Ripple (XRP) vs Mutuum Finance (MUTM): Which Crypto Will Dominate Your 2025 Portfolio?

Digital Assets Face Off in High-Stakes Market Battle

The crypto arena heats up as two contenders clash for investor attention. Ripple's XRP continues its legal marathon while newcomer Mutuum Finance promises revolutionary DeFi solutions.

XRP's Institutional Legacy

Ripple's enterprise-focused approach gives it staying power that newer projects envy. Banking partnerships and cross-border payment infrastructure create real-world utility that speculative tokens can't match.

MUTM's DeFi Disruption

Mutuum Finance enters the ring with lending protocols that challenge traditional finance. Their automated yield systems promise returns that make bank savings accounts look like financial relics.

Market analysts watch both assets closely as regulatory clarity emerges. XRP's established track record versus MUTM's innovative potential creates the classic crypto dilemma—stability versus moonshot potential.

While Wall Street still debates whether crypto has legs, these projects are already running marathons. Sometimes the revolution doesn't ask for permission—it just builds better financial rails.

Plaintiffs are accusing Meta of hiding risks and pushing harmful design choices via its platforms

The lawsuit, filed by Motley Rice on behalf of school districts across the country, accuses Meta, TikTok, Snapchat, and Google of hiding known dangers from parents, students, and teachers.

The filing says the companies encouraged kids under 13 to use their platforms, failed to properly address child sexual abuse content, and tried to increase teen usage during school hours.

The case also claims the companies attempted to win over child-oriented groups by offering them financial support.

One example in the filing involves TikTok sponsoring the National PTA and then bragging that the group WOULD “do whatever we want going forward in the fall… they’ll announce things publicly… their CEO will do press statements for us.”

The allegations against Meta are more detailed than those against the other platforms. Internal documents cited in the filing say the company designed its teen safety tools to be weak and rarely used, and blocked tests for stronger features because they might affect growth.

One document says Meta allowed users to attempt sex trafficking 17 times before removing them, calling it a “very, very, very high strike threshold.”

Papers in the case say Meta knew that boosting teen engagement meant showing more harmful material but kept pushing the strategy.

Meta is also accused of delaying efforts to stop child predators from contacting minors for several years. Safety staff were reportedly told to circulate arguments defending Meta’s decision not to take action.

The filings also include a 2021 text message from Mark Zuckerberg, where he said he would not claim child safety was his biggest concern because he had “a number of other areas I’m more focused on like building the metaverse.”

Clegg reportedly asked Mark for more resources for safety work, but nothing changed.

Andy disputed the accusations, saying Meta removes accounts as soon as they are flagged for sex trafficking and that the company’s systems for teens and parents work.

He said the claims in the lawsuit twist Meta’s actions and rely on “cherry-picked quotes and misinformed opinions.” None of the underlying Meta documents are public yet.

Meta filed a motion to strike them, arguing the request to unseal them is too broad. The case is moving ahead, and a hearing on the filing is set for January 26 in Northern California District Court.

The smartest crypto minds already read our newsletter. Want in? Join them.