Bitstamp status: access issues and outage reports

Problems in the last 24 hours

The graph below depicts the number of Bitstamp 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.

Bitstamp Issues Reports

Latest outage, problems and issue reports in social media:

• 
  Cryptothreads.io (@CryptoThreadsX) reported 1 minute ago

  @Cointelegraph MiCA rejection = Binance losing access to 450M EU users legally. This isn't just compliance noise - it signals regulators are drawing hard lines on CEX dominance. Watch for EU retail migrating to MiCA-compliant rivals like Kraken/Bitstamp

• 
  Alexander Pierce (@Kaique0819) reported 2 minutes ago

  BTC has broken below 75K! This is no longer an ordinary pullback. Short-term bears are accelerating their sell-off. Looking at the Bitstamp 4H chart, BTC has fallen all the way from the 82.5K high, and the structure on the right side now looks extremely weak: 80K broken. 78K broken. 76K broken. Now even 75K has failed to hold, with the price struggling around 74.8K. The most dangerous signal is not how much it has fallen, but that every rebound is getting weaker, and former support levels are continuously turning into new resistance levels. During this sell-off, the large bearish candles on heavy volume are very obvious, indicating that this is not simply a washout in the short term, but that the market is actively releasing risk. Next, there are only two key zones to watch: First, 74.3K–74.5K. This is the nearest defense line at the moment. As long as it can still hold, BTC may first see a technical rebound, targeting 75.5K–76K. Second, 75.5K–76K. This is the level the bulls must reclaim. If BTC cannot get back above it, any rebound will look more like an opportunity to escape rather than a reversal signal. My view is very direct: BTC remains bearish in the short term. If 74.3K fails again, the next step could very likely be a direct test of 74K, or even the 73.5K area. Only by reclaiming 76K can the selling pressure from this decline possibly ease. The easiest mistake to make right now is rushing to buy the dip after seeing one small green candle. In a downtrend, a rebound does not equal a reversal. Do you think BTC will rebound back to 76K first, or continue falling toward 73.5K? Comment “Rebound” or “Keep Falling.” Follow me. I will continue tracking BTC’s next key turning point. For personal opinion only. Not financial advice.

• 
  Rio_Saputra (@KING_Mashaa) reported 4 minutes ago

  @CoinMarketCap Zero fee access to 50 plus crypto assets gives UK users a simpler way in through Bitstamp on Robinhood. Hard not to feel late to the shift. What asset would you watch first Share your take and tell others why

• 
  Natalie Harris (@NatalieHarr21) reported 5 minutes ago

  @Bitstamp Do not recommend Bitstamp to people. They are not a good company. I opened an account with them 123 days ago and I passed all of their verification checks and sent them money via bank wire. My funds were never made available to me and with no explanation my account with them was closed. I am still waiting for my funds to be returned 70 days later. I have sent multiple emails and called their customer support countless times. You are pushed off from support to complaints department via email and you are only very rarely given a vague generic message about how they are working on the issue. Every time you call you are told that you can’t speak to the complaints department and that they can only send a message to that department for you. If you plead then they will escalate the message. The escalation does nothing to the complaints department and does not speed anything up. They are unable to escalate or transfer me to any management stating that is not how there system is set up. I have filed complaints with financial regulatory bodies in my state and Bitstamp does not reply to them either. Robinhood will not help stating that it is a Bitstamp issue. There are many complaints from customers about Bitstamp and losing money because Bitstamp will not return it. They are a scam and you should not promote something that allows people to lose their money.

• 
  Alexander Pierce (@Kaique0819) reported 10 minutes ago

  Bitcoin is stuck at 77.3K. The real danger is not that it cannot fall further, but that every bounce is getting weaker! Looking at the Bitstamp 4H chart, BTC has fallen all the way from the 82.5K high. 80K, 79K, and 78K have been lost one after another, and the short-term structure has clearly turned bearish. Right now, the price is consolidating around 77.3K. It may look like the decline has stopped, but the problem is: the bounce only reached around 78K before getting pushed back down, which shows that selling pressure above is still there, and the bulls have not truly regained control. Next, there are only two key levels to watch: 77K–76.5K: The current defense zone. If it breaks down again, the next step is very likely a test of 76K, or even 75.5K. 78K–78.5K: The threshold for a short-term reversal. Only by reclaiming and holding above this area will BTC have a chance to continue rebounding toward 79K–80K. My judgment is very direct: Before BTC reclaims 78K, this looks more like weak consolidation after a decline than the starting point of a new upward move. The most dangerous market condition is not a sharp drop. It is when every bounce is weaker than the last one. Do you think BTC will reclaim 78K first, or break directly below 76.5K? Follow me. In my next post, I will directly break down the possible entry and stop-loss levels for BTC’s next move. （This is only my personal opinion and does not constitute investment advice.）

• 
  MarketUnfiltered (@subhashishc0x) reported 13 minutes ago

  You were told crypto was too risky for your retirement account. Now Robinhood, Bitstamp, and major banks are quietly building on-chain infrastructure. Bitcoin is up 18% in the last 30 days to $82,328. Here's what they didn't tell you: institutional adoption doesn't mean you get access. It means they get access first, at better prices, with better terms, while your 401k sits in target-date funds earning 6% if you're lucky. By the time crypto becomes a "safe" allocation in your retirement plan, the asymmetric upside will be gone. They'll sell you exposure at the top and call it diversification. The system wasn't built to give you early access. It was built to let institutions buy low and sell you high. Most accounts are selling you something or farming engagement. I'm giving you the structure behind the headlines. If you're not following yet, you're leaving alpha on the table. 🧵

• 
  Brian (@KoZmoh) reported 22 minutes ago

  Four “features” I want to see Robinhood ($HOOD) implement @vladtenev @RobinhoodApp International Markets: Open up Europe, Japan, UK, and Canada to US users. Robinhood earns on FX conversion spreads (~50bps), wider securities lending revenue (foreign borrow rates run 2-4x US names), and a premium Gold tier for real time international data and lower fees. Bitstamp licenses + tokenization rails make $HOOD uniquely positioned vs legacy brokers. Forex Trading: Direct currency pairs (EUR/USD, GBP/JPY etc.) with 24/5 access. Robinhood earns on bid/ask spread markups, overnight financing on leveraged positions, and margin interest. Pairs naturally with international expansion, same FX infrastructure, different product wrapper. High margin and recurring revenue. Again can offer lower fees for gold members. Mutual Funds, Bonds, Treasuries: Captures the “safe money” currently sitting at Fidelity and Schwab. Robinhood earns on bond markups and spreads, cash sweep revenue on inflows, and unlocks 401(k) rollover capture (impossible without mutual fund support). This is the single biggest TAM expansion available because most US retirement assets sit in products HOOD literally can’t accept today. Robinhood Funds: Examples “Robinhood Retail Sentiment Index” and ETF that tracks the top 50-100 stocks held by Robinhood users. “Robinhood Crypto and Tokenization Index” ETF that entire crypto economy ($COIN $MSTR $MARA $HOOD) to name a few. Robinhood would make margin on expense ratios.

• 
  votesa ■ (@votesa) reported 23 minutes ago

  base but with a hood on. everyone reviewed robinhood chain as a product launch. i think it's a trap for base airdrop money, set up months in advance. what went live on july 1: → stock tokens in 120+ countries inside robinhood wallet, trading 24/7, usable as defi collateral → uniswap live from day one as the main public dex → morpho powering robinhood earn with ~7% on USDG → USDG issued natively on the chain → perps built straight into the wallet via lighter → arcus (by dYdX team), stock trading at zero fees with a token promised to the community → gas free for the first 90 days now look at base's side of the board. they said out loud they're exploring a network token. in february they walked off the OP stack onto their own codebase and stopped paying optimism rent. and now they're about to ship B20, their own token standard baked straight into the node software. erc20 compatible, but with freeze and transfer controls built in, aimed at stablecoins, RWAs and tokenized equities. nobody rebuilds token plumbing at the protocol level for fun. robinhood chain mainnet july 1. B20 mainnet july 8. one week apart, both laying rails for the same thing. a base token would be the biggest retail wealth event of the cycle. a new class of rich onchain wallets, old ones waking up, normies crawling back the second "base printed" hits their group chats. that liquidity doesn't retire, it looks for the next trade. and post-airdrop money always walks the same ladder: dump some, rotate majors, farm, memes, then something that feels more adult. robinhood just shipped the adult option. NVDA and TSLA as collateral, 24/7, inside an app normies already have on their phones. coinbase wakes retail up. robinhood is standing right there with something to sell them. maybe the whole robinhood arc has nothing to do with base at all. maybe they just executed a year-old roadmap and the window opened around them. but wall street holds COIN and HOOD as one bet on finance moving onchain, and both companies started laying rails for the same moment at the same time. the bitstamp deal fits the same picture: licenses first, then own chain, then tokenized stocks, then defi rails. nobody collects that stack to add two more coins to an app. why would any of this actually hurt base? because eth vs sol is a religion war. evm vs evm is nothing. trenchers bridge in minutes, builders redeploy in a day. there is no switching cost, only reasons. just look at bankr and virtuals. two flagship base projects, both added robinhood chain support within days. no drama, just a new chain in the dropdown. and base picked a bad year to slow down. creator coins meta fizzled, ai agents barely got any support while they were the hottest meta in crypto. baseapp never found its pmf and feels like it exists for optics, not for onboarding anyone. the ecosystem spotlight kept landing on stuff like o1 exchange. loyalty in evm land is a bridge transaction. pure shizo, zero evidence, but the symmetry is funny: coinbase trades as COIN and incubates BASE token. robinhood trades as HOOD. ROBIN completes the pair. do with that what you want. to be fair to the other side: robinhood planned this chain for over a year, a base token still has no date and might not even happen this cycle. and robinhood chain tvl is tiny for now. positioning only pays if liquidity actually shows up. base will be fine. coinbase isn't going anywhere and neither is the money behind it. and i'm saying all this with love. base is the main reason i even stayed onchain these past couple of years. but for the first time base has an evm competitor with a cleaner story for normie capital, and its answer so far is "we're exploring". B20 goes live soon. let's see what base does with it.

• 
  SyAz (@SyAzCrypto1) reported 24 minutes ago

  Every exchange collapse gets called "the bottom is in." But data says only the last one in the chain ever is, and knowing the difference is the whole edge. A crypto bear isn't one single event. It's a chain of blow-ups that fires over months, and the bottom only prints on the final one, when the last leveraged player dies and there's nothing left to force-sell. The collapse everyone remembers is almost always the first domino & not the last. 2014–15: The Gox cycle → Nov 2013: ATH $1,163 → Feb 7 2014: Mt. Gox halts withdrawals → Feb 28 2014: Mt. Gox files bankruptcy, 850k BTC gone. Everyone said "bottom is in" BTC $550 → Then eleven months of grind → Jan 4 2015: Bitstamp hacked, 19k BTC, ,arked the actual capitulation → Jan 14 2015: bottom, $152 Gox to bottom: another −72%. the famous collapse was the opener. Bitstamp closed it. 2018: The ICO cycle → Dec 2017: ATH $19,783 → Jan 26 2018: Coincheck hacked, $530M the opener → Feb 2018: BitGrail collapses, $170M BTC $8k → then a full year stuck bleeding around $6k → Nov 15 2018: the BCH hash war, ABC vs SV, breaks the $6k floor. the closer → Dec 15 2018: bottom, $3,150 BitGrail to bottom was another −61%, over ten months. 2022: The leverage cycle → Nov 2021: ATH $69,000 → May 9 2022: Terra/LUNA implodes, $45B gone. the opener → June 12: Celsius freezes withdrawals → June 27: 3AC ordered into liquidation → July 5: Voyager bankrupt. July 13: Celsius bankrupt → Nov 8–11: FTX collapses. the closer → Nov 21 2022: bottom, $15,480 FTX to bottom was just −26%, in 10 days. This is the one case where the famous name was the last domino, which is exactly why it marked the low. So the tell was never the size of the name. It's where it sits in the chain. Terra was bigger than FTX and it marked the top of the crash, not the bottom. Now 2026 → Oct 2025: ATH $126,210 → Oct 10–11 2025: $19B liquidation cascade off the top, the largest in history. this is the opener → Nov 2025: down to $80k now $64k, off by 49% → July 1 2026: AscendEX closes → July 23: BitMEX announces closure → July 26: BitMart winds down Here's what "bottom is in" wrong here. AscendEX, BitMEX and BitMart aren't blow-ups. They're wind downs. Still solvent, withdrawals open, nobody force selling a single coin. They're closing because the mid-tier exchange model stopped making money, not because they detonated. A business shutting on bad math is not a domino. For until now we've had the opener, the Oct 10 Binance cascade but we haven't had the closer yet. No major leveraged entity has detonated into a forced selling panic the way Gox, BitGrail and FTX did. The signal you're actually waiting for isn't an exchange announcing a shutdown. It's an exchange or a fund detonating. The last domino is waiting to happen soon.

• 
  ＣＯＣＯ Ｗ ❄️ (@phy_nhu) reported 26 minutes ago

  @Bitstamp this feels like a generic canned ad not a real support reply, especially with all the frozen accounts piling up on the thread lol

• 
  Steve K. Loucks (@MetGlobal) reported 29 minutes ago

  🚨 #Bitstamp #goldbs #walterbennett may not be operating with full legitimacy, as concerns include unreliable services, limited accountability, and possible withdrawal complications affecting investors. If impacted, seek support promptly via DM.

• 
  SyAz (@SyAzCrypto1) reported 30 minutes ago

  Every exchange collapse gets called "the bottom is in." But data says only the last one in the chain ever is, and knowing the difference is the whole edge. A crypto bear isn't one single event. It's a chain of blow-ups that fires over months, and the bottom only prints on the final one, when the last leveraged player dies and there's nothing left to force-sell. The collapse everyone remembers is almost always the first domino & not the last. 2014–15: The Gox cycle → Nov 2013: ATH $1,163 → Feb 7 2014: Mt. Gox halts withdrawals → Feb 28 2014: Mt. Gox files bankruptcy, 850k BTC gone. Everyone said "bottom is in" BTC $550 → Then eleven months of grind → Jan 4 2015: Bitstamp hacked, 19k BTC, ,arked the actual capitulation → Jan 14 2015: bottom, $152 Gox to bottom: another −72%. the famous collapse was the opener. Bitstamp closed it. 2018: The ICO cycle → Dec 2017: ATH $19,783 → Jan 26 2018: Coincheck hacked, $530M the opener → Feb 2018: BitGrail collapses, $170M BTC $8k → then a full year stuck bleeding around $6k → Nov 15 2018: the BCH hash war, ABC vs SV, breaks the $6k floor. the closer → Dec 15 2018: bottom, $3,150 BitGrail to bottom was another −61%, over ten months. 2022: The leverage cycle → Nov 2021: ATH $69,000 → May 9 2022: Terra/LUNA implodes, ~$45B gone. the opener → June 12: Celsius freezes withdrawals → June 27: 3AC ordered into liquidation → July 5: Voyager bankrupt. July 13: Celsius bankrupt → Nov 8–11: FTX collapses. the closer → Nov 21 2022: bottom, $15,480 FTX to bottom was just −26%, in 10 days. This is the one case where the famous name was the last domino, which is exactly why it marked the low. So the tell was never the size of the name. It's where it sits in the chain. Terra was bigger than FTX and it marked the top of the crash, not the bottom. Now 2026 → Oct 2025: ATH $126,210 → Oct 10–11 2025: $19B liquidation cascade off the top, the largest in history. this is the opener → Nov 2025: down to ~$80k. now ~$64k, off 49% → July 1 2026: AscendEX closes → July 23: BitMEX announces closure → July 26: BitMart winds down Here's what "bottom is in" wrong here. AscendEX, BitMEX and BitMart aren't blow-ups. They're wind downs. Still solvent, withdrawals open, nobody force selling a single coin. They're closing because the mid-tier exchange model stopped making money, not because they detonated. A business shutting on bad math is not a domino. For until now we've had the opener, the Oct 10 Binance cascade but we haven't had the closer yet. No major leveraged entity has detonated into a forced-selling panic the way Gox, BitGrail and FTX did. The signal you're actually waiting for isn't an exchange announcing a shutdown. It's an exchange or a fund detonating. The last domino is waiting to happen soon.

• 
  Dr. Nas 🇦🇪 (@Nas_UAE_Dubai) reported 31 minutes ago

  @Bitstamp Worst support service. Don’t use this exchange

• 
  Vadim (@vadim_web3) reported 33 minutes ago

  Look at this: Known CEX balances currently hold ~4.89 BILLION $POL - ~46% of the circulating supply. Meanwhile, low-IQ onchain detectives monitor 5M, 10M, 15M POL transfers to exchanges, draw red circles around them and scream “SELLING 🚨”. Unfollow and block these idiots. They’re not doing analysis. They’re farming content and your attention. A CEX transfer alone is an extremely weak signal of selling. Why? Because almost 5 BILLION POL-equivalent is already behind the CEX wall. Onchain detectives can see POL entering a CEX. They cannot see what happens to it after that. And no, this does NOT mean 5B POL is sitting on order books waiting to be dumped. CEX balances represent an entire financial industry: customer & institutional custody staking market makers liquidity exchange inventory team/company balances internal settlement and plenty of activity we simply cannot see From the wallets I can currently identify: 4.894B POL-equivalent on CEXs 1.710B POL staked 3.184B POL-equivalent outside staking So ~35% of identified CEX balances are demonstrably staked already. POL can move to a CEX without being sold. POL can also be sold without any new onchain transfer to a CEX - because billions of POL are already there. That’s the blind spot of “onchain detective” analysis: once assets enter centralized infrastructure, onchain data stops telling you what is actually happening economically inside it. Top identified CEX balances: Binance - 1.257B POL Coinbase - 1.192B Upbit - 983.9M Kraken - 202.2M Crypto com - 115.7M Bithumb - 110.6M OKX - 99.6M Bybit - 95.0M Bitpanda - 94.6M Bitstamp - 93.4M 38 CEXs tracked. ~4.89B POL-equivalent identified. Keep that scale in mind next time someone draws a red circle around a 10M POL transfer and tells you what it supposedly means.

• 
  nsarao1980 (@nsarao1980) reported 35 minutes ago

  $22 billion contributed by Bitstamp notional volumes. On extended margin. The book surged to a record $21.6 billion, representing an aggressive 127% increase Yoy. Yikes. Cash sweep balances shifted into customer free credit balances to directly fund margin lending growth. 2/

• 
  CCN - Crypto Citizens Network (@CCNCitizens) reported 36 minutes ago

  🚨 🇪🇺 The EU’s MiCA deadline is just 2 weeks away. • Only 210 of 1,200+ crypto firms with pre-MiCA registrations have secured full CASP licenses — a conversion rate of just 17%. • Kraken, Coinbase, Bitstamp, OKX, Crypto. com & Bitpanda are licensed. • $USDC & EURC are MiCA-compliant. ❌ $USDT remains outside EU-regulated markets. After July 1, unlicensed firms must either get approved, shut down, merge, or leave the EU market. 🚨

• 
  Louround 🥂 (@Louround_) reported 36 minutes ago

  Could Lighter overtake Hyperliquid if all the stars align? Let's say clarity act passes, Robinhood keeps Lighter as its perp engine, 28m users (Americans and EU++) start trading perps on crypto and stocks, what does $lit actually earn from that? After writing this article, debunking a few takes and getting quite deep into the situation, it's more complex than it seems. Best case I could build is $500m - 1b a year vs ~$90M today with assumptions of: - $10b/day volume × 365 = $3.65t/year × 0.5-1bp = $180 - 365M. - $25b/day × 365 = $9.1t/year × 0.5-1bp = $455 - 910m. Hence "$500m-1b best case" (everything is forecast and assumptions so very rough). So it indeed looks juicy, but let's get back to reality. Lighter doesn't charge retail anything, that's their model, they earn from premium accounts (the pros and MMs), around 1bp (DefiLlama fees ÷ volume), while Hyperliquid takes 2-3bps in fees on the same volume. Lighter is the club with free entry for the mass, but the bar makes its money from the VIP tables. Packed club, but the bill only rings on one table, ~1bp realized take vs 2-3bps for hyperliquid that charges everyone at the door. Second problem, and honestly the one that keeps me up on this trade, why would Robinhood let $1B a year walk out the door to another company? They already own Bitstamp, they already own a CFTC-licensed derivatives entity, spent a decade proving they'd rather internalize order flow economics than share them, PFOF is literally their invention, they have the distribution and users. The moment US perps get legal and the prize becomes real, the build vs buy question will be properly analyzed. Vlad advising Lighter and the Ventures stake are nice, but nice wont stop a broker from vertical integration when 9 to 10 figs are on the table. Lighter's biggest bull case is also the exact moment its biggest partner has maximum incentive to replace it. And before the .hl crew celebrate, clarity cuts both ways. Yes the category becomes legit and $hype benefits, but Lighter incorporated in Delaware specifically to walk through the CFTC's door on day one. Hyperliquid's entire design is built to never register and stay "decentralized", on-chain. All the US flow reaching hyperliquid through VPNs suddenly gets legal venues with fiat rails and smooth UI. Will people use it and switch platform? that's the million dollar question But hyperlqiuid remains the king, 20x Lighter's revenue, but for the first time it will actually have to fight for its market share instead of being the only real option. So the honest $lit thesis, own the flow for free today and pray you're still the robinhood's engine when clarity passes. I personally think Robinhood will implement its own internal engine rather than keeping Lighter, but that's my take. It's a patience trade with a betrayal risk attached, but could be one of the most asymmetric there is 🥂

• 
  The Fonz (@cryptofonzie) reported 40 minutes ago

  Do not rely on a withdrawal from Bitstamp @RobinhoodCrypto Any problems it’s days of useless customer support false promises passing the buck and inability to do anything other than tell you we will pass on a message to someone that never replies

• 
  Dan G. (@dg1001) reported 40 minutes ago

  @blknoiz06 @0xMerp Bitstamp is working at least

• 
  𝐒𝐇𝐎𝐂𝐊𝐖𝐀𝐕𝐄 ⚡️🌊 (@Shockwave_App) reported 42 minutes ago

  @projectpips @Bitstamp It's not fake (it's a screenshot), it's a glitch.

• 
  Garrett Graham (@garrett_grham) reported 43 minutes ago

  Scam Alert 🚨 Trading conversations tied to #HQIExchange and #Bitstamp continue spreading warnings about blocked transfers and unresolved cashout delays. Quiet support can be requested directly.

• 
  Equity Ledger (@equityledger) reported 44 minutes ago

  $HOOD Two segment anomalies justify a paragraph each. Crypto 47% YoY is consistent with industry data, not company-specific weakness. Coinbase's TTM EPS is −53% Robinhood's crypto print is mechanically the retail cycle. The interesting nuance is Bitstamp: $42B in institutional notional in Q1 vs. $24B in retail-app notional. Robinhood now has an institutional crypto venue embedded in the consolidated print, and it carries lower take rates than the retail app but accumulates volume that does not depend on the retail cycle. Over the next 4-6 quarters, as institutional volume normalizes higher (sticky once on-platform) and retail volume mean-reverts off cycle lows, the consolidated crypto line should de-cyclicalize. That is a slow, multi-quarter pattern, not a one-quarter print event. Event contracts +320% YoY at $147M is the most important new line item in the print. This is the lineal successor to crypto in the Robinhood revenue stack. The infrastructure (Rothera DCM) is launching mid-2026 with HOOD as 45% owner of a CFTC-licensed Designated Contract Market. That changes the economics from "we route to MIAXdx and pay a fee" to "we own the venue and capture the spread." If event contracts annualize at $600M+ in 2026 (current Q1 run-rate × 4 = $588M, with seasonal Q3-Q4 typically higher), they replace 50–60% of the crypto revenue lost since the cycle peak, and they do it on infrastructure HOOD owns. The market currently treats this line as a curiosity. In two prints it will be one of the top two narrative drivers.

• 
  Iso Ledger (@JamesDula82) reported 44 minutes ago

  Dark Defender posted "The Chart That Did Not Move." The claim: a Fibonacci structure drawn in September 2023, never redrawn, that called every major XRP level years ahead, including the exact bottom of the correction that just ended. Clean. Orderly. Floor held, surge followed, three confirmed closes, leverage "flushed out within a day." Here's what actually happened inside that window. On August 22, XRP printed a 37% wick on Bitstamp, from $1.697 down to $1.067 and back to $1.448, all inside one minute. Other venues like Kraken and OKX showed far smaller moves. It happened days after a 60%+ weekly rally that briefly topped $1.69. Market-wide liquidations hit roughly $1.35 billion in 24 hours, with about $500 million in longs cleared in the acute phase. XRP's own long liquidations that day were the largest since October 2025, per CryptoQuant, yet open interest still sat at $3.66 billion afterward, so calling it "flushed out" overstates how much leverage actually left. That entire event gets one line in the article. No 37%. No scale. The most violent single-venue move of the whole eight week "test" window gets reduced to a quiet cleanup. That's the surface problem. The deeper one is the method itself. Elliott Wave counts are built to be adjusted after the fact. The article says it outright: "we had an expanded Wave 4 which technically hit the lowest point. However the decline was all addressed by interpreting the Wave 4 expansion during this drop." The count didn't predict the drop. It got reshaped once the drop had already happened. Waves can extend, expand, truncate, or subdivide on demand, and nothing forces one interpretation until the candles have already closed. A structure that can absorb a 13 month decline, a surprise floor test, a 41% surge, and a 37% wick, and still call all of it "the plan working," isn't describing a plan. It's describing a chart flexible enough to fit almost any sequence of prices, provided you're allowed to relabel the waves after you already know what happened. The levels themselves roughly track real history. What's being sold is the certainty that "the map never changed." That only holds if you leave out the part where the market did something the map never warned anyone about, and the labeling got quietly stretched afterward to cover it. Verify the levels if you want. Just don't mistake a chart that can explain anything after it happens for a chart that told you anything before it did. We audit the plumbing 🛡 Link to his post 🤝 👇

• 
  Cathy Breeden -🪝🛠️ @Xaman® + XRPL + Xahau (@c_abreeden2016) reported 46 minutes ago

  @GoldLoverXo Buy XRP: Uphold, Bitstamp, Kraken. Store securely: Xaman, Ledger, Tangem Need more help? Just ask me

• 
  Robinhood Rush (@RobinhoodRush) reported 46 minutes ago

  @RobinhoodCrypto morpho on bitstamp by rh = more defi access for retail

• 
  Grey (@guo_lin99725) reported 46 minutes ago

  Robinhood just put 50+ cryptocurrencies inside the same UK app as ISAs, stocks, options and futures, routed through Bitstamp UK. Zero trading fees is the billboard. Habit consolidation is the business. The dangerous part for incumbents is not a cheaper crypto tab. It is a customer opening one app for every financial impulse. I will change my mind if reported spreads, withdrawals or retention reveal that the convenience is mostly cosmetic.

• 
  Derek Guardiola (@dguardi) reported 46 minutes ago

  @StephanieStarrC That must be bitstamp. It didn't wick as far down in other exchanges

• 
  Zahra K. (@zha_kh) reported 50 minutes ago

  @Bitstamp Issues with withdrawal. Is this exchange now fraudulent??

• 
  Artax (@LiminalTraverse) reported 53 minutes ago

  Did you just see that flash crash wick down to $1.06 on Bitstamp?? ripple:native

• 
  STEELLDY (@bradarska1) reported 54 minutes ago

  5) Bitstamp price hit $76,003, down $1,370 (-1.77%). An intraday rejection below $77K triggered a "mechanical breakdown": stop-loss activation below $77K, trend-following algorithms switching to short, leveraged long liquidations, and panic amplified by negative news.