Bitstamp Outage Map

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:

• 
  kui ʬʬ (@000kuin) reported 2 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

• 
  Mysterious Doctor 📉📈📉. (@MysteriousDoct3) reported 2 minutes ago

  Buy the Exchange vs Build the Chain and decentralisation 🔥 🔥 🔥 🔥 🔥 🔥 🔥 🔥 🔥 🔥 🔥 Buy the Exchange vs Build the Chain $Robinhood with Bitstamp Bought 14 years of compliance. 50+ licenses. Instant UK access. Frontend = Robinhood. Backend = Bitstamp. Accounts still separate. Crypto comes to 20M users through regulation. $QUBIC Built Outsourced Computation. Roadmap → Mainnet. 1,455 invocations live. 451/676 Computors sign every action. Smart Contracts = Brain Oracles = Senses OC = Hands ← now acting No middleman. Just math. The difference: One bought infrastructure to fit the old system $Robinhood One built infrastructure for a new system. $Qubic Robinhood says " Distribution first". $QUBIC says Computation first. Most people will see Robinhood first. The agents will run on $QUBIC first. Which side are you on? Or are you on both sides ?

• 
  Gerald (@Gerald9h8) reported 4 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.

• 
  Professor on chain (@Proxonchain) reported 4 minutes ago

  $LIT LIQUIDATION SWEEP: BitGo & Wintermute Inflows Trigger -8.2% Flush Before Instant Demand Bounce! If you saw $LIT take an aggressive -8.19% dive from $3.92 to $3.60 and immediately bounce back to $3.75, 2 hours ago, institutional custodian BitGo routed a massive 102.8K $LIT ($391.7K) block straight into OKX. Simultaneously, Wintermute and Robinhood desks funneled spot supply into Bybit and Bitstamp. The moment the demand block absorbed the sell-off, dip buyers aggressively bid the floor. Exchanges immediately had to unlock cold vaults to keep up with liquidity demand Coinbase: Unlocked 101.4K $LIT ($376K+) from Cold Storage to Hot Wallets. . Bitget: Moved 30K $LIT ($110K) from Cold to Hot. Smart money triggered the dump into a historical demand block, flushed weak hands, trapped late shorters at $3.60, and engineered a fast V-shaped recovery straight back to $3.75.

• 
  UtilityTruth (@UtilityTruth) reported 6 minutes ago

  📌 Robinhood Brings 50+ Crypto Assets to UK Investors, Including XRP, LINK, SOL, AVAX Real, confirmed: Robinhood began rolling out crypto trading to eligible UK customers this week via Bitstamp UK Ltd (FCA-registered, acquired by Robinhood for $200M in 2025). Zero trading, account maintenance, or custody fees — though a 0.1% FX fee applies (0.3% on weekend conversions). Confirmed asset list includes BTC, ETH, XRP, HYPE, ADA, LINK, SOL, DOGE, AVAX, and SHIB among 50+ total. Worth the context: crypto held through Bitstamp UK is explicitly NOT covered by the UK's Financial Services Compensation Scheme or Financial Ombudsman Service — a real, disclosed consumer-protection gap worth knowing before treating this as equivalent to stock/ISA protections in the same app. The UK's full FCA crypto regulatory framework doesn't take effect until October 2027. 👀

• 
  Brian (@KoZmoh) reported 7 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.

• 
  Cryptorbix (@Cryptorbix) reported 8 minutes ago

  Robinhood opens crypto to eligible UK customers — access to 50+ assets via Bitstamp inside its main investing app, rollout starts this week. Expect more retail flow into BTC/ETH and alt orderbooks. 🇬🇧 #Crypto #CryptoNews

• 
  SyAz (@SyAzCrypto1) reported 8 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.

• 
  West (@asu_maro39) reported 14 minutes ago

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

• 
  Defi Trillioniare (@memexbn) reported 16 minutes ago

  Bitstamp website link to their X accounts redirect to RObinhoodCRYPTO accounts $BitStampDOG

• 
  Mosterin.SOL (@Mosterin_0) reported 17 minutes ago

  💸 Robinhood adds crypto trading to its main UK app Robinhood has started rolling out crypto trading for eligible UK users. You can now buy and sell more than 50 digital assets directly in the main investing app - alongside stocks, options, ISAs, and other products. Crypto trading runs through Bitstamp, the exchange Robinhood acquired last year for $200 million. At launch, Robinhood is offering zero trading fees, no account maintenance fees, and no custody fees. There is a 0.1% FX fee (rising to 0.3% for certain weekend conversions). Robinhood has also introduced an AI feature in the UK (Cortex Digests for Crypto) that analyzes news, market data, and technical indicators to explain - in plain English - what’s driving price moves in individual cryptocurrencies. The service is rolling out this week to eligible customers via Bitstamp UK Ltd.

• 
  Vadim (@vadim_web3) reported 21 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.

• 
  The Fonz (@cryptofonzie) reported 21 minutes ago

  @Bitstamp Hi what are you going to do that’s any different to the phonecalls i’ve made and unanswered complaint email? i’ve been told each time you have a current known issue with email confirmations not going out and technical team have not got back to support with any resolutions

• 
  votesa ■ (@votesa) reported 28 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.

• 
  Sagzee (@IAmSagzee) reported 30 minutes ago

  Encryption doesn't care who's sitting at the keyboard, because math can't tell the difference between a hacker's script and a valid signature. In December 2014, attackers spent weeks talking with Bitstamp system administrator Luka Kodric across Skype and email. Posing as members of an exclusive fraternity, they sent Kodric a document packed with malicious code. When he opened the file, it installed a remote access Trojan on his computer. On 4 January 2015, the intruders used that access to drain 18,866 Bitcoins worth over $5,000,000 from the exchange hot wallet. "Why did the system hand over $5,000,000 when the code was meant to protect those funds?" the Cryptographic Vault asks. "Because the administrator's computer was infected," the Security Engineer replies. "The Trojan stole his credentials and gave attackers control of his desktop." "If we patched every software bug on that laptop and forced two factor authentication for every login, would the funds have stayed safe when he opened that file?" "No," the Security Engineer admits, pausing. "The file executed code directly inside his active user session. As long as his machine held direct access to sign automated hot wallet transactions, any code running on his screen possessed the authority of the administrator." "Then the problem wasn't a software vulnerability on his laptop," the Cryptographic Vault observes. "What actually failed?" "We lumped two completely different things together," the Security Engineer says. "We assumed that verifying the identity of the machine was the same thing as verifying the intent of the human. It's like a heavy vault door with two keyholes. One keyhole sits inside a locked steel box. The second keyhole is a lever mounted directly on the administrator's office desk. The attackers didn't try breaking into the steel box. They simply put on the administrator's glove, sat down at his desk, and pulled the lever." The breach revealed a fundamental mismatch in system architecture. Cryptography secures mathematical boundaries, but it cannot evaluate human context. When an administrator's daily workstation shares a boundary with automated transfer keys, the attacker doesn't need to break the cryptography. They simply need to trick the human into letting them borrow the key. "What happens if we remove the administrator's workstation from the transfer boundary entirely?" the Cryptographic Vault asks. "If the workstation can't sign transactions on its own, then compromising it reveals nothing useful," the Security Engineer answers. "The attacker gets control of a screen, but the screen doesn't hold the key." "So how does the system confirm that a transaction ought to happen?" "By forcing independent boundaries," the Security Engineer explains. "Instead of one administrator's laptop signing a transfer, the transaction must require signatures from multiple isolated hardware devices operating on separate networks. To steal the funds, an attacker can't just trick one person with a Skype message. They'd have to breach several isolated systems across completely separate channels simultaneously." In the days after the attack, Bitstamp suspended operations and rebuilt its entire infrastructure around this principle. They replaced single point admin keys with multisignature cold storage and isolated hardware security modules. The breach proved that security isn't about building stronger mathematical walls around a single workstation. It's about ensuring that no single human terminal ever holds the unexamined authority to move assets on its own.