Bitfinex status: access issues and outage reports

Problems in the last 24 hours

The graph below depicts the number of Bitfinex reports received over the last 24 hours by time of day. When the number of reports exceeds the baseline, represented by the red line, an outage is determined.

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:

• 
  Tutsi Andre (@tutsiandre) reported 1 minute ago

  Hey @bitfinex I've been a verified customer for many years, now you are blocking my withdrawals?

• 
  Mike Richardson (@Mike_the_Animal) reported 7 minutes ago

  @CW8900 Last cycle the volume of BTC Longs on Bitfinex was highest at the bottom of the cycle, roughly. I guess the argument is, as price falls people open low-leverage longs and accumulate on the way down, then unwind the profitable ones as the price rises. Whether that is true or not, who knows. Also, on the weekly chart, they are still accumulating.

• 
  Victor (@gvictor808) reported 7 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.

• 
  Whistleblower (@whistleblowerTA) reported 8 minutes ago

  Tether, the largest stablecoin issuer in the crypto industry, currently has a market capitalization of around $184 billion. According to publicly available data, it was the 7th-largest net buyer of U.S. Treasury bills in 2024 and is on track to become one of the top 10 purchasers of U.S. T-bills in 2026. Tether's demand for Treasury bills helps finance U.S. government debt. What's surprising is that Tether has existed for 14 years, yet it still has not published a full independent audit proving that all USDT tokens are fully backed by reserves. But in March 2026, Tether engaged KPMG, one of the Big Four accounting firms, to conduct its first full independent financial statement audit covering USDT reserves and the company's financials. KPMG is not infallible, no auditor is. However, it is generally considered far more credible than smaller accounting firms. There have also been notable audit failures involving KPMG, including: - Wirecard (Germany, 2020): KPMG was involved in reviewing a company that later collapsed after a €1.9 billion accounting fraud was uncovered. - Carillion (UK, 2018): KPMG faced criticism over its audit work before the construction giant went bankrupt. - KPMG has also faced regulatory fines from authorities such as the U.S. SEC and the UK's FCA over deficiencies in certain audits. Although KPMG's involvement could significantly strengthen confidence in Tether, it should not be viewed as proof of perfection. For years, Tether changed statements on its own website, including earlier claims that every USDT token was fully backed by U.S. dollars. Tether is also closely connected to the Bitfinex exchange, with both companies sharing common ownership. In 2018, Tether arranged a "verification" by Friedman LLP. The day before the verification, Bitfinex transferred approximately $382 million to Tether's bank account to demonstrate reserves, and the funds were moved out shortly afterward. These events were later confirmed during investigations by the New York Attorney General (NYAG) and the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), which resulted in regulatory fines. Tether and Bitfinex ultimately paid $18.5 million and $41 million in fines, respectively, related to misleading statements about reserve backing and other regulatory violations. Tether also faces significant regulatory pressure in the European Union and has not obtained authorization under the MiCA regulatory framework, leading to restrictions on its availability in parts of the EU. Tether remains one of the most controversial companies in the cryptocurrency industry, yet it also plays a crucial role in providing liquidity across the crypto market.

• 
  SkyGecko❄️ (@skygecko_) reported 16 minutes ago

  One thing Apple shares, Brazilian credit, and $1.6B worth of nickel had in common this week is that... They all became part of the onchain financial system. The market has moved beyond the usual Treasury narrative, with tokenized stocks, commodities and real-world credit becoming increasingly usable across DeFi. Here’s what happened: → Coinbase tokenized U.S. stocks on Base Apple, Nvidia, Meta and Alphabet are now available to eligible non-U.S. users, backed 1:1 by real shares. They can trade 24/7 and connect with protocols like Aave, Morpho and Euler. The stock doesn’t just sit onchain, it can be used. → $50M of nickel was tokenized Bitfinex Securities completed a $50M raise tied to ~7M meters of 99.99% pure nickel stored in Switzerland and valued at ~$1.64B. Physical commodities are becoming financial products people can access digitally. → Brazilian credit entered RWA Earn Bybit added nOPAL, a tokenized Brazilian credit-card receivables strategy with $70M+ TVL and a reported ~12% 30-day rolling yield. → Trade finance moved beyond the pilot stage POSCO International completed a live tokenized trade-receivables transaction where verified invoices and shipping documents were used to support an actual financing deal. Meanwhile, tokenized RWA value sits around $38B with holders around 3M. RWA is slowly becoming more about making aseets useful once they come onchain.

• 
  waffles (@WaffleHouseGuy1) reported 18 minutes ago

  @bitfinex Will you support Luke coin?

• 
  Youngsky01 (@DaneiCesario) reported 20 minutes ago

  @bloom_pegnmk6 @bitfinex Satoshi also wouldn't recognize half the things people call "blockchain" today—he was solving a specific problem (trustless payments), not inventing a hammer for every nail in existence

• 
  DA₿OLOSKOV (@daboloskov) reported 22 minutes ago

  @BFXSecurities @paoloardoino @bitfinex Are you guys can answer to your customer? Your support form certificate is no signed anymore and outdated.

• 
  ~dorsen-witnes (@fazzam_eth) reported 25 minutes ago

  Really strong stuff. There’s a lot of precedent for successfully navigating an event like this in defi. Bitfinex repaid 36% of customer assets in 8 months and came back stronger than before. Euler lost $197M, made everyone whole, and relaunched bigger than it ever was. Crypto doesn't punish teams for getting hit but for leaving holes. This is textbook comms so far.

• 
  sradic (@_sradic_) reported 26 minutes ago

  @bitfinex @paoloardoino @CRYPTO101Pod "Volume up, customer base up". Yeah, and? No fees, remember? The only saving grace could be if you're taking a cut from the lending market. If that's the case, bravo.

• 
  EyeOnChain (@EyeOnChain) reported 29 minutes ago

  Abraxas Capital isn't slowing down its ETH buying. Over the past 7 hours, Abraxas Capital has withdrawn more than 15,477 ETH, worth over $29.88 million, from major exchanges. That brings its total ETH accumulation over the past week to more than 48,996 ETH, valued at over $88 million, withdrawn from Binance, Bybit, and Bitfinex. The steady stream of exchange withdrawals suggests Abraxas continues to aggressively accumulate ETH rather than keeping it on trading platforms.

• 
  Slevin Kelevra ✡︎ ☦︎ (@kruper47) reported 29 minutes ago

  Sometimes we'll dive into history to better understand market context. Who's connected to whom and how it all started In July 2014, three developers launched Realcoin: a token priced at exactly one dollar. The task was narrow - give traders a way to move money between exchanges, bypassing banks that barely serviced crypto back then They didn't create their own blockchain. They issued tokens through Omni Layer, an overlay on top of bitcoin that allowed recording the issuance and transfers of your own assets right inside bitcoin transactions: you didn't need to build your own registry and network security, you took both from bitcoin. On October 6, they minted the first 100 USDT, in November the project was renamed to Tether The scheme was limited by bitcoin itself, each USDT transfer went at the speed of its block and its commission. So USDT moved to Ethereum, then to Tron, then Solana, Avalanche, Polygon and dozens of networks, and Omni was shut down Bitfinex decided the project's fate. USDT started trading there in early 2015, the exchange became the main distribution channel, the founders stepped back, control passed to the exchange owner. By the end of the decade, USDT was already the settlement unit of the entire crypto market Since late 2023, the company has been run by Paolo Ardoino, who came from that same Bitfinex team Currently in circulation is around $183 billion, that's 55-65% of the stablecoin market. Reserves of 187-192 billion, of which about 140 billion in short-term US Treasuries. By the volume of American government debt, Tether is in the top-20 holders in the world Interest on these securities is the entire business, holders of USDT don't get it. $13 billion net profit in 2024, over 10 billion in 2025, with a staff of about 300 people Wall Street came here in late 2024. The old New York investment bank Cantor Fitzgerald bought rights to about 5% of Tether for 600 million, when the entire company was valued at 12 billion. Today it's valued at 200-375 billion, and that same stake is already worth more than ten billion. Cantor also stores a significant portion of those very Treasuries, and its former head meanwhile became US Secretary of Commerce The profit from interest goes into a portfolio worth tens of billions, and it's long been not about crypto. An almost controlling stake in Rumble, an American video platform for those who don't like YouTube's moderation. Control in a South American agro-holding that grows sugar cane and rice. Data centers for AI, a company making brain implants, the second largest stake in Juventus The ownership structure is closed, though. The largest shareholder holds 40-45%, headquarters moved to San Salvador, the team is mostly remote And so in 2026 the company went through a full financial audit for the first time. Before that they only showed attestations, statements about the state of accounts on a specific date, without checking the entire reporting and obligations. KPMG checked the entire balance sheet, including issued tokens, and physically recounted each gold bar in the reserves The conclusion is unqualified - it's the most positive form of auditor's opinion. As of the end of 2025, reserves exceed liabilities by $6.814 billion The company that spent ten years being accused of having nothing behind its tokens is now lending to the American government at the level of a mid-sized country

• 
  Uğraş Bay (@kochobay) reported 29 minutes ago

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

• 
  Bitcoin Well (@bitcoinwell) reported 31 minutes ago

  Tether traded at 99.8 cents on Coinbase overnight. Kraken showed 99.83. Bitfinex got dragged with them. The peg is back already, but what can we learn from this? A stablecoin is a promise that one unit is always worth one dollar. The promise is collateralized by Treasuries, commercial paper, and the willingness of an arbitrage desk to buy below par when the spread opens. The collateral works most of the time. The arbitrage works most of the time. But what is "most" of the time worth, especially when the thing your pegged to is already losing value every day? Bitcoin made no such promise. The protocol does not target a price. It targets a supply. It produces a block every ten minutes whether the dollar is 1.00 or 0.97 or 1.04 against another currency. The chain has no peg to defend. Stablecoins stabilize against the dollar. They do not stabilize against the conditions that move the dollar. When the conditions move hard enough, the peg slips, the arbitrage opens, the spread closes, and the chart looks normal again two hours later. The thing the spread was telling you about the system underneath is the part you are supposed to remember. Bitcoin does not chase a price. 1 BTC = 1 BTC always.

• 
  Stash Management (@Stashquants) reported 32 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.

• 
  Beautyon (@Beautyon_) reported 35 minutes ago

  "He’s publicly stated numerous times their desire to put Simplicity, their smart contract protocol, on Bitcoin mainnet. He calls it "the last softfork". It would require certain parts of Taproot that BIP110 would hinder. It would prevent them from putting non-bitcoin assets on the Bitcoin base layer. Simplicity is currently on their sidechain, Liquid." This is super interesting, isn't it? Liquid, the side chain that is adjacent to Bitcoin, where, if you want to get out of it requires the consent of the cabal of nodes who administer it, Their "Permission" if the amount you want to get back in to bitcoin is "too much at one time". If Simplicity is already live on Liquid, then surely, if Liquid has any utility at all, this is what you need to be promoting, not putting Simplicity onto Bitcoin. Promoting Simplicity on Liquid might turn around Liquid's fortunes, making it into Etherium 2.0 and increasing Liquid's user base. At the moment, very few people are using Liquid. and it is not in widespread use. It has been live since 2018 but remains very much a niche network. The clearest metric is L-BTC in circulation: on the order of 3,000–4,000 BTC as of early 2026, versus roughly 130,000+ BTC wrapped on Ethereum and around 5,000 BTC in public Lightning Channel capacity. Most Liquid activity comes from a small set of participants; Bitfinex, SideSwap, Boltz swaps, and tokenized-asset issuance (e.g., Blockstream's ASSETS platform, El Salvador-related bond experiments), rather than broad retail or merchant adoption. The 15-member federation model has also kept some of the Bitcoin community at arm's length. It is a fundamental weakness in the model because trust is at the core of its architecture and design. Wallet support reflects this profund failure to capture market share. Out of the hundreds of Bitcoin wallets in circulation, only about a dozen support Liquid: Blockstream App (from Blockstream, which means they must support it) Blockstream Jade (hardware) AQUA (JAN3) SideSwap Marina (Vulpem, browser extension) Bull Bitcoin Wallet (uses Liquid internally for swaps) Ledger (limited, via Liquid app) BTCPay Server (via plugin, merchant-side) Specter/Elements-based desktop setups (for technical users) So as a proportion of Bitcoin wallets, Liquid support is in the low single digits percentage wise, and several of those are Blockstream's own products or companies closely aligned with it. The mainstream wallets, Electrum, BlueWallet, Muun, Phoenix, Sparrow, Trezor Suite, Exodus, Coinbase Wallet, Wallet of Satoshi, Phantom and the majority of others do not support it. The wallet runners have development teams who know exactly what they're doing, and they've rejected Liquid. Why is that? Putting Simplicity on Liquid was not enough to midwife the creation of Etherium 2.0 and bring "Crypto" heads into the Liquid ecosystem, and so having failed there or being too impatient to work on growing Liquid, they want to go straight to Bitcoin, and have Simplicity running in two places. The question is this; why are Blockstream in a privileged position to put their own scripting language into Bitcoin? If another company has another language, should that also be put into bitcoin? Is adding scripting languages to Bitcoin a privilege only for Blockstream, or can anyone do it. I think the answer is, "I'm the only one" because Blockstream's spokesperson says, "This is the last soft fork", meaning that no future languages will ever be soft forked into Bitcoin. Excuse me? Who elected these people as the guardians and final arbiters of what does and does not go into bitcoin? I think after BIP-110 there will be 0 chance of getting Simplicity into Bitcoin; after all, it is already fully live and available to anyone who wants it on Liquid, so they are free to experiment in that playpen, where they can harm no one. And that is the way it should be. Running your own sidechain where people can opt in and experiment under the rules of the committee is exactly how things should be architected. Liquid causes no harm to bitcoin, and is completely ethical. What it does show however, is no one wants that stuff. It's not compelling at all, or attractive; trust is anathema to bitcoiners. What makes anyone think Simplicity on bitcoin will be a hit? Hopefully that particular experiment is never run and we never have to find out at everyone's expense!

• 
  Brutal Crypto Brief (@BrutalDegenX) reported 39 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

• 
  🔥BLAZE🔥💎DIAMONDS💎 (@Blaze3Win) reported 39 minutes ago

  @AshCrypto ETH pulling back to $1,670 support while Bitfinex longs go vertical and Bitmine buys $73 million weekly is the dip that gets absorbed before the $1,850 reclaim that opens $2,400 💎 While the support holds and the next leg loads, ETH native yield via DIAMONDS keeps compounding without forced selling #BLAZE #DIAMONDS

• 
  DataFox (@datafox21) reported 40 minutes ago

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

• 
  Golden Luco (@GoldenLuco) reported 40 minutes ago

  Bitfinex Alpha suggests key levels to watch for Bitcoin's next move, signaling potential trend shifts. Traders should monitor these support and resistance zones closely. Will Bitcoin break through or bounce back? Stay alert and share your thoughts! #Crypto #Bitcoin #Trading

• 
  catching flaws (@catchingflaws) reported 41 minutes ago

  Alts did a full 180: 67 green, 9 red, avg +2.8%. $ARB +35% on record DEX volume — the L2 finally woke up. $DASH +12.9% riding the privacy bid, OI up 49%. Losers are rounding error: $POL -4.2%, $LEO's -2.4% is just Bitfinex noise. BTC dom 59.1%. Sentiment: BUY — 67/9 breadth, alts beating BTC as dominance slips.

• 
  Cosimo Capiτal ⚜️ (@CosimoCapital) reported 46 minutes ago

  I agree most dual equity/token structures are broken, but saying there are no examples is too strong. ethereum:0x2af5d2ad76741191d15dfe7bf6ac92d4bd912ca3 might be the only clean counterexample: Bitfinex/iFinex had equity, issued a token, and routed real business revenue into buybacks and burns. That is the key distinction. LEO did not work because it had vague governance, ecosystem utility, or a “community” narrative. It worked because the token had explicit, credible value accrual. The lesson is not that equity + token never works. The lesson is that it almost never works unless the token has a real economic sink tied to the business. Crypto Twitter has also changed. It is starting to act less like moonbois and more like activist investors. People are demanding value capture, capital return, burns, buybacks, transparency, and alignment. We should study what has actually worked and duplicate the mechanism instead of pretending every token needs to be a vibes-based governance asset.

• 
  Wall Street NYC Quant. bitcoin-fund-manager.com (@BITCOINFUNDMGR) reported 48 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.

• 
  SerPAI (@im_serPAI) reported 48 minutes ago

  ***** Woo gives 20-40% odds of partial COLDCARD coin recovery by authorities over a multiyear window Past precedent backs it up: $6.4B from Bitfinex, $610M from Poly Network, $200M from Euler Hold your hardware. File a report. Never pay a "recovery" service.

• 
  Moloch (@Moloch6666) reported 50 minutes ago

  @vincent_vancode It's manipulated on the way down and up It has been discovered in court how tether is manipulating the prices with bots in cooperation with the biggest exchanges(bitfinex case).

• 
  NineInchTrails (@nineinchtrails) reported 50 minutes ago

  BTC We went lower. And imo BTC looks like it wants to go lower soon again with breaking $60k eventually. Several BOSs. Closed below demand. Closed below CME gap. Closed below HTF range EQ. USDT.D now BOSs after the SFPs after the bullish 3 drives. Very bullish structure. Confirmed accumulation imo. Also crossed several fibs already. Now in supply. But overall imo USDT.D looks like it wants even higher. All on the daily as well. BVOL out of support. BTC Longs on Bitfinex moving up nearing the next supply level that could indicate a possible local bottom of $44k-$48.9k. So a clean HTF redistribution to me here. The level between $68kish and $70kish acted as a strong "downside trampoline" like I thought. CME Gap + FVG + Range EQ + strong bullish level before at the move up. Things further speed up in terms of going down as thought. Don't know if it's just a coincidence and bs or if I turned knowledge into correct learnings. Waiting for a close below $62.kish SL for confirmed SOW. And as far as I get it there's also no real HTF liquidity there. Would support the idea of a further fast move down. And I think if we close below the $60kish low the probability is very high that we could go all the way down to the $44k-48.9k region for the next local bottom afterwards. FIFA World Cup could act as a nice distraction then maybe, to make the herd believe "everything is good, it's already going up again". HTF Bias: still bearish Main Thesis: we could go below the Feb 6th $60.kish low. Invalidation: in case we should close above $90.kish we have a bullish ChoCh on the daily. // As already stated often but again here and there: Below a TA beginner and not trading yet. So just paper trading here for improving TA.

• 
  Seabass On-Chain (@SeabassCity) reported 50 minutes ago

  @CryptoGirlNova @bitfinex Chances are degens are too slow to understand macro factors

• 
  Jason Montoya (@jaysmontoya) reported 56 minutes ago

  @bitfinex the playbook ran early because ETFs front-ran it. ATH still came on historical schedule. this is the post-peak correction, not a broken cycle.

• 
  Dom's Crypto (@Doms_Crypto) reported 56 minutes ago

  Bitcoin has crashed = bears are happy BUT: bitcoin:native has printed same low on RSI14 level around ~12.00 - same as back on massive crash down to $60,000 (see on the second chart) An indecisive 4-hour candle printed which can bring buyers back into the game Bitfinex Longs going nuts

• 
  Uncle Jim (@losingshekels) reported 59 minutes ago

  @paoloardoino PAOLO PLEASE HELP ME TO RETRIEVE MY 11.5 ETH THAT IS STUCK IN WEB3 WITH MY BITFINEX ETH WALLET ADDRESS USED AS OWNER