Key Highlights
- Massive Dataset: Analysed the 250 most frequent balance values from ~7 million XRP wallets, representing 2,685,283 wallets (approximately 38.3% of the network)
- The 1.00000100 Mystery: A single balance value (1.00000100 XRP) has exploded to become the #3 most common balance with 470,609 wallets (6.7% of entire network), potentially indicating network spam or automated wallet creation
- Inactive Wallet Discovery: The persistence of exact reserve amounts (10.0 and 20.0 XRP as top 2 values) suggests significant wallet abandonment at historical minimums, creating "value fossils"
- Protocol DNA: Reserve requirements from as far back as 2012 continue to shape the network's value distribution, with even 1000 XRP (2012 reserve) still appearing at rank #95
- Round Number Dominance: The top two values alone (10.0 and 20.0 XRP) account for 16.13% of all wallets, showing extreme psychological anchoring
- Digital Archaeology: The persistence of wallet balances from different eras reveals the network's growth history, similar to tree rings or archaeological strata
- User Behaviour Pattern: Evidence strongly suggests users rarely delete their wallets, instead abandoning them with exactly the minimum reserve amount
The DNA of a Blockchain Network
Imagine taking a snapshot of all the balances in your bank's systems. You'd likely see a random distribution of values: savings accounts with odd amounts like $2,847.53, checking accounts with $143.28, and so forth. But what if 16% of all accounts had exactly the same two amounts: $10 or $20?
This is exactly what I found analysing the XRP Ledger ecosystem, which currently contains approximately 7 million accounts. By examining the 250 most common value patterns across all wallets, I discovered something peculiar: rather than a random distribution, the data reveals clear patterns that tell a fascinating story about how protocol rules fundamentally shape blockchain networks.
Methodology: Understanding the Data
This September 2025 analysis examines:
- Source: ~7 million XRP Ledger wallets scanned
- Sample: Top 250 most frequent balance values (mode analysis)
- Coverage: These 250 values represent 2,685,283 wallets (38.3% of network)
- Concentration: Top 50 values alone account for 34% of the network
This approach captures the dominant patterns in the network while filtering out the long tail of unique balance values.
The Reserve Requirement Effect
The XRP Ledger requires users to maintain a minimum reserve in each wallet, also know as wallet activation fee, to prevent spam and network abuse. This reserve has changed over time:
| Time Period | Wallet Reserve | Exact Balance Count | % of Network | Rank | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2012 (Launch) | 1000 XRP | 1,945 wallets | 0.028% | #95 | Still persists after 13 years |
| Early 2013 | 200 XRP | 2,803 wallets | 0.040% | #72 | More common than 1000 XRP |
| Dec 2013 - Sept 2021 | 20 XRP | 538,586 wallets | 7.687% | #2 | Second most common value |
| Sept 2021 - Dec 2024 | 10 XRP | 591,510 wallets | 8.442% | #1 | Most common value in network |
| Dec 2024 - Present | 1 XRP | 507,341 wallets total* | 7.241% | - | *36,732 exact + 470,609 at 1.000001 |
Like rings in a tree trunk, these values tell us about the network's history and growth. The most common values directly match these historical requirements, with each creating its own cluster of similar values.
Change Analysis: February 2025 vs September 2025
| Reserve Level | Feb 2025 Count | Sept 2025 Count | Absolute Change | % Change | Trend |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1000 XRP | 3,748 wallets | 1,945 wallets | -1,803 | -48.1% | ↓ Declining rapidly |
| 200 XRP | 2,930 wallets | 2,803 wallets | -127 | -4.3% | ↓ Slowly declining |
| 20 XRP cluster | 748,140 wallets | ~700,000 wallets* | -48,140 | -6.4% | ↓ Gradual decline |
| 10 XRP cluster | 894,220 wallets | ~800,000 wallets* | -94,220 | -10.5% | ↓ Moderate decline |
| 1 XRP cluster | 348,832 wallets | 507,341 wallets | +158,509 | +45.4% | ↑ Explosive growth |
| Network Total | 6.2M wallets | 7.0M wallets | +800,000 | +12.9% | ↑ Growing |
*Cluster totals estimated from multiple related values in top 250
The data reveals a clear pattern: older reserve levels are declining while the newest 1 XRP reserve shows explosive growth, suggesting both new user adoption and possible migration to lower reserves.
Value Clusters Reveal Wallet Persistence
When we group variations of the same base values, the pattern becomes even clearer:
~20 XRP Cluster (2013 Reserve)
- Exact 20.0 XRP: 538,586 wallets (Rank #2)
-
Variants around 20:
- 19.99998800: 42,333 wallets (Rank #6)
- 19.99998000: 35,612 wallets (Rank #8)
- 19.99999000: 17,494 wallets (Rank #18)
- 19.99998500: 17,321 wallets (Rank #20)
- Plus 15 more variations in top 250
- Total cluster: ~700,000+ wallets
- Pattern: High concentration at exact value with variations suggesting fee deductions
~10 XRP Cluster (2021 Reserve)
- Exact 10.0 XRP: 591,510 wallets (Rank #1)
-
Slightly above:
- 10.00000100: 66,018 wallets (Rank #4)
- 10.00000200: 15,276 wallets (Rank #21)
-
Slightly below:
- 9.99999000: 32,996 wallets (Rank #10)
- 9.99998800: 27,575 wallets (Rank #12)
- 9.99998500: 26,135 wallets (Rank #13)
- Total cluster: ~800,000+ wallets
- Pattern: Largest single cluster with symmetric distribution around reserve
~1 XRP Cluster (2024 Reserve) - The Surprising Discovery
- 1.00000100 XRP: 470,609 wallets (Rank #3!) - The mysterious third place
- Exact 1.0 XRP: 36,732 wallets (Rank #7)
-
Variants around 1:
- 1.00000200: 28,347 wallets (Rank #11)
- 0.99998900: 64,902 wallets (Rank #5)
- 0.99999100: 35,441 wallets (Rank #9)
- Total cluster: ~650,000+ wallets
- Pattern: Massive variation above 1.0, particularly the 1.00000100 phenomenon
The 1.00000100 XRP Mystery: Network Spam Revealed
The most striking finding is that 1.00000100 XRP is now the 3rd most common balance with 470,609 wallets (6.717% of the entire network). This phenomenon is almost certainly the result of memo-spam transactions:
The Spam Pattern:
- When users fund new wallets with exactly 1 XRP to activate them, they instantly receive spam transactions
- These spam transactions add exactly 0.000001 XRP, creating the 1.00000100 balance
- This affects nearly half a million wallets - a massive spam campaign
Impact on the Network:
- 470,609 spam-affected wallets represent more than the bottom 200 balance values combined
- These wallets likely belong to genuine users who activated with 1 XRP
- Shows how vulnerable new users are to immediate spam upon wallet activation
This discovery reveals a significant problem: the precision of 1.00000100 XRP across nearly half a million wallets proves this is systematic, automated spam targeting new wallet activations. The lower 1 XRP reserve has attracted many new users, but these users are immediately hit with memo-spam upon activation. This can be an immediate risk on-boarding new users to XRPL network.
Why These Variations Exist: User Behaviour Patterns
The slight variations from exact reserve values reveal fascinating behaviour patterns:
Transaction Cost Effects: When users withdraw funds, they often leave tiny amounts of negative "dust" behind, typically equivalent to the transaction cost. This creates values like 9.99998800 or 19.99998800 XRP and indicates at least some historical transaction activity. In other words, when users abandon their wallets, their withdraw everything and send XRP elsewhere, going into a "debt" equal to the transaction cost.
Minimal Deposits: Some users deposit the bare minimum plus a small buffer. There are some other interesting values, like 1.2 XRP cluster, that accounts to about 17k wallets, as 12 XRP cluster, with around 11k wallet. These values clearly indicate at a activation fee + 1 trust line reserve fee. Skimming through the data more of similar pattern variations can be detected.
Reserve Persistence: Most importantly, I found strong evidence that users typically don't delete their wallets at all. Once a wallet is created with a specific reserve amount, it tends to keep that amount indefinitely, creating "value fossils" that persist for years.
Technical Implementation: Some variations stem from different wallet software implementations and how they handle precision. Values like 24.97750000 XRP (4,124 wallets) or 44.97750000 XRP (3,934 wallets)have a consistent 0.9775 pattern at different levels (25 and 45 XRP) possibly indicates an exchange that deducts exactly 0.0225 XRP, likely as a withdrawal fee.
Comparison: February 2025 vs September 2025
The evolution over 7 months reveals interesting trends:
February 2025 Analysis (Original Article):
From the original article's findings with 6.2M wallets total:
- 1000 XRP cluster (2012): 3,748 wallets (0.06% of network)
- 200 XRP cluster (Early 2013): 2,930 wallets (0.05% of network)
- 20 XRP cluster (Dec 2013): 748,140 wallets (12.06% of network)
- 10 XRP cluster (Sept 2021): 894,220 wallets (14.41% of network)
- 1 XRP cluster (Dec 2024): 348,832 wallets (5.62% of network)
- Combined reserve clusters: ~32% of all wallets
September 2025 Analysis (7M wallets total, top 250 values):
- 1000 XRP (exact): 1,945 wallets (0.028% of network) - 48% decrease
- 200 XRP (exact): 2,803 wallets (0.040% of network) - 4% decrease
- 20 XRP (exact): 538,586 wallets (7.687% of network)
- 10 XRP (exact): 591,510 wallets (8.442% of network)
- 1 XRP area: 507,341 wallets total - 45% increase
- Top 250 values: 38.3% of all wallets
Key Changes:
- Network Growth: ~800,000 new wallets created (13% growth)
- 1 XRP Explosion: The newest reserve cluster grew by 45% in just 7 months
- 1.00000100 Phenomenon: This specific value exploded to become #3 overall
- Early Reserves Declining: 1000 XRP wallets decreased by 48%
- Concentration Increasing: Top values represent larger network percentage
The Power of Round Numbers
The data shows humans love round numbers, even in blockchain networks:
Exact Round Numbers in Top 250:
- Powers of 10: 1, 10, 100, 1000 XRP
- Simple multiples: 20, 30, 40, 50, 60, 70, 99, 110, 120, 150, 200, 250, 300, 400, 500 XRP
- Other rounds: 11, 12, 15, 21, 22, 24, 25, 31, 33, 35, 45 XRP
Top 10 Round Numbers by Wallet Count:
- 10.00 XRP: 591,510 wallets (8.442%)
- 20.00 XRP: 538,586 wallets (7.687%)
- 100.00 XRP: 19,266 wallets (0.275%)
- 25.00 XRP: 17,372 wallets (0.248%)
- 50.00 XRP: 11,867 wallets (0.169%)
- 12.00 XRP: 10,255 wallets (0.146%)
- 30.00 XRP: 9,585 wallets (0.137%)
- 22.00 XRP: 5,643 wallets (0.081%)
- 21.00 XRP: 4,558 wallets (0.065%)
- 40.00 XRP: 3,622 wallets (0.052%)
This strong preference for round, memorable numbers persists across the entire dataset and tells us something fundamental about human psychology, even in technical settings.
Growth Story: From 1000 to 1 XRP
The frequency of values paints a picture of network growth and adoption waves:
- The original 2012 reserve (1000 XRP) appears in only 1,945 wallets (0.028% of the network)
- The early 2013 reserve (200 XRP) appears in 2,803 wallets (0.040% of the network)
- The 2013 reserve (20 XRP) remains at 538,586 wallets (7.687% of the network)
- The 2021 reserve (10 XRP) dominates with 591,510 wallets (8.442% of the network)
- The 2024 reserve (1 XRP) already has 507,341+ wallets (7.241% of the network)
This suggests both accelerating adoption over time and the impact of lower entry barriers. As reserve requirements decreased from 1000 XRP to just 1 XRP, the network experienced waves of new wallet creation.
The Persistence of Wallets: Digital Archaeology
One of our most striking findings is that users rarely delete or fully empty their wallets. Wallet balances created during different reserve eras persist nearly unchanged:
- 1,945 wallets still hold exactly 1000 XRP from 2012
- 2,803 wallets still hold exactly 200 XRP from early 2013
- 538,586 wallets still hold exactly 20 XRP from 2013-2021 era
- 591,510 wallets still hold exactly 10 XRP from 2021-2024 era
This persistence creates a kind of blockchain archaeology, where we can trace the network's evolution through layers of wallet values, similar to archaeological strata or tree rings.
The data strongly indicates a "set it and forget it" pattern, where users who stop using the network rarely take action to close or reactivate dormant wallets, even when protocol changes could allow them to withdraw most of their locked funds.
Network Utilisation and Activity Insights
The concentration of balances at exact reserve requirements provides additional insights:
Adoption Waves: The large clusters at specific reserve values (10 XRP with 591,510 wallets, 20 XRP with 538,586 wallets) represent waves of user sign-ups during different eras, many of whom may have subsequently become inactive.
Transaction Indicators: Wallets with values slightly below round numbers show evidence of at least some historical transaction activity, as transaction fees would have reduced the balance from the exact reserve.
Network Utilisation: With the top 2 values alone representing 16.13% of all wallets, and these being exact reserve amounts, a significant portion of the network's accounts may not be actively contributing to network utility.
Concentration Metrics:
- Top 2 values: 16.13% of all wallets
- Top 10 values: 27.33% of all wallets
- Top 50 values: 34.00% of all wallets
- Top 250 values: 38.32% of all wallets
Why Do These Patterns Matter?
These patterns aren't merely statistical curiosities. They reveal:
- Protocol DNA: Technical decisions fundamentally shape how users interact with networks
- Lasting Impact: Reserve requirements create "value fossils" that persist for years
- Adoption Patterns: The network growth rate can be traced through these value distributions
- User Behaviour: Even in technical contexts, human preference for round numbers dominates
- Activity Metrics: The distribution provides a passive measure of wallet activity levels
- Technical Evolution: Small variations tell us about how the network implementation has evolved
What This Means for the Future
As blockchain networks evolve, these findings suggest several key insights:
- Persistent Patterns: Protocol-level changes create lasting patterns in network usage
- Migration Challenges: Many users never update from original configurations
- Account Lifecycle: Most accounts remain in the ledger indefinitely
- Technical Evolution: Small variations tell us about implementation changes
- Future Design: New reserve requirements will likely create new dominant value clusters
- Sustainability Considerations: Networks must plan for permanent account persistence
Beyond XRP: Universal Patterns?
Could these patterns appear in other blockchain networks? The evidence suggests these might be universal behaviours wherever protocol requirements set specific values or thresholds.
Looking across different networks with this lens might reveal similar "protocol DNA" shaping user behaviour and network configuration in ways not previously understood. The persistence patterns we've identified likely exist in other blockchain ecosystems but may be harder to detect without clear reserve requirements as reference points.
Methods Behind the Analysis
This analysis examined the 250 most frequent values across approximately 7 million XRP Ledger wallets. Values were grouped by magnitude, exact match, and proximity to known reserve requirements. Pattern analysis identified distribution characteristics and correlation with historical protocol changes.
Without additional data like last transaction date, our assessment of account activity is based on balance patterns, but the strong correlation between reserve requirements and the most frequent balances provides compelling evidence of behavioural patterns.
Conclusion
The XRP Ledger serves as a perfect case study in how technical protocol decisions create lasting behavioural patterns. With 38.3% of wallets holding just 250 specific values, and the top 2 values alone accounting for 16.13% of all wallets, we see clear evidence that blockchain networks aren't just technical systems, they're archaeological records of user behaviour, market cycles, and protocol evolution.
Each wallet balance tells a story: exact reserves reveal persistence patterns, slight variations show historical activity, and round numbers demonstrate human psychology persisting even in algorithmic systems. The explosive growth of 1.00000100 XRP to become the #3 most common balance shows how new patterns emerge in real-time.
As the network continues to evolve, these "value fossils" will remain, permanent reminders of the waves of adoption and abandonment that characterise blockchain ecosystems.
Updated September 2025. Previous analysis from February 2025 showed similar patterns with a smaller dataset of 6.2 million wallets.
Appendix: Raw Data - Top 30 Most Frequent XRP Balances
The complete dataset of 30 most frequent balance values from ~7 million XRP wallets:
| Rank | Balance (XRP) | Count | Percentage | Cumulative % |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 10.00000000 | 591,510 | 8.442% | 8.442% |
| 2 | 20.00000000 | 538,586 | 7.687% | 16.129% |
| 3 | 1.00000100 | 470,609 | 6.717% | 22.845% |
| 4 | 10.00000100 | 66,018 | 0.942% | 23.788% |
| 5 | 0.99998900 | 64,902 | 0.926% | 24.714% |
| 6 | 19.99998800 | 42,333 | 0.604% | 25.318% |
| 7 | 1.00000000 | 36,732 | 0.524% | 25.842% |
| 8 | 19.99998000 | 35,612 | 0.508% | 26.351% |
| 9 | 0.99999100 | 35,441 | 0.506% | 26.856% |
| 10 | 9.99999000 | 32,996 | 0.471% | 27.327% |
| 11 | 1.00000200 | 28,347 | 0.405% | 27.732% |
| 12 | 9.99998800 | 27,575 | 0.394% | 28.125% |
| 13 | 9.99998500 | 26,135 | 0.373% | 28.498% |
| 14 | 1.80000100 | 25,872 | 0.369% | 28.868% |
| 15 | 1.19998900 | 23,028 | 0.329% | 29.196% |
| 16 | 100.00000000 | 19,266 | 0.275% | 29.471% |
| 17 | 1.00048100 | 18,339 | 0.262% | 29.733% |
| 18 | 19.99999000 | 17,494 | 0.250% | 29.983% |
| 19 | 25.00000000 | 17,372 | 0.248% | 30.231% |
| 20 | 19.99998500 | 17,321 | 0.247% | 30.478% |
| 21 | 10.00000200 | 15,276 | 0.218% | 30.696% |
| 22 | 1.20000100 | 13,662 | 0.195% | 30.891% |
| 23 | 1.20000000 | 12,698 | 0.181% | 31.072% |
| 24 | 50.00000000 | 11,867 | 0.169% | 31.241% |
| 25 | 1.00009100 | 11,192 | 0.160% | 31.401% |
| 26 | 0.99998800 | 10,797 | 0.154% | 31.555% |
| 27 | 1.39998900 | 10,578 | 0.151% | 31.706% |
| 28 | 19.99999100 | 10,463 | 0.149% | 31.856% |
| 29 | 1.00001300 | 10,427 | 0.149% | 32.004% |
| 30 | 12.00000000 | 10,255 | 0.146% | 32.151% |
Full dataset of 250 values available, reach me out if you need it.
Top comments (0)