On November 11, David Schwartz, who served as Ripple's Chief Technology Officer for a long time and was deeply involved in the construction of the XRP Ledger, chose to put himself in the spotlight: He publicly stated that, due to his self-assessed “low risk tolerance,” he has sold almost all cryptocurrencies. This is not a minor adjustment but rather a near-complete reset of the massive accumulation of assets built up over the years—prior to this, he held about 26 million XRP, 1,500 BTC, and 40,000 ETH, but now he has only about 3 million XRP, 1 BTC, and 6 ETH left. Numerically, this represents an extreme reduction across three major assets: XRP, BTC, and ETH, with his position falling from a symbol of “deep industry ties” to a range closer to that of ordinary high-net-worth holders. His explanation is simple and direct: it’s not a loss of confidence in the technology, but a personal financial and risk management decision to bring his asset structure back to a level where he can sleep at night.
From 26 million XRP to 3 million: an almost liquidation decision
If we break down this adjustment, the extreme nature truly becomes apparent. XRP shrank from about 26 million to around 3 million, reducing his position to just a fraction of what it was, with what remains appearing more like symbolic chips of a “long-term participant,” rather than a high-stakes bet that could influence his personal fate. In contrast, BTC and ETH were almost completely exited: from about 1,500 BTC down to just 1, and from approximately 40,000 ETH down to 6 left, with the earlier exposure, which was “tied to the entire crypto world,” cut down to an insignificant tail on his personal balance sheet.
More importantly, this is not just a withdrawal from a particular chain or project but an overall risk contraction covering mainstream assets like XRP, BTC, and ETH, effectively taking a big step back in his entire crypto asset portfolio. As of November 11, the only things the outside world can see are his public personal statements and changes in holdings—Ripple itself has not released any position or response regarding this, and interpreting this reduction as an official signal from the company or project does not hold water within the existing information framework; it appears more like a personal choice by a long-time technical professional defining new boundaries between belief and risk tolerance.
Industry veterans fear volatility: how risk tolerance affects holdings
Schwartz put it quite plainly—it's not because he is bearish on the industry, but because he considers himself to have “low risk tolerance,” hence he sold nearly all cryptocurrencies. From an early accumulation of about 26 million XRP, 1,500 BTC, and 40,000 ETH, to now leaving just about 3 million XRP, 1 BTC, and 6 ETH, this is not a lightly taken mode of adjustment but a withdrawal of most chips exposed to high volatility. Those who have stood on the technical front lines for a long time know better than anyone what these assets’ wild fluctuations on charts mean: every sharp rise and fall in price directly reflects on one’s net worth, causing one to repeatedly monitor market conditions at night and question oneself during downturns, “How much longer can I hold on?” When volatility starts to dominate emotions and sleep quality, risk ceases to be just a numbers game but transforms into a psychological burden faced every day upon waking and sleeping.
Because of this, his choice pierces the stereotype of “industry believers” outside: a senior technical person deeply involved in the construction of the XRP Ledger does not necessarily have to infinitely increase their stakes in the same track on a personal asset level. The reduction he made covered mainstream assets like XRP, BTC, and ETH, indicating that his previous allocation was not a bet on small surprises but rather on the most concentrated varieties of market cap and narrative. Yet, even so, if the overall position exceeds his volatility threshold, proactively lowering risk becomes the more rational option. For some people, crypto assets can be the core of their portfolio; for others, they are suitable only as corner allocations. The same position can be viewed as an opportunity by high-risk takers and as an invisible pressure by those with low-risk tolerance. Schwartz's liquidation-style reduction effectively emphasizes a simple and calm conclusion through his own accounts: risk preference is not an industry label, but rather a boundary each person must individually draw regarding asset choices in the face of volatility.
Core personnel reduction: a sign of exiting or noise?
In an emotion-driven market, a core figure's reduction in holdings can easily be interpreted as a sign of “the captain has jumped ship.” Schwartz has long been engaged in the technical construction of the XRP Ledger, almost synonymous with being the technical spokesperson for XRP in the eyes of many investors. Now, however, after no longer holding the position of Chief Technology Officer at Ripple, he openly states, “due to self-assessed low risk tolerance, I have sold almost all my crypto assets,” and has reduced his holdings from about 26 million XRP, 1,500 BTC, and 40,000 ETH to only about 3 million XRP, 1 BTC, and 6 ETH (according to a single source). Such a magnitude of reduction will naturally be amplified into a vote against Ripple, XRP, and even the entire market. However, based on the current information, we can only confirm that this is a position choice made by a technical figure with years of industry experience based on personal risk tolerance and financial management, not an external expression of Ripple as a company, the XRP project, or some form of "official judgment," as there is currently no public statement from Ripple that specifically correlates with his actions.
More crucially, available information does not provide the specific time window of his reduction, transaction prices, trading methods, or short-term market reactions, nor any direct records of impacts related to price, liquidity, or liquidation. If, under such an information void, one simply equates an extreme personal reduction to a deterioration of project fundamentals or even views it as an industry trend turning point, then the logic would cross the boundary of evidence. Schwartz did not express doubts about the technical route or concerns about regulatory risks in his reasoning; instead, he merely redefined his own risk tolerance, suggesting it is more a story about “how individuals cope with volatility” rather than a forecast of “tech or company changes.” For readers, what truly needs practice is to separate “the dynamic of industry figures' assets” from “changes in project fundamentals.” In the absence of a company-level stance and blockchain or market evidence, absolutizing a former core figure's personal reduction as an exit signal represents a misinterpretation of risk preferences that should be approached with caution.
From programmer to asset manager: how crypto practitioners protect themselves
For Schwartz, the real change lies not in his job title but in identity recognition: from being an engineer who only writes code to becoming a manager who must take responsibility for all personal assets. Having long been deeply involved in the construction of the XRP Ledger and at one point possessing about 26 million XRP, 1,500 BTC, and 40,000 ETH, he was a typical case of “wealth highly tied to the industry”—his professional exposure and personal asset exposure nearly overlapped along the same curve. Now he actively reduces his holdings to about 3 million XRP, 1 BTC, and 6 ETH, and the public reason given is “low risk tolerance,” essentially performing subtraction on that curve: no longer allowing his life to follow the fluctuations of the crypto market entirely.
In an industry lacking long-term commitment to certainty, this kind of “proactive deleveraging” does not equate to treachery or bearishness; rather, it is a common logic of self-preservation: continuing deep involvement professionally, sustained investment technically, while through diversification and moderate cashing out on the personal asset side, transforming the extreme volatility of a single asset into manageable noise. Current information has not shown where the funds from the reduction are being directed, nor is there any official stance regarding adjustments to Ripple or XRP strategies; it feels more like a purely personal family asset decision rather than a covert vote on project fundamentals. For readers, what is truly worth referencing is not the specific figures of holdings but the decision-making method: honestly assess your own risk tolerance first, then determine the level of binding between your profession and assets; only after understanding that this is someone else's financial choice rather than a follow-the-leader instruction, is it possible to stay clear-headed during intense fluctuations without easily elevating others’ reductions to your own panic exit.
Calculation time beyond faith: reflections after the Schwartz incident
On November 11, Schwartz laid out his decision to “almost liquidate” along with the reason of having “low risk tolerance” on the table, breaking the narrative stereotype that core technical figures naturally “won’t sell” or “will always be heavily invested.” The journey from about 26 million XRP, 1,500 BTC, and 40,000 ETH down to only about 3 million XRP, 1 BTC, and 6 ETH reflects a shift from highly concentrated to relatively conservative asset allocation, forcing so-called “faith” to confront the cold, hard ledger for the first time: high-volatility assets are not purely black or white bets, but require continuous alignment with personal psychology, family responsibilities, and professional paths as a risk choice. For readers, what matters more is not speculating why he acted at this moment or tying one’s own holdings to the movements of a certain industry figure; it is about acknowledging the upper limits of losses and drawdowns one can bear and accepting that outside of this range, proactive reduction, diversification, or even temporarily exiting is a necessary reality. Schwartz’s choice is definitively categorized as a personal financial decision rather than an official stance from Ripple or XRP, yet it subtly foreshadows a potential path: future participants in the crypto industry may increasingly refrain from proving loyalty by “going all in on a single asset” but rather maintain participation chips through more diversified configurations and rhythmic adjustments between cycles, allowing the curves of technical belief and financial safety to run parallel for as long as possible.
Join our community to discuss and grow stronger together!
AiCoin exclusive Hyperliquid benefits: https://app.hyperliquid.xyz/join/AICOIN88
AiCoin exclusive Aster benefits: https://www.asterdex.com/zh-CN/referral/9C50e2
On-chain Telegram community: https://t.me/AiCoinWhaleData
On-chain community: https://www.aicoin.com/link/chat?cid=N6OVMor5g
AiCoin on-chain Twitter: https://x.com/aicoinwhaledata
免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到[email protected]，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。
