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:

• 
  EddieOz ⚡ (@eddieoz) reported 8 seconds ago

  When block size warz in 2017, bcashers tried the BCC tckr. But Bitfinex was using BCH. Some say it was Bitcoin Cash, but others say it was for *******. Well, we know. That matters: if 110ers try to list their shitcoin, it is up to the exchanges to decide. CSW feelings.

• 
  Ricardo Martinez (@ricardoXMR) reported 2 minutes ago

  @R3st4rtY0urL1f3 I don't think they are shutting down, but who knows. I know tether/bitfinex specifically chose to pull out of Europe to avoid MICA and the ****** EU & UK crypto regulations

• 
  Julitta Ayan (@_Tyrano_) reported 3 minutes ago

  @dahongfei @BitMEX Bitmex was never a surprisingly large exchange, while Bitfinex where $neo was delisted is vastly bigger and far more active. Long-term survival does not equal success; on the contrary, ur persistent problems continue to cause full or partial delistings across multiple platforms.

• 
  Bitcoin Regime (@BitPrintzz) reported 9 minutes ago

  @bitfinex @PositiveCrypto It’s cold card issue reshuffle nothing than that. Look into URPD instead

• 
  Bitcoin Consultants (@BTCConsultantNL) reported 9 minutes ago

  @ChrisFromAT @AquaBitcoin What do you mean? Can’t you send it without sideshift? Trade on HodlHodl, Peach Bitcoin, Bitfinex? They all support liquid network?

• 
  Uncle Jim (@losingshekels) reported 9 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

• 
  Jason Montoya (@jaysmontoya) reported 10 minutes ago

  @bitfinex fair read on reserves but sentiment this crushed with funding negative means shorts are comfortable here. that's not a safe spot to be short either. leg down is possible, so is a violent squeeze with no buyers on the ask

• 
  Golden Luco (@GoldenLuco) reported 12 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

• 
  Beautyon (@Beautyon_) reported 22 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!

• 
  Stash Management (@Stashquants) reported 23 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.

• 
  Samson Mow (@Excellion) reported 28 minutes ago

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

• 
  Mrbankstips Parody (@Mrbvnkstips) reported 31 minutes ago

  Every crypto CEX shutting down like Bitfinex and others have one thing in common they bought ETH and over leveraged simple

• 
  Sumbull (@Ssas_33) reported 32 minutes ago

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

• 
  DataFox (@datafox21) reported 32 minutes ago

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

• 
  Shanaka Anslem Perera ⚡ (@shanaka86) reported 33 minutes ago

  On 15th August 2010, a single Bitcoin transaction created 184,467,440,737 coins. That is 8,784 times the entire 21 million supply cap. Two addresses received 92 billion each. The fix took five hours, and it was written by hand. The supply limit everyone treats as a law of mathematics has already failed once and been restored by people. It happened again in 2018, when a second inflation path was found and patched before anyone used it. The cap survived because when it broke, humans coordinated inside an afternoon. Fungibility has no such defence. There is no consensus rule anywhere in Bitcoin saying one coin must be accepted like any other, so there is nothing to violate, nothing to patch, and no emergency to coordinate around. It has been eroding for a decade and no client has ever shipped a fix, because no rule was ever broken. The Bitcoin taken from Coldcard wallets are the current demonstration. More than 1,367 bitcoin:native and Galaxy Research says most of it has not moved. Every node on earth treats those outputs as perfectly spendable. Bitcoin has no stolen flag, no freeze, no administrator and no way to reverse a confirmed transaction. They are still close to "unusable" anywhere that checks identity. That decision is made outside the protocol entirely. Analytics firms score provenance, exchanges screen deposits, and custodians act on the result. There is no canonical formula for any of it. One provider models ownership clusters, another estimates proportional exposure, another counts hops. CoinJoin breaks assumptions several of those methods rely on. Two exchanges can examine the same output and reach opposite conclusions. So clean and ***** are not properties of a satoshi. They are privately manufactured 'credit ratings' attached to history. Which means the split forming is not two coins at two prices. It is a compliance spread. On-chain a bitcoin holds its full face value. At the regulated edge, what it is actually worth is that price multiplied by the odds an institution accepts where it has been. Bitfinex settles what that means in practice. Of 119,756 bitcoin stolen in 2016, roughly 25,000 moved through years of laundering. Over 94,000 were recovered, and not because any blacklist disabled them. Investigators obtained the private keys. Watching narrows the exits. Taking them back still requires control. Some read all of this as proof of the asset's strength, on the reasoning that only real value attracts theft and scrutiny at this scale. Criminals take enormous risks for cash, gold, art and data too! The harder observation is structural. Bitcoin fixed the scarcity problem that fiat has. It never solved the fungibility problem that cash solved by accident, because paper carries no history. Bitcoin carries all of it, forever, and the protocol has no opinion about what that history should cost you. One supply. One settlement ledger. And a growing number of private ledgers deciding whose spending gets accepted.

• 
  JP_OptionsDeFi (@DefiLtam) reported 33 minutes ago

  @bitfinex And what ******** does this damn industry that wants to destroy wealth or create it, damn Chinese and American demons creating their patterns of cursed cycles.

• 
  SANDY.CRYPTOMAN (@SanMSH21) reported 35 minutes ago

  $Bitcoin ----Most Costly Mistakes The $44 Billion Bithumb Blunder (2026) A Bithumb employee accidentally sent 620,000 BTC instead of 2,000 Korean Won to users, forcing a massive, near-total network rollback and asset freeze. $44.000 Billion — Bithumb Error (2026) $9.000 Billion Mt. Gox Repayment Move (2024) $3.600 Billion DOJ Bitfinex Seizure (2022) $1.000 Billion DOJ Silk Road Move (2020) $0.003 B. Record Transaction Fee ($3.1M in 2023) $0.001 Billion Paxos Overpayment ($510,000 in 2023)

• 
  Sheryl | Simple Crypto Advice (@syedaliakber2) reported 37 minutes ago

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

• 
  tarık (@tarkbalakar) reported 40 minutes ago

  BitMex is shutting down. Now BitMart. What's next? Bitget Bitstamp Bitfinex Bithumb bitFlyer Bitso Bitkub Bitvavo Bitpanda Bit2Me

• 
  difoxxn (@Difoxxn) reported 40 minutes ago

  $𝗕𝗚𝗕 𝗯𝘂𝗹𝗹𝘀 𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝗼𝘂𝘁 𝗵𝗲𝗿𝗲 𝘀𝗲𝗹𝗹𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘆𝗼𝘂 𝗮 "𝘂𝗻𝗶𝘃𝗲𝗿𝘀𝗮𝗹 𝗲𝘅𝗰𝗵𝗮𝗻𝗴𝗲" 𝗳𝗮𝗶𝗿𝘆 𝘁𝗮𝗹𝗲 𝘄𝗵𝗶𝗹𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝘁𝗼𝗸𝗲𝗻 𝗶𝘁𝘀𝗲𝗹𝗳 𝗶𝘀 𝗾𝘂𝗶𝗲𝘁𝗹𝘆 𝗴𝗲𝘁𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗿𝗲𝗸𝘁. 𝗟𝗲𝘁'𝘀 𝗲𝘅𝗽𝗼𝘀𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗴𝗮𝗽 𝗯𝗲𝘁𝘄𝗲𝗲𝗻 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗺𝗮𝗿𝗸𝗲𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗼𝗻-𝗰𝗵𝗮𝗶𝗻 𝗿𝗲𝗮𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘆 Bitfinex just yeeted $BGB off their platform (delisted July 3). And the "official reason"? A vague "listing qualifications review." Translation: read between the lines yourself. Meanwhile Bitget's out here launching Stocks 2.0 like it's the second coming of TradFi. Cool story. But nobody's talking about the fact that $BGB's 24h volume is a measly $10M on a $1.18B cap. That's a 0.85% vol/cap ratio. This thing trades like a ghost town, not a "top 3 exchange token." "Deflationary tokenomics" 🤡 let's fact check that real quick: Dec 2024 burn: 800M tokens. Massive, legit, impressive. Q2 2026 Morph burn: 3,010,400 tokens. That's not a burn, that's a rounding error. Someone's riding on 2024's hype with 2026's leftovers. And here's the part that should actually scare you — there's NO public whale wallet breakdown for $BGB. None. Zero. Nada. An exchange that publishes monthly Proof of Reserves for 42 straight months... can't show you who's holding the bag on their own token? Make it make sense. That green candle everyone's screenshotting? Pure market beta. Zero BGB-specific catalyst behind it. You're not smart money for buying it — you're just along for the market's ride. My honest take: this is a CEX with real revenue wrapped around a token with thin liquidity, a fresh tier-1 delisting, and zero whale transparency. That's not a "hold and pray" setup — that's a "know your exit" setup. Growth headlines don't pay your bags. On-chain flow does. Stay sharp, don't get exit-liquidity'd. NFA, DYOR, act accordingly. #BGB #Bitget

• 
  whits (@whits23) reported 43 minutes ago

  @SaniExp have not heard from you lately. Bitfinex had 30000 bitcoin but just shut down with only 3600? Any explanation or truth? @w_s_bitcoin @Pledditor

• 
  Stash Management (@Stashquants) reported 43 minutes ago

  @bitfinex Urgent KYC issue: Compliance directed me to open a ticket, but Support has directed me back to Compliance. I can provide current documents and proof of my legal name change. My account is also under a withdrawal hold, making the 3-day deadline impossible. Need Help.

• 
  BlackIntus (@Blackintus) reported 45 minutes ago

  Crypto Fear & Greed Index: 16/100 — “extreme fear.” Bitcoin briefly broke $60K last week — worst stretch since FTX collapse in 2022. Now rebounding to $63,800. But Bitfinex warns: “Rallies are increasingly being sold rather than accumulated.” The structural problem hasn’t changed. Macro is restrictive. Rates are going higher. Bitcoin is a risk-on asset in a risk-off environment. 💰 YOUR MOVE: The $63,800 bounce is a relief rally, not a reversal. For the trend to change you need two things: Strait of Hormuz reopens (oil down, inflation pressure eases, Fed pause) or SpaceX IPO capital returns to crypto after the excitement fades. Neither is happening this week. If you’re long crypto, set a stop at $58,000. If you’re waiting to buy the dip — the structural floor is $52,000, not $60,000. @Blackintus

• 
  DMT-NAT 小果果（晨曦） (@nat_xgg2288) reported 51 minutes ago

  @fiatarchive Remaining BTC Supply Projection April 2026 Remaining: 984,370 coins (Block reward per block: 3.125 BTC) April 2027 Remaining: 820,310 coins (Block reward per block: 3.125 BTC) April 2028 Remaining: 656,250 coins (Block reward per block: 1.5625 BTC) April 2029 Remaining: 574,210 coins (Block reward per block: 1.5625 BTC) April 2030 Remaining: 492,180 coins (Block reward per block: 1.5625 BTC) April 2031 Remaining: 410,150 coins (Block reward per block: 1.5625 BTC) April 2032 Remaining: 328,120 coins (Block reward per block: 0.78125 BTC) April 2033 Remaining: 287,100 coins (Block reward per block: 0.78125 BTC) April 2034 Remaining: 246,090 coins (Block reward per block: 0.78125 BTC) April 2035 Remaining: 205,070 coins (Block reward per block: 0.78125 BTC) April 2036 Remaining: 164,060 coins (Block reward per block: 0.390625 BTC) April 2037 Remaining: 143,550 coins (Block reward per block: 0.390625 BTC) April 2038 Remaining: 123,040 coins (Block reward per block: 0.390625 BTC) April 2039 Remaining: 102,530 coins (Block reward per block: 0.390625 BTC) April 2040 Remaining: 82,030 coins (Block reward per block: 0.1953125 BTC) By the completion of the 7th halving (projected April 2036): Total Bitcoin minted: 20,835,937.5 coins Total Bitcoin left unmined: 164,062.5 coins This means that by April 2036, 99.22% of Bitcoin’s total supply will have been fully mined. The gradual depletion of block rewards is hardcoded into Bitcoin’s protocol and can be calculated with absolute precision, yet most people fail to grasp this reality, refuse to believe it, or simply deny this inevitable outcome. Let us break down a critical question: Can Bitcoin sustain steady operation all the way to the 7th halving in April 2036 relying solely on its current block reward model? A simple cost analysis lays bare the issue. The current mining cost per Bitcoin stands at roughly $75,000. After three more halvings, mining costs will surge eightfold, pushing the cost per coin to $600,000. At that price point, Bitcoin’s overall total market capitalization would need to top $12 trillion. By contrast, the total hardware value of all Bitcoin mining rigs across the globe is only around $7 billion. How can a $12 trillion market be supported by merely $7 billion worth of mining hardware? This is utterly illogical and devoid of basic market sense. Are all institutional investors and capitalists in this space ignorant or irrational? This scenario completely defies commercial logic and fundamental capital principles. Scaling up network hash rate will only drive mining costs higher, amplify operational losses, and accelerate the onset of a death spiral. This is an unsolvable dead end under the existing rules—there is only one fix: expand block reward supply. The solution: #NAT #NAT is a native asset built directly on the Bitcoin mainchain. It shares identical hash power, blockchain, block generation cycle and wallet address system with Bitcoin, minting synchronously every ten minutes within each block. It functions as the secondary native asset minted in parallel within every Bitcoin block, Bitcoin’s twin asset sharing the same foundational blockchain infrastructure. Two of the world’s top 4 mining pools, SpiderPool and F2Pool, have already begun distributing #NAT to miners. The entities with the most to lose are the major Bitcoin holders ranked below: 1. Coinbase (Exchange + ETF custody): 976,000 BTC ​ 2. Strategy (formerly MicroStrategy, public listed firm): 845,300 BTC (Latest financial filing update, June 8) ​ 3. BlackRock IBIT (iShares Bitcoin Spot ETF): 817,100 BTC ​ 4. Binance (User exchange reserves): 631,000 BTC ​ 5. BTC seized by the U.S. government: 328,400 BTC ​ 6. Fidelity FBTC ETF: 190,000 – 200,000 BTC ​ 7. Grayscale GBTC: 144,000 BTC (Sustained net redemptions and drawdowns) ​ 8. Bitfinex Exchange: Approximately 195,000 BTC

• 
  Kathlyn Tuccillo (@KathlynTuc77441) reported 54 minutes ago

  Bitcoin ETFs absorbed 13300 BTC last week against 3150 issued, but price rose only 2 percent. Bitfinex Alpha flags a demand engine turning seller as range support. Read report now, weigh in: what moves Bitcoin next? #Crypto

• 
  DxM (@diopter_ring) reported 54 minutes ago

  @WuBlockchain Bitfinex down 59.7% is brutal rest of the market dipped but thats a straight cliff

• 
  Wu Blockchain (@WuBlockchain) reported 55 minutes ago

  June 2026 Exchange Data Report: Spot Volume Fell 5.1%, Derivatives Volume Rose 4.2%, Website Traffic Fell 0.8% In June 2026, spot trading volume across major exchanges fell by approximately 5.1% from May. Bitfinex recorded the largest increase, up 21.4%, while BitMart recorded the largest decline, down 58.6%. Derivatives trading volume rose by approximately 4.2% from May. Deribit recorded the largest increase, up 26.6%, while HTX recorded the largest decline, down 42.4%. Traffic to major exchange websites fell by approximately 0.8% from May. Deribit recorded the largest increase, up 165.1%, while HTX recorded the largest decline, down 50.8%.

• 
  Coca Cola Kid (@CocaColaKid_OG) reported 56 minutes ago

  Bitfinex whale 24h pace down from ~+1,300 to +762, with a flat/negative last hour, could be top signal like projected ~88.4K BTC, +11%, day 18 last time it quit buying Bitcoin gained +20%

• 
  TU_Crypto_News (@TU_Crypto_News) reported 58 minutes ago

  Tony Katz says Europe cutting off Binance could trigger a wider regulatory domino effect, with markets from Australia to the US potentially following. He warns that could push Binance down the global exchange rankings toward the status of Poloniex and Bitfinex.

• 
  TradingArgento (@TradingArgent0) reported 59 minutes ago

  @bitfinex No, it will retrace to the key level of 72k, a support zone.