BlackRock’s XRP Prediction: Time Traveler Says This Is Real

The crypto world thrives on rediscoveries, old research papers suddenly reborn as new ￰0￱ week, a resurfaced video shared by crypto commentator Time Traveler on X sparked heated discussion after claiming that BlackRock’s head of digital assets, Robbie Mitchnick, once placed XRP’s “high estimate” price at $32.91. The clip, which has rapidly gained traction across the XRP community, points to a valuation framework authored years before Mitchnick joined ￰1￱ is this truly a “BlackRock prediction,” or a misunderstood piece of academic modeling? The Origins of the Controversial XRP Valuation The document at the center of the viral discussion is titled “A Fundamental Valuation Framework for Cryptoassets”, published in 2018 by Robbie (Robert) Mitchnick and Stanford economist Susan ￰2￱ paper was an academic exploration of how to fundamentally value digital assets, including Bitcoin and XRP, using theoretical monetary models.

Importantly, the paper was not a corporate publication from ￰3￱ the time, Mitchnick was not yet employed by the firm, and the study was released in an academic context, intended to provide economists and investors with tools to assess crypto valuations under different market ￰4￱ XRP ￰5￱ is ￰6￱ — 𝚃𝚒𝚖𝚎 𝚃𝚛𝚊𝚟𝚎𝚕𝚎𝚛 (@Traveler2236) October 23, 2025 What the Paper Says About XRP In one of its modeled scenarios, the framework applies assumptions about XRP’s potential adoption in global cross-border transactions and the speed at which it circulates (monetary velocity). Under highly optimistic conditions, assuming significant real-world usage and institutional adoption, the model’s upper limit valuation for XRP reached approximately $32.91 per ￰7￱ number, cited in Time Traveler’s viral clip, was never presented as an official price forecast or target.

Rather, it was a hypothetical “high estimate” generated by the model under extreme parameters, a common practice in theoretical financial modeling to show possible, not probable, ￰8￱ Mitchnick’s Role at BlackRock Today, Robbie Mitchnick serves as Head of Digital Assets at BlackRock, the world’s largest asset ￰9￱ connection has led many on social media to label the academic paper as a “BlackRock XRP prediction.” However, this is misleading. Mitchnick’s 2018 co-authored research was conducted long before his tenure at BlackRock and was not endorsed by the ￰10￱ is no official statement from BlackRock providing a price forecast for XRP or any other ￰11￱ are on X, follow us to connect with us :- @TimesTabloid1 — TimesTabloid (@TimesTabloid1) June 15, 2025 The paper remains a scholarly contribution, one that has gained renewed interest simply because its co-author now holds an influential position in traditional ￰12￱ Fact from Viral Fiction The claim circulating on X that “BlackRock predicted XRP at $32.91” blends fact and ￰13￱ figure originates from a legitimate academic valuation model, but it does not represent a BlackRock-issued ￰14￱ resurfaced clip by Time Traveler is, however, accurate in citing the number, and his statement that the document is real checks out.

Nevertheless, investors should read such models within ￰15￱ outputs are deeply sensitive to assumptions, such as network adoption rate, transaction velocity, and total market ￰16￱ changes in these variables can drastically alter the final ￰17￱ Thoughts Time Traveler’s post has successfully reignited interest in one of the earliest formal attempts to quantify XRP’s theoretical ￰18￱ figure of $32.91 is indeed real — it exists within the 2018 paper co-authored by Robbie ￰19￱ calling it BlackRock’s prediction stretches the truth. Rather, it stands as an academic scenario demonstrating the possible upper bounds of value under perfect conditions, a “what if” thought experiment rather than a corporate price ￰20￱ XRP continues to evolve in a maturing digital asset ecosystem, this rediscovery reminds investors of an important principle: not every number with a BlackRock connection is an official prediction, but some ideas, even old ones, can still spark new ￰21￱ : This content is meant to inform and should not be considered financial ￰22￱ views expressed in this article may include the author’s personal opinions and do not represent Times Tabloid’s ￰23￱ are urged to do in-depth research before making any investment ￰24￱ action taken by the reader is strictly at their own ￰25￱ Tabloid is not responsible for any financial ￰26￱ us on Twitter , Facebook , Telegram , and Google News