Bitfinex status: access issues and outage reports

Problems in the last 24 hours

Bitfinex signals over the past 24 hours. The dashed line is the service-wide baseline used to detect unusual activity.

• Service-wide signals
• Service-wide baseline

Community Discussion

Tips? Frustrations? Share them here. Useful comments include a description of the problem, city and postal code.

Beware of "support numbers" or "recovery" accounts that might be posted below. Make sure to report and downvote those comments. Avoid posting your personal information.

Bitfinex Issues Reports

Latest outage, problems and issue reports in social media:

• 
  lunadreamy 🌷 (@lunacocoer2b) reported 4 minutes ago

  @bitfinex Feels like we needed that reset tbh. Everyone was way too comfortable longing the whole way down.

• 
  Cloakd ⌛ (@CloakdDev) reported 7 minutes ago

  @stevensarmi @redacted_noah @VelocityDEX I think the reality is they should of shuttered and used remaining funds to make as many users as possible whole - Sure you can pray for a hail mary but i just think too much damage has been done at this point & comes at the cost of making less users whole. The whole USDT thing is just predatory tbh, they saw a weak protocol as a way to get some easy marketing without having to risk anything (Even using pre-hack volumes there was little to no rev coming in to ever make a sizable whole in the 250m) Good point on bitfinex, i think they had a much better approach though. The comms etc coming out of drift at the moment sound like they are being written by some tone deaf external marketing agency. How long did it take for bitfinex to recover? Yup everyone is entitled to their oppinion but you do hold a position of authority on the L1 so it has additional weight compared to others. Just came across badly reading it as a user (cynic) that i should go eat dirt for voicing an oppinion. I see the reality of the situation from almost 20 years of experience at this level, im not half empty/full ive just seen enough at this point its very easy to see the wood from the trees in regards to issues like that. I prefer to be pragmatic when it comes to money. Sure i would love to be like "yeah go drift, your doing an amazing job woooo" - but again the reality is that they arent, the sequence of events from the hack onwards shows their intentions pretty clearly tbh. Lack of accountability from the core team (hence the external marketing agency), rebrand to hide the bad debt etc. I think the lack of accountability is the big one tbh - Realistically the old team should step down if its got any hope of recovery as at the end of the day they were responsible for the loss so should pass the torch to someone not found to be negligent. No amount of procedure is going to bring back that trust unfortunately. Its admiral you made your users whole, and tbh i think once a hack of this scale has been done the protocol is pretty much a dead man walking so sacrificing the ego of the protocol for their users seems like a logical trade. The whole new users thing i dont really buy, we know there is what max 30k traders, all hopping across the same 5 apps - With the current narrative new users, if they came in would land on Phoenix/Flash etc. Anyone trading in size (which is what they need for rev) will do their due dilligence and see the hacks and never touch it - its simply too much of a risk at this point. I have a huge amount of faith in Noah but unfortunately this isnt a tech problem, its a people/trust problem which isnt going to be solved with a rebrand. When you look at it from a tradeoff perspective - Unless something dramatic changes the protocol will probs run for 6/12 months until runway is out and then they will shutter anyway. All of that funding realistically should be going to making users whole as the writing seems on the wall logically. 10 years rebuild time is just too long of a time horizon for it to logically work given this is mostly an attention economy & with new competitors entering the market which are better funded, trusted & unhindered by what has been. They just arent going to win in that arena. They are just in a really tricky spot tbh, and as sad as it is to say, shuttering the protocol or raising a tonne of fresh funding seems to be the only way this one survives. Everything else is just a half measure

• 
  Uğraş Bay (@kochobay) reported 10 minutes ago

  @bitfinex A hacker, when he/she asked for 1 bitcoin to send decryption method for the disk of a virtual server :)

• 
  ForeDex (@ForeDex_Global) reported 15 minutes ago

  Daily ForeDex CVD by Order Size (Spot) Snapshot 📸 🔸 Whales and Mega Whales Only 🔸 Based on a 1 month period (1M) 1. Binance : Decreased 📉 2. Bybit : No Change ➖ 3. Bitfinex (USD) : No Change ➖ 4. Bitfinex (USDT) : No Change ➖ ✅ Summary: A gradual step-down was seen on Binance, with no change across Bybit, Bitfinex USD, and Bitfinex USDT. [07-16-2026]

• 
  Erik (@ero_crypto) reported 22 minutes ago

  CENTRALIZED EXCHANGE ASSET FLOWS Where is capital moving across centralized exchanges this month? Looking at 30-day net flows across 65+ tracked CEXs, the picture shows a clear shift in capital and confidence between platforms. As of August 6, 2026, total CEX assets stand at $244.6B, down from $246.86B 30 days earlier — a net decline of $2.26B (-0.92%). ◾ 28 exchanges recorded inflows totaling +$893.5M ◾ 37 exchanges saw outflows totaling -$3.15B ◾ OKX: -$1.186B (-5.59%) ◾ Bybit: -$604.2M ◾ Bitfinex: +$263.91M ◾ Deribit: +$257.36M Bitfinex and Deribit attracted the strongest inflows relative to their size, while OKX and Bybit experienced some of the largest capital outflows. The broader takeaway: capital is leaving CEXs overall, but the flow between individual platforms is telling a much more interesting story.

• 
  Victor (@gvictor808) reported 26 minutes ago

  @ProofOfMoney Bitcoin custodian (and exchange) failures form a long-running pattern of hacks, key mismanagement, fraud, and insolvency that has repeatedly locked or destroyed customer funds. These are not isolated events. Centralized platforms holding private keys create single points of failure—whether technical, operational, or human. Major Historical Failures Platform Year Estimated Loss Primary Cause Notes Mt. Gox 2014 ~850,000 BTC Prolonged security breach / poor controls Once handled >70% of global BTC volume. Bankruptcy; partial creditor repayments began years later and continued into 2025–2026. Net unrecovered portion still very large. Bitfinex 2016 119,756 BTC Multi-signature wallet vulnerability Significant hot-wallet/security failure. QuadrigaCX 2019 ~76,000 BTC + other assets Founder death + sole key control / alleged fraud Canadian exchange; Gerald Cotten held sole access to cold wallets. Funds largely inaccessible. Celsius 2022 Several billion USD Insolvency / risky lending Withdrawal freeze then bankruptcy after market downturn. FTX 2022 ~$8 billion shortfall Fraud (customer funds diverted to Alameda) One of the largest exchange collapses. Bankruptcy proceedings later recovered substantial value; some creditor classes received >100% of petition-date claims due to market recovery and asset management. Other notable cases include Prime Trust (2023) and related entities such as Fortress Trust, which faced insolvency, lost access to wallets/keys, and allegedly used customer funds improperly to cover shortfalls. Broader Context and Patterns •Hacks remain common (e.g., Bybit’s large 2025 incident involving ~$1.4–1.5 billion, primarily ETH, attributed to sophisticated attackers exploiting operational processes). •Key management failures (lost or inaccessible private keys) and commingling/misuse of customer assets appear repeatedly. •Insolvency cascades in 2022 (Celsius, Voyager, BlockFi, Genesis, FTX) showed how lending and leverage amplify risks when platforms treat customer deposits as their own capital. •Recovery is often slow and incomplete. Mt. Gox creditors waited a decade-plus; FTX moved faster with better asset recovery but still involved multi-year processes and frozen access during bankruptcy. Independent archives tracking custody access failures (including exchange lockouts, inheritance issues, and operational barriers) document hundreds of cases, with a high percentage of known outcomes ending in blocked or constrained access for legitimate owners or heirs. Key Lessons Custodial arrangements introduce counterparty risk: you rely on the platform’s security, honesty, solvency, and operational competence. History shows these can fail catastrophically even at large, seemingly reputable firms. Self-custody eliminates that counterparty risk but shifts responsibility to the individual (seed phrase security, device integrity, inheritance planning, etc.). Hybrid approaches (e.g., multisig with careful key distribution) aim to balance the two. The repeated failures reinforce the core Bitcoin principle: not your keys, not your coins. Platforms can and do lose or lock customer Bitcoin through negligence, theft, or deliberate misuse.

• 
  AlehandroPRO CRYPTO (@Alehandro_PRO_) reported 28 minutes ago

  June 2026 Exchange Report 📊Spot trading volume decreased by 5.1% compared to May. Derivatives trading volume increased by 4.2%. Website traffic decreased by 0.8%.Spot Trading: Bitfinex showed the biggest growth (+21.4%), while BitMart recorded the largest drop (-58.6%).Derivatives Trading: Deribit led with the highest growth (+26.6%), while HTX saw the biggest decline (-42.4%).Website Traffic: Deribit posted the strongest growth (+165.1%), while HTX experienced the largest drop (-50.8%).

• 
  Wu Blockchain (@WuBlockchain) reported 29 minutes ago

  Bitfinex Alpha: Bitcoin Lacks Sustained Spot Buying Support Bitfinex Alpha said the softer-than-expected US June CPI pushed Bitcoin to its highest close since June 22, but the rally was driven mainly by a repricing of macroeconomic expectations. The move lacked sustained spot absorption, a positive Coinbase premium and constant, price-agnostic ETF inflows, making it a form of “borrowed strength.” The report identified the $68,000–$68,300 range as a key decision band, with sustained ETF inflows needed to support acceptance above this level. Bitfinex remains cautious, warning that if the rates story reverses, the justification for the rally could quickly disappear.

• 
  Sumbull (@Ssas_33) reported 31 minutes ago

  @MaxCrypto Bitfinex whales don’t known ****

• 
  DataFox (@datafox21) reported 32 minutes ago

  @BarlasLevent @bitfinex Right. Nearly every time there is a spike price goes down afterwards.

• 
  ₿arnabyTheStoic (@BarnabyTheStoic) reported 32 minutes ago

  @bitfinex Wtf are you thinking asking this

• 
  Stash Management (@Stashquants) reported 33 minutes ago

  @bitfinex @bitfinex My account is being terminated, but withdrawals are disabled. Your deadline is 15 Aug, 10:00 UTC. I’ve contacted support. Please urgently enable withdrawals or provide an alternative way to withdraw my funds.

• 
  The Bull Q🐂 (@TheBull1123) reported 33 minutes ago

  🚨SOMEONE JUST OPENED A $16,000,000 $XRP LONG. At the same time, Bitfinex whales are aggressively increasing their $XRP positions. Wtf is going on???

• 
  Hovermere (@Hovermere) reported 34 minutes ago

  4/10 Cash is not flowing to “the RWA market.” It is flowing to whoever already owns the stack. Alkemya turns idle wire into working capital for GTX. Bitfinex Securities gets a record commodity listing under El Salvador’s rules. Vault, audit, and venues get paid for the plumbing whether a deep bid shows up or not. Subscribers only start getting paid after the waterfall moves: capital back, 6% preferred, then 80% of surplus. Until a distribution hits, outside money is the product being tested.

• 
  Cryptoinsightuk (@Cryptoinsightuk) reported 34 minutes ago

  bitcoin:native probably does continue down here again at some point soon. This wasn't my base case before yesterday, but since we have new data we need to pay attention. I think there is a liquidation event to come. Although we see some liquidations occurring yesterday and the day before, we see a continuation in Open Interest and massively positive funding. This suggests we have people going leverage long here in size. If price keeps pushing down, their stop losses will get triggered and a liquidation style event could occur. This isn't inevitable, but looks likely here. If we combine this information with our liquidity pools, we can assume the dense band of liquidity at around $64,000 will be taken and I'd also like to see the Yellow liquidity down to $60,000 be taken too. The question after that becomes whether this creates a cascade and bitcoin:native falls through support OR if bitcoin:native creates a double bottom style pattern. This discussion is a difficult one. As I talked about yesterday, Bitcoin did hit the oversold area on the daily, and historically this has been a fantastic opportunity to buy throughout this cycle. On top of that, we saw a fairly aggressive pullback yesterday despite the large amount of open interest in the market. That doesn't necessarily mean price has to follow through to the downside immediately. We could just as easily see Bitcoin chop around for a few weeks, regain some strength, and then come back to flush out the remaining open interest later. In other words, it doesn't have to continue straight down from here. A period of consolidation over the next week or two would be entirely normal. Finally, if we look at what @CastilloTrading was pointing out, Bitfinex whales appear to be going long into this weakness, which is another interesting element of the current pullback. I don't know how much weight to put on that signal, if any, but it's definitely something worth considering alongside the other data points.

• 
  Wall Street NYC Quant. bitcoin-fund-manager.com (@BITCOINFUNDMGR) reported 35 minutes ago

  WTF is going on with $leo by @bitfinex? Are they still buying it back to add to treasury? Price is up 10x continually last 5 years. It looks just like bitcoin when under $100. Also looks like $bnb in 2017. Might be smart to hold a few. Remember. Bitfinex owns USDT Tether. They can do anything they want.

• 
  Wu Blockchain (@WuBlockchain) reported 38 minutes ago

  Review: Major Institutions' Bitcoin Bottom Price Predictions for This Cycle Major institutional assessments of Bitcoin’s cycle bottom cluster mainly in two ranges: $50,000–$60,000 and $40,000–$46,000. However, some figures are base-case bottom forecasts, while others represent valuation floors, support levels or bearish scenarios. Standard Chartered said $59,000 may have marked the bottom; CryptoQuant, NYDIG and Citi identified key levels near $53,000–$54,000; 10x Research’s latest model pointed to $46,628–$50,732; and Galaxy Research placed its base-case bottom at $40,000–$46,000. Bitfinex and 22V Research also identified potential downside toward $40,000 under weaker demand or a decisive support break, while forecasts below $40,000 mostly reflect prolonged bear-market, recession or severe stress scenarios. Forecasts from industry figures are more dispersed, ranging from around $57,000 to below $30,000. Overall, there is no unified institutional consensus that Bitcoin will bottom at $44,000–$46,000.

• 
  Samson Mow (@Excellion) reported 39 minutes ago

  Many things in this post are incorrect, and it matters that we correct them, because this version of the history is exactly what convinced people the last few months were a good idea. “BIP-148 is celebrated as Bitcoin Independence Day, because it proved that ordinary users, running nodes in their homes, could force the most powerful mining cartels and corporations in the industry to back down. The users had no hashrate, no exchanges, no lobbyists. They had conviction and they had nodes, and that was enough.” First, the framing. August 1st is what's celebrated as Bitcoin Independence Day (I coined and popularized that term). August 1st was the flag day, and it commemorates the outcome the UASF threat produced, not BIP-148 itself. Second, BIP-148 was not just "ordinary users" running nodes at home. It was a cross section of the entire Bitcoin network, something a lot of BIP-110 supporters seem to disregard: developers, exchanges, wallets, miners, and mega whales, alongside ordinary users. Most important to understand is that BIP-148 and the small block camp carried a massive amount of economic weight. Chain split markets ran on @bitfinex through 2017, and outside of those markets I know of many OTC deals struck privately in whale groups to trade one side of a split against the other. There was skin in the game on both sides of the war, and huge amounts of BTC put on the line to show real conviction. This was as much an economic war as an ideological one, and that point is rarely acknowledged. Even the companies backing BIP-148 were taking real risk. BIP-148 was never merged into Bitcoin Core. Running it meant deliberately installing different software and accepting that if the UASF chain lost, you could be reorganized off the chain entirely. Bitmain spelled that scenario out themselves, calling it a wipe out, in the same post where they laid out their hard fork contingency. Dozens of companies committed anyway (BIP-110 supporters would likely call them suitcoiners today). On the topic of hashrate, BIP-148 had no version bit of its own. It required bit 1, which was BIP-141. So the accurate way to state it is that BIP-148/BIP-141 had 30-45% of hashrate behind it for most of its deployment window. During that time I was COO of BTCC, overseeing a mining pool that was the biggest one signaling SegWit. So the UASF threat had three components that made it credible: economic weight, hashrate, and nodes. BIP-110 only had nodes. That is UASF cosplay, not a real UASF. Another point to cover: Mechanic was spreading misinformation in Spaces (and likely other places) that BIP-148, a UASF, activated SegWit. That is false. It was technically BIP-91 that brought miners in line with BIP-141. BIP-148 was effectively frontrun and never had to be tested. So Bitcoin Independence Day, while celebrating the flag day deadline, is as much a celebration of BIP-91 as it is of BIP-148. So no, it was not just nodes and conviction. Just think about things rationally for a minute. Why would buying a node-in-a-box give you the right to dictate what anyone else on the network does, regardless of whether it's a miner or another user? Does buying two nodes-in-a-box give you that power? Of course not. Btw the whole plug-and-play node culture came after the Blocksize War. In 2015-2017 you just downloaded the software and ran it on your computer. Stay humble and stack sats, but also stay humble when people who lived through the history try to explain it to you.

• 
  Nomad (@JourneyMacro) reported 41 minutes ago

  And the reason why Tether does not support Ethereum even though it uses the Ethereum network for stablecoin transactions is because Tether is owned by the same people who own Bitfinex, a Crypto exchange, which is a third party

• 
  Skin In The Game (@SITGnews) reported 43 minutes ago

  Bitcoin faces a key inflation test this week as key support levels near $60K are watched closely by Fidelity and Bitfinex. CryptoQuant warns the bear cycle may not be over.

• 
  2weed 🇵🇸 (@TAUHEED5) reported 45 minutes ago

  @CW8900 Wtf is bitfinex whale

• 
  Kemo (@K3m0s) reported 50 minutes ago

  @tobitdogg @BitQua Not on Tradingview BTCUSD INDEX, CRYPTO, or Bitfinex charts. Their 2015 bear = 90 weeks & 2016-17 bull is 121. Bitfinex was the #1 exchange by volume outside China, whose exchanges were shut down and excluded from data. i.e. you have to ignore the #1 data source to get this

• 
  0xLaplace 🔺 (@0xlaplaced) reported 51 minutes ago

  Bitfinex survived by making everyone share the wound. Customer balances were cut by about 36%. In return came BFX debt tokens: $1 for every dollar lost. Hold, sell, or swap them for equity. Within eight months, Bitfinex redeemed the tokens. The bitcoin remained gone.

• 
  Luna By Crypstocks AI (@CrypstocksAI) reported 51 minutes ago

  the quietest structural fight in crypto right now is at the sec/cftc: is a perpetual on a US stock a future or a swap? ondo and hyperliquid both filed comment letters on aug 24 in the joint product-definitions review, arguing cash-settled equity perps qualify as security futures. no fixed expiry is not disqualifying — recurring funding does the convergence job that expiration used to do, ondo argues — so no new law is needed, just the existing sec/cftc joint framework applied as is. the demand side is already offshore: ondo's stablecoin-settled stock perps did 8b usd cumulative volume in about six weeks, and the hyperliquid policy center says its HIP-3 equity markets cleared 480b usd notional in 10 months. it runs on the same rails as tokenized stocks — 29.5b usd/month of onchain stock transfer volume, coinbase's B20 tokens on base, bitfinex securities listing btc-treasury notes on liquid. issuance and derivatives are converging into one onchain equity market. classification decides everything. as security futures, stock perps land in the joint sec/cftc regime — designated contract markets, notice registration, margin accounts — and us persons get access onshore. as swaps, they fall into cfTC dealer and clearing plumbing and stay effectively offshore. the risk: joint rulemaking is exactly what stalls when the CLARITY window closes, and courts may not buy 'funding replaces expiration' just because two comment letters say so. the letters are in; the agencies' answer is the market-structure event. $HYPE

• 
  Rahul K (@iamrahulinc) reported 52 minutes ago

  🚨𝗚𝗟𝗢𝗕𝗔𝗟 𝗦𝗣𝗢𝗧 𝗩𝗢𝗟𝗨𝗠𝗘 𝗣𝗟𝗨𝗠𝗠𝗘𝗧𝗦 𝟮𝟭.𝟳% 𝗜𝗡 𝗝𝗨𝗟𝗬! Spot trading across 14 leading exchanges fell to $429.0 billion in July, down from $547.9 billion in June. Every exchange saw a dip. Binance led with $196.5 billion (45.8% of total), followed by OKX ($41.6 billion) and Bybit ($36.3 billion), together making up 64% of activity. Uniswap ($UNI) had the mildest drop at 9.8%, while Bitfinex slumped 59.7%, Coinbase 26.4% and Bybit 24.5%.

• 
  Muntari Abdulhamid (@SupplyDemand29) reported 53 minutes ago

  $BTC BITCOIN BOUNCES TO $64,812 AND ETHEREUM LEADS - BUT DON'T GET TRAPPED Today's market is doing the exact opposite of yesterday and most people will misread it. BTC is up to $64,812 from $64,246 open. Low was $63,267, high $65,176. We bounced $1,500 from yesterday's dump. ETH is at $1,922 up 1.12%, high $1,936 low $1,872. ETH/BTC at 0.0297 - ETH is beating BTC again. So what changed in 24 hours? Yesterday Korea's KOSPI crashed 10% and dragged us to $63K. Today Korea crashed again and Bitcoin went UP toward $64K. That's called decoupling. Bitfinex predicted this. When stress is rates-driven, BTC dumps with stocks. When stress is stock-specific like chipmakers Samsung and SK Hynix, BTC decouples and holds. That's exactly what happened today. Second, Fed relief. The panic before Fed is over. Market is positioned. Bitcoin held the $63K support and 50-day EMA at $65,089 area, printed its 4th weekly gain structure intact.

• 
  umo (@0xumo) reported 54 minutes ago

  @bitfinex Terrible timing. Blocking this crap account

• 
  Brutal Crypto Brief (@BrutalDegenX) reported 56 minutes ago

  475K $ETH pulled off exchanges in ONE week - Binance, Bitfinex, OKX, Gemini all bleeding outflows 👀 June avg return is -7.59%, ETH already down 16% this month - and degens are STILL buying the dip Brave or stupid, we'll find out $ETH #Ethereum

• 
  Weaver (@Trend_Weaver) reported 57 minutes ago

  @bitfinex Been watching the same thing. Feels more like a slow grind than a strong reversal right now.

• 
  Matched-Betting.US (@MatchBettingUS) reported 57 minutes ago

  @bitfinex Support will decide