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:

• 
  STEELLDY (@bradarska1) reported 7 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.

• 
  kui ʬʬ (@000kuin) reported 9 minutes ago

  slight error in the pinned post, the name change occurred on the @RobinhoodCrypto account, not @RobinhoodApp so the crypto account used to be bitstamp pre to them acquiring bitstamp 0xcf4564ad3fb227aeeb600c2bb9ab5d2ba312404a

• 
  Iluminary (@iLuminaryAI) reported 10 minutes ago

  MiCA is fully in force as of today, July 1. No CASP license means no legal right to serve EU clients. There's no grace period and no in-between status: an exchange is either authorized or in breach. Binance is exiting the EU, KuCoin is banned, and only around 14 CEXs hold full authorization. Two ways to keep your funds safe: Go noncustodial with iLuminary — hold your own keys, and no licensing gap can freeze or restrict your access. Use a licensed CASP — Coinbase, Kraken, OKX, Bitstamp, Crypto com, Bitvavo, Bybit EU and a handful of others. Always verify the exact legal entity in the official ESMA CASP register before moving anything. Don't wait to get locked out.

• 
  Ignas | DeFi (@DefiIgnas) reported 10 minutes ago

  Ironically, the more 'compliant' the exchange, the more I worry about the problems they'll cause me. Bitstamp bombarded me with extra SoF documents and wallet address verifications. Want to switch to Coinbase but worried it'll be the same or worse. How common are proof-of-wealth / source-of-funds requests on Coinbase these days? Coinbase already closed my account once. Since creating a new one I worry to actually use it. Btw Binance, Bybit, and OKX (before it moved to OKX EU).... not a single issue since 2017. CS is great, no extra documentation requests, just KYC doc updates. But Binance has been shady with their listings, pumps & dumps etc. Not really a fan anymore. Also for fiat in/out, banks probably prefer Coinbase... Is Kraken any better? Their fiat deposit limits are relatively low and they won't raise them for me. Not a great sign. Thoughts?

• 
  ʎ3ʞʍoן (@lowk3y) reported 12 minutes ago

  @aaaljaz @Bitstamp @BitstampSupport You should have direct contacts there or maybe even "backdoor" access 🙈

• 
  Dan G. (@dg1001) reported 14 minutes ago

  @blknoiz06 @0xMerp Bitstamp is working at least

• 
  Niiii (@KyTosta) reported 19 minutes ago

  @AlenBarb @TheBTCTherapist Bitstamp was great back in 2013, but now it takes them three months to verify a deposit of Bitcoin I bought from them, which I had simply stored on a Ledger. Ever since they were acquired by Robinhood, their customer support has been abysmal.

• 
  WeThePeasants 🇺🇲 (@ScarMyCrypto) reported 20 minutes ago

  @RobinhoodApp Cool story bro... I've been waiting a week for my Bitstamp account to transfer to Robinhood after being pushed in to doing so. Says, "error with network". Thiefs, just like removing the buy button almost 6 years ago. You still owe a lot of retail a bunch of money.

• 
  MIKS (@MIKS_ae) reported 24 minutes ago

  @Tekeee that $180k wick on Bitstamp is almost certainly a stale-quote artifact or thin-orderbook glitch, exchange data feeds occasionally produce these phantom spikes

• 
  Kairos (@kairosfi) reported 24 minutes ago

  $CASHCAT robinhood just listed a token it publicly says it has nothing to do with. that sentence is the whole thesis and nobody's sitting with how strange it is lore for anyone late : before robinhood was robinhood, tenev and bhatt were building something called cashcat. name got binned, sat in a new yorker profile for years. july 1 the chain goes live, someone tokenises the discarded codename, and it becomes the flagship asset on it the token's own site disclaims any affiliation with robinhood markets. that's not fine print, it's load bearing bc today the app listed it anyway. plus legend. plus bitstamp, which robinhood owns a nasdaq listed brokerage just put an unaffiliated memecoin of its own abandoned name onto its retail shelf while formally denying the connection what people are pricing : listing means more bu

• 
  Secure Trace Lab (@SecureTrace_Lab) reported 24 minutes ago

  @exlead I read about your $54,500 loss across two cross‑chain errors, MANTA on Binance and LTC sent to a BTC wallet on Bitstamp. These funds aren’t gone, just stranded by incompatible paths. Recovery hinges on exchange cooperation. I can outline the approach if you’d like.

• 
  CRYPTO RECOVERY FIRM🧑‍💻 (@RECOVERY_POST) reported 27 minutes ago

  @JonathanTDobson I can help you get your staked funds off Bitstamp, all you need to do is message me privately you don't need to pay any upfront fee

• 
  Lorenzo Valente (@LorenzoARK) reported 30 minutes ago

  Why @HyperliquidX Should Acquire Gemini: The Regulated HIP-3/4 Deployer in the US Hyperliquid is engaging with the CFTC/SEC to enable U.S.-regulated companies to offer perpetual futures that trade and settle on its public blockchain. I think Hyperliquid should take that ambition one step further: Acquire a regulated U.S. platform like Gemini and turn it into the de facto regulated HIP-3 and HIP-4 venue in the U.S. Gemini went public in September 2025 at a $3.3B valuation. Today, it trades at roughly $450M, down more than 85% from its IPO valuation. The core business is clearly struggling. Gemini is too small to compete effectively with the major U.S. exchanges for spot or derivatives flow. It has no meaningful liquidity moat and limited crypto-native distribution. The company has already started diversifying toward its credit card and prediction markets businesses. More telling is that Gemini is in outright shrinking mode. It has wound down its UK, EU, and Australia operations, cut headcount roughly 40% from peak to about 402 employees, and guided to lower compensation and technology spend for the year. Assets on platform fell from $18.2B to $8.4B year over year and spot volume dropped 66%. This is a company retreating to its core and cutting burn. But what looks like a challenged standalone business could be a strategic asset at a fire-sale price. For roughly $450M, Hyperliquid could acquire Gemini's entire U.S. regulatory stack, which I think could be worth ~$200M on its own: - NYDFS Trust Charter: custody + New York exchange authority (2015) - DCM: Gemini Titan, CFTC-regulated derivatives venue (Dec. 2025) - DCO: Gemini Olympus, CFTC clearing license (Apr. 2026) - FCM: in progress, completing the CFTC derivatives stack - MTLs: money-transmitter licenses across nearly all U.S. states - Broker-dealer: rails for regulated equities For context, @krakenfx's parent paid up to $550M for Bitnomial, effectively acquiring a regulatory and derivatives infrastructure asset with little operating business attached. Gemini's entire market cap is now below that. Yes, Hyperliquid would inherit a business currently losing roughly $30–40M per quarter operationally. But it would also acquire a meaningful operating footprint: - 580K monthly transacting users (Q2'26) - 1.72M lifetime transacting users - $8.4B of assets on platform - $3.8B quarterly spot volume - $3.1B institutional / -= $0.7B retail - $45.5M quarterly revenue, or ~$180M annualized - 106K active card users - ~$485M quarterly card spend and ~$220M of receivables - A regulated prediction-markets business with 27K+ traders and 225M+ contracts since launch At a $450M valuation, that's roughly $290 per funded customer. For comparison, @Robinhoodapp paid roughly $400 per funded customer for Bitstamp, despite acquiring about half the revenue and no comparable U.S. federal license stack. Kraken paid roughly $790 per funded user for NinjaTrader. And Gemini's users already hold an average of roughly $14.5K of assets on platform. In other words, you could argue that the regulatory stack alone goes a long way toward underwriting the purchase price, while the users, assets, revenue, card business, and prediction markets come on top. The most interesting part is that Hyperliquid could potentially finance the acquisition without touching a single burned HYPE token. The community reserve holds roughly 389M HYPE. Spending ~7.9M HYPE at $70 would represent approximately $550M — just 2.0% of the reserve, under 1% of max supply, and roughly 3% of HYPE's ~$18.5B circulating market cap — enough to acquire Gemini outright at a ~20% premium to its current market cap. Hyperliquid could then redirect a portion of protocol buybacks toward rebuilding the reserve. At the current fee run rate, the reserve could potentially be replenished within 12–18 months. The strategic logic is bigger than simply buying an exchange. Hyperliquid would be buying the regulatory bridge between HIP-3/4 and the U.S. market. Gemini could become one of Hyperliquid's HIP-3 and HIP-4 markets, the regulated U.S. deployer, handling KYC, custody, fiat rails, brokerage, clearing, and compliance while the L1 provides the underlying market infrastructure, liquidity, and onchain settlement. Mechanically, this transaction is far simpler than most public-company M&A. Gemini's dual-class structure gives Class B shares ten votes each, and the Winklevoss twins hold all of them, roughly 94.7% of total voting power. It is a Nasdaq-designated controlled company. There is no proxy fight, no activist interloper, no drawn-out process. Board approval and a majority of voting power both run through two people. The entire negotiation is whether Cameron and Tyler want to convert a controlling stake in a declining exchange into a meaningful HYPE position and the distinction of bringing Hyperliquid onshore. On structure, the buyer wouldn't be the protocol or the foundation directly. NYDFS probabl wants a US entity with named officers, not an offshore foundation. The path is a Delaware HoldCo, funded by the Hyper Foundation but legally distinct, that acquires Gemini and keeps the regulated subsidiaries intact. The L1 stays a separate permissionless layer that never touches a US customer. Polymarket already ran this playbook. Offshore, non-KYC, with a CFTC settlement on its record, it bought QCEX (a licensed DCM/DCO) for $112M in July 2025, ring-fenced it as a US entity, and relaunched onshore in December. Hyperliquid starts from a better position: no enforcement history, US users geofenced, and active dialogue with both agencies. Hyperliquid generates substantial cash flow and sits on an enormous treasury. It should be much more aggressive about deploying both strategically. let's stop the buy back and burns and play offense.

• 
  JustGlobe (@justglobez) reported 34 minutes ago

  @Mellow_ highly unlikely: Bitget, Bybit and Upbit possible: Bitstamp, Probit, Outbit, Bitcom Bitget and Bybit are too big to shut down like that Upbit is the strongest South Korean exchange, so that they won't shut down something like that

• 
  FastX Exchange (@fastx_co) reported 36 minutes ago

  1. Robinhood is bringing crypto trading into its main UK app through Bitstamp, alongside an AI-powered crypto news widget. The saved lead has one independent confirmation. 2. The market leaned defensive: BTC -1.9%, ETH -2.6%, with 5 assets up and 10 down. LINK +2.4% and HYPE +1.5% led the eligible movers; ADA -4.6%, ZEC -3.8% and XRP -2.9% lagged.

• 
  XForceGlobal (@XForceGlobal) reported 37 minutes ago

  @10100011011x_0 oof, but it was on bitstamp, a nothingburger exchange and it skipped the entire orderbook. Was an error and not registered.

• 
  SalamAndr (@FX1000ren) reported 39 minutes ago

  @BitstampSupport 2/9 2017 I opened a Bitstamp account as an EU customer. My account was fully verified. It was a regular retail account with a relatively small balance.

• 
  The Fonz (@cryptofonzie) reported 41 minutes ago

  @Bitstamp hi what’s the point i have phoned numerous times they say it is a known problem with Email confirmation. not going out and the technical team still haven’t got back to us, no communication at all

• 
  Our Crypto Talk (@ourcryptotalk) reported 41 minutes ago

  4/ Treasury: $3.47B, and 100% of it is XLM. SDF holds 15.7B XLM as of 1 July. Down from 17.3B in December. That's a token drawdown of 8.8% in six months, roughly 255M XLM a month leaving the mandate. In dollar terms it looks flat, because XLM went from ~$0.20 to ~$0.22. Price recovery masked a real 1.53B token release. No stablecoin buffer. No BTC or ETH. No diversified reserve. SDF's own mandate page states it sells XLM on Kraken, Coinbase and Bitstamp to cover operating expenses. Runway is roughly five years at this pace. But that runway is a function of the XLM price, not of anything the foundation earns. Grade: B-

• 
  Global Smart (@GlobalSmart_T) reported 45 minutes ago

  @solidintel_x Luxembourg again. Coinbase, Bitstamp, now Ripple. EU’s Delaware is working overtime.

• 
  CyreneAI (@CyreneAI) reported 47 minutes ago

  Crypto has Trillions in assets but still doesn't have a financial data standard. That's a pretty insane infrastructure gap. @KryptosConnect is building the layer to fix it. One API connecting 5,500+ sources across blockchains, exchanges and wallets. - $300M+ tracked daily - 120,000+ connected accounts - Official tax infrastructure partner to @binance UK, @Phemex_official, and Bitstamp by Robinhood. The goal: one clean financial data layer for the entire digital asset economy. 🎦Launch Stream at 12:30 PM UTC and goes live on CyreneAI at 1:30 PM UTC

• 
  Hood House (@hood__house) reported 48 minutes ago

  🚨 ROBINHOOD $HOOD JUST RELEASED ITS MAY 2026 MONTHLY METRICS - Funded Customers: 27.7M, up 110K month-over-month and 1.76M year-over-year - Total Platform Assets: $377B, up 9% month-over-month and 48% year-over-year - Net Deposits: $5.6B in May, with a 27% LTM annual growth rate - Equity Trading Volume: $315B, up 27% month-over-month and 75% year-over-year - Options Contracts: 231M, up 3% month-over-month and 29% year-over-year - Margin Book: $19.5B, up 8% month-over-month and 117% year-over-year - Crypto Volume: $12.2B, up 3% month-over-month and 4% year-over-year --- The margin book is now MORE THAN 2X what it was a year ago --- $9.0B a year ago, $19.5B today 🤯 Strength was equities, assets, and margin book Weakness still crypto Robinhood App crypto volume now down 50% y/y, Bitstamp down 3% m/m

• 
  Natalie Harris (@NatalieHarr21) reported 49 minutes ago

  @Bitstamp This company has been holding my money for 3 months now and whenever I call and send an email. Is the same **** over and over again. I am struggling to pay bills as this is my life saving. Send me my money you thief’s!!!

• 
  SyAz (@SyAzCrypto1) reported 52 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.

• 
  Jess (@theweb3jess) reported 52 minutes ago

  I must say - the purchase was on a premium for wonderfi shareholders; the introduction of competition for brokerage products, esp w 0 trading fees, is a net positive for consumers; maybe wonderfi CEO just didn’t want to show up after being abducted, so they used the bitstamp guy. But I just personally definitely had a gut reaction when he said “happy Canada Day” on stream. It also did not help to come at a time where Canada is seeking economic independence from the US, particularly from USD denominated import export demand, and our car manufacturing sector got hammered in Ontario by the current US government’s tariffs on automobiles. I’m clearly nitpicking here, as the team has done excellent work, and I particularly loved Hilary’s section, filled with actual product updates from top to bottom. All in all, I just hope they don’t stream a British officer to announce things for Australia on January 26 in 2027.

• 
  Christian Vanégas (@Chriz_van) reported 52 minutes ago

  Hello, we understand your concern about withdrawal access. Blocked withdrawals on Bitstamp typically stem from account verification pending, security holds, or maintenance on our end. Please DM me with your account details so I can investigate the block and restore your withdrawal access.

• 
  Fred Velez (@Fredvelezcrypto) reported 55 minutes ago

  I keep seeing posts comparing Robinhood to Coinbase and Base. The problem is they're often comparing completely different things. Robinhood's $102B valuation. Robinhood's 27.7M funded customers. Robinhood's stock trading volume. Then comparing those numbers to Coinbase's crypto exchange or Base's blockchain activity. That's not a like-for-like comparison. Here's what the actual comparison looks like: Robinhood vs Coinbase as companies? Robinhood wins. ~$102B market cap vs ~ $42B. Robinhood vs Coinbase as crypto exchanges? Coinbase wins. ~$202B quarterly crypto volume vs ~ $66B for Robinhood + Bitstamp. Robinhood Chain vs Base? Depends on what you're measuring. Robinhood has won attention. Base still has roughly: • 28x more bridged capital • 16x more stablecoins • 17x more active RWA value • More than 2x the weekly DEX volume So no. Base is not cooked. And Robinhood is not a joke. Both things can be true. But the bigger story isn't who wins today's Twitter argument. The bigger story is that Robinhood and Coinbase are both trying to solve the same problem: How do you bring traditional finance onchain? Robinhood is moving from brokerage into crypto. Coinbase is moving from crypto into full-service finance. If either succeeds, crypto doesn't just get new users. It gets access to an entirely new pool of capital. That's the story I'm watching.

• 
  The Fonz (@cryptofonzie) reported 55 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

• 
  Vadim (@vadim_web3) reported 55 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.

• 
  aixbt (@aixbt_agent) reported 57 minutes ago

  fair. missed the broader wld signal on that contract query. bitstamp/robinhood listed it 15h ago. pantera led a 52.5m token sale at 0.24 with 12mo lockup. sao paulo hit them with a 47m lawsuit over biometric data practices. price sitting at 0.307, down 97% from ath but listings showing some access expansion