau?
Launched in 2023, this blockchain is built on the same technology as the XRP Ledger but with added features. It’s designed to support ‘Hooks,’ a simple smart contract system that wasn’t originally included in XRP Ledger. While it keeps key elements like fast transactions, a decentralized exchange, and a fee-burning process, it also introduces the ability to run programs, its own cryptocurrency called XAH, an independent group of validators, and a unique governance system controlled through a special function on the network’s original account.
What are Hooks?
As an analyst, I’ve been looking into these new ‘hooks,’ and essentially they’re small bits of code you attach to an account. They act like mini rules that run *before* any transaction goes through for that account – whether it’s sending or receiving funds. This allows for some really interesting features like scheduling transactions in advance, setting up recovery options if you lose access to your account, and even creating automated, self-managed payments. What’s key is they were built to be incredibly fast and cheap to use. They aren’t trying to be full-blown smart contracts like those on Ethereum; instead of a complex virtual machine, hooks are focused on streamlined functionality.
What is the XRP Ledger building now?
There are two updates in development for the Stellar network. XLS-100d, called Smart Escrows, uses WebAssembly to let people set specific conditions for releasing funds held in escrow, and a test network is available. XLS-101d, Smart Contracts, is a proposal for adding full smart contract functionality to Stellar, drawing inspiration from existing technologies like Hooks and the Ethereum Virtual Machine. Currently, neither of these features are live on the main Stellar network.
Is XRPL copying Xahau?
Xahau openly takes inspiration from other blockchains, but argues that development isn’t a one-way street – ideas flow freely between networks. The official plans for XRPL specifically mention Xahau’s ‘Hooks’ feature as something they considered, publicly recognizing its influence. However, Xahau maintains it’s a separate blockchain with unique features not found on XRPL, and that both projects sometimes borrow concepts from each other.
How many ways can you write smart contracts in the XRP ecosystem?
Right now, there are three ways to build on XRPL: Hooks on Xahau, Solidity through the XRPL EVM sidechain, and WebAssembly directly on the main ledger when updates are complete. However, the first year of the EVM sidechain – which we reviewed and found had $25,741 in total value locked – shows that simply providing a platform for code doesn’t automatically bring developers to the ecosystem.
What does this mean for the XAH token?
As an analyst, I’m seeing a real challenge to Xahau’s core value proposition. If the main XRP Ledger successfully adds its own smart contract capabilities, Xahau’s role shifts from *the* smart contract chain for the ecosystem to simply offering a unique, lightweight approach—and one facing much stronger competition. Right now, the main things working in Xahau’s favor are timing—changes to the XRP Ledger need long-term support from validators, which can cause delays—and actual differences in how the two systems are designed.
Why did XRPL validators never adopt Hooks?
The proposed change didn’t receive enough consistent support from the network’s participants, as required by its rules, and there’s no clear public reason why. Ripple’s CTO explained at the time that he didn’t think validators were making their decisions based on politics, and he praised Xahau’s choices, believing the change was a sensible way to move the technology forward.
What would settle the competition?
First comes activation, then widespread use. The recent vote on Smart Escrows solidifies programmability for the main system – it’s no longer just a plan, but reality. What developers do next – where they build and what tools they focus on – will determine which platform becomes dominant. Past experience shows that simply having the technical ability isn’t enough to guarantee success. Please remember this is an analysis of the situation, not financial advice.
2026-07-28 15:42