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:

• 
  ddadybayo (@ddadybayo) reported 4 minutes ago

  This is the kind of narrative that gets pushed while the actual architecture centralizes and leaks. Onion routing hides the full path. That part is real. But the protocol has built in leaks that have been known and documented for years: - Same payment hash on every hop →trivial correlation. - Balance probing recovers up to 89% of public channel balances. - Timing analysis: the single most central node can observe timing on 50% of payments. Top 4 nodes cover 72%. 
Meanwhile the “decentralized L2” part: - Public capacity hovers between 2.7k–5.6k BTC.
- Top 10 nodes control 62% of all public liquidity.
- Gini coefficient for node capacity: 0.97. - Top 10% of nodes hold 80% of the locked bitcoin. This is not decentralization. This is a hub and spoke system with a few very powerful hubs. 
Who runs these hubs? Mostly exchanges and LSPs: Bitfinex, ACINQ, Binance, Kraken, OKX, Wallet of Satoshi and similar. If you’re not running your own full node and managing your own liquidity, you’re almost certainly routing through these entities. They see sender, receiver and amounts. Privacy collapses. 
This isn’t a bug. It’s the predictable result of a design that prioritizes routing efficiency and capital efficiency over actual decentralization and strong privacy. Powerful adversaries (state level or well resourced) don’t even need to break onion routing perfectly. They just sit on or near the big hubs and watch. 
Lightning can move small payments faster and cheaper than on-chain. That’s its actual use case. But calling it incredible privacy by default while the liquidity and routing are this concentrated and while these attacks exist, is dishonest. Real privacy requires an additional layer on top (Chaumian ecash like Cashu is one attempt). The base Lightning protocol does not deliver it. 
Bitcoin was supposed to be a tool for financial sovereignty and resistance to control. When the dominant scaling solution creates new centralized chokepoints that are easy to monitor and potentially censor, we’ve traded one set of problems for another that serves power better. Data doesn’t lie. Narratives do.

• 
  Seabass On-Chain (@SeabassCity) reported 5 minutes ago

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

• 
  Cryptocrat (@Cryptocratico) reported 10 minutes ago

  🚨 $167M BTC SHIFTS BETWEEN MAJOR EXCHANGES Approximately 2,572 BTC moved in two transactions from a Bitfinex-labeled hot wallet to Kraken-labeled addresses. This is a sizeable cross-exchange liquidity shift—not evidence of a sale. Customer withdrawals, custody, OTC settlement or liquidity management remain possible.

• 
  HypeDojo (@HypeDojo) reported 14 minutes ago

  > Coinbase down. > Binance down. > Bitfinex down. Hyperliquid remained online. Market participants don't care about promises during bull markets.They care about performance when everyone shows up at once.

• 
  Matched-Betting.US (@MatchBettingUS) reported 15 minutes ago

  @bitfinex Support will decide

• 
  Seyvion 𐤊 (@XSeyvion) reported 18 minutes ago

  $BTC Everyone is staring at the Fed, but the real support line is the ETF pipe staying open. Bitfinex is pointing at that $77,100 area because it was the level that framed the August break. Last week ETFs still pulled in net new cash even with a red day at the end. The other part is positioning stayed pretty controlled, so this is not a market that is forced to puke if rates get one more hawkish nudge. Also pay attention to who is holding it. Big wallets trimmed around 50,500 BTC since late June, and exchange plus ETF custody added about 59,100 BTC. That is supply moving into wrappers people hold longer, not coins getting prepped to swing trade. Rate fear can cap upside, but the bid is real if the ETF channel keeps absorbing dips. If that inflow slows, $77,100 stops being a line and turns into a trap door.

• 
  RelativelyIrrelevant.vip (@RelIrrelvantVIP) reported 19 minutes ago

  @Charlesdav43874 @IndyBitcoin So when an XMR customer uses Kraken, KuCoin, Bitfinex, Poloniex (all examples) or similar XMR providers; those DAB's know the Customer and the amount of the Digital Asset Business Activity performed on the Customer's behalf. Those XMR DABAs would not be anonymous & are taxable.

• 
  Strategy Trader (@strategytraderE) reported 20 minutes ago

  @Karman_1s BNB support fails but Bitfinex BTC longs grow, alt weakness, not isolated crash.

• 
  0xLaplace 🔺 (@0xlaplaced) reported 24 minutes ago

  Bitfinex survived by making everyone share the wound. Customer balances were cut by about 36%. In return came BFX debt tokens: $1 for every dollar lost. Hold, sell, or swap them for equity. Within eight months, Bitfinex redeemed the tokens. The bitcoin remained gone.

• 
  Max Gas (@aqualanga) reported 25 minutes ago

  $UNI already down 5.5% over 4 hours, and $2.8M just landed on Binance, Bitget, Gate and Bitfinex in the last hour. this isn't the early signal, it's supply still showing up while the move is already happening. one wallet, 0x28c6…1d60, sent $2.0M straight onto Binance by itself. that's not a smear of small deposits, that's one player moving real size. worth noting, "Ceffu Deposit" also pulled $101K off Binance in this window, and we've clocked that wallet before, it moved on LINK back in August and that one barely budged the price over the next 8 hours. mixed signals in the same hour. coins on exchanges can be sold, they're not guaranteed to be. go trace the $2.0M yourself if you don't believe the number. NFA

• 
  clav (@marsclavie) reported 27 minutes ago

  the timeline is suddenly full of XPL bull posts a month before one of the biggest unlocks relative to float in crypto history. funny timing @plasma here's why it's one of the worst-structured tokens in crypto. with receipts. the setup was perfect. tether and bitfinex behind it. founders fund. $373m committed to a $50m public sale, 7x oversubscribed. $2b of stablecoins on chain on day one. ath $1.68. twelve months later: $0.087. ten straight red monthly candles. back to the launch-day open. –94%. the chain: tvl from $5.7b in week one to $624m today. stablecoins on chain from 2b to 838m. fees: ~$830 a day. about $300k a year against an $870m fdv. that's not a bug. it's the design. zero-fee usdt means the core use case is structurally unmonetizable. every dollar of "adoption" produces nothing for the token. they built the one l1 that can't capture value from its own success. staking was promised for q1 2026. it's august 31. not live. no date. holders are just exit liq. meanwhile their own supply api shows 10.12b+ xpl, over 125m minted beyond genesis, while their docs say inflation "only activates when external validators and stake delegation go live." explain that one. tokenomics: 10b supply, 18% floated at launch. 25% team, 25% investors, one-year cliff. sept 25: 833m team + 833m investors + 89m ecosystem = 1.76b tokens in one day. 63% of the float. then 228m a month, 5% of float, until september 2028. the most circulated bull report, written by a disclosed plasma investor, models the cliff at "roughly 830 million tokens." official docs: 833m team and 833m investors. 1.67b. off by half, in a report about token demand. retweeted by the team. "look guys, this is why you buy xpl!" lmao. plasma one, "the world's first stablecoin-native neobank." their own data: 78,400 "cards." median balance under $1. one wallet holds 11% of all deposits. $17.9m total. 61 app store ratings. revolut has 75m customers and $6b in revenue. this is a dune dashboard with a visa logo. the card pays cashback in xpl. a token down 94%. every reward is a bag. platinum requires locking 100,000 xpl, about $8.5k, for a year. their own bull case admits the flywheel "partially throttles itself": token goes up, the lock costs more; token goes down, you're stuck in it. unit economics: 3–4% cashback against 2–3% interchange. their own investor report concedes they "may lose a little on each transaction." lock demand: ~33m xpl a month. vesting supply after sept 25: ~228m a month. seven to one. before the cliff. cmon bros. this playbook ran before. CRO: lock the token, get a metal card, 19x in 2021. rewards got cut, round-tripped 90%. plasma copied it, made the lock harder to enter, and launched it three months before the biggest unlock in the token's life. no CRO action, just dilution and holders crying. august had record binance spot volume, 12.75b xpl, 4.6x the float. looked like accumulation. it was a binance trading tournament. 4m xpl in vouchers. they paid for volume while the token sat at the bottom. october 2025, the founder: "no team members have sold any xpl." june 2026: wallets labeled plasma team moved 150m xpl to binance, flagged by onchain lens. august 2026: plasma-linked wallets depositing again, three weeks before 833m team tokens unlock. maybe it's market-making. they haven't said a word. same month: ethena bought out its selling investors and put a fee switch to a vote. +100%. monad offered to buy out early investors. pumpfun spent $350m on buybacks and ripped straight through its own cliff. plasma ran a trading competition. the stablecoin thesis is the best thesis in crypto. stablecoins settled $33t last year. the demand is real, in lagos and buenos aires and istanbul, and someone will build the rail. plasma had tether, thiel, and $373m of demand on day one. they built a token dispenser. im not buying the dip. i don’t want it. not because the idea was wrong. because they made it about themselves and not the holders. zero

• 
  Beautyon (@Beautyon_) reported 29 minutes ago

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

• 
  Brutal Crypto Brief (@BrutalDegenX) reported 29 minutes ago

  475K $ETH pulled off exchanges in ONE week - Binance, Bitfinex, OKX, Gemini all bleeding outflows 👀 June avg return is -7.59%, ETH already down 16% this month - and degens are STILL buying the dip Brave or stupid, we'll find out $ETH #Ethereum

• 
  Kathlyn Tuccillo (@KathlynTuc77441) reported 29 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

• 
  PIKACHU4SSR IS 💞ALIVE🦋😎 (@PikaDetects) reported 32 minutes ago

  what is this about bitfinex ? Error loading address data. (400 OK: Invalid Bitcoin address) ?? #Bitcoin

• 
  Mandelbrot (@Wild_Randomness) reported 37 minutes ago

  @NotSpikeG @LunaticxOsmo That’s trading fellas— I spoonfed every single one of you the 82->60k move, I even came at every micro bounce to stay short along the way I publicly tweeted my sub 60k short covers, and then did the same this week at 60.8 Bullposted 61s when bitfinex twap slowed down Cmon…

• 
  Weaver (@Trend_Weaver) reported 38 minutes ago

  @bitfinex Been watching the same thing. Feels more like a slow grind than a strong reversal right now.

• 
  Rheticus ⚡️ (@RheticusRhombus) reported 40 minutes ago

  @bitfinex I bought 1 sat at the pico top Now **** off

• 
  Muntari Abdulhamid (@SupplyDemand29) reported 41 minutes ago

  $BTC BITCOIN BOUNCES TO $64,812 AND ETHEREUM LEADS - BUT DON'T GET TRAPPED Today's market is doing the exact opposite of yesterday and most people will misread it. BTC is up to $64,812 from $64,246 open. Low was $63,267, high $65,176. We bounced $1,500 from yesterday's dump. ETH is at $1,922 up 1.12%, high $1,936 low $1,872. ETH/BTC at 0.0297 - ETH is beating BTC again. So what changed in 24 hours? Yesterday Korea's KOSPI crashed 10% and dragged us to $63K. Today Korea crashed again and Bitcoin went UP toward $64K. That's called decoupling. Bitfinex predicted this. When stress is rates-driven, BTC dumps with stocks. When stress is stock-specific like chipmakers Samsung and SK Hynix, BTC decouples and holds. That's exactly what happened today. Second, Fed relief. The panic before Fed is over. Market is positioned. Bitcoin held the $63K support and 50-day EMA at $65,089 area, printed its 4th weekly gain structure intact.

• 
  CaptSpectacular (@CaptSpectacular) reported 43 minutes ago

  @bitcoinmunger @bitfinex @tradingview Just another avenue for capitulation. Now we got etfs, saylor ponzi and this. ****.

• 
  2weed 🇵🇸 (@TAUHEED5) reported 44 minutes ago

  @CW8900 Wtf is bitfinex whale

• 
  Hovermere (@Hovermere) reported 44 minutes ago

  4/10 Cash is not flowing to “the RWA market.” It is flowing to whoever already owns the stack. Alkemya turns idle wire into working capital for GTX. Bitfinex Securities gets a record commodity listing under El Salvador’s rules. Vault, audit, and venues get paid for the plumbing whether a deep bid shows up or not. Subscribers only start getting paid after the waterfall moves: capital back, 6% preferred, then 80% of surplus. Until a distribution hits, outside money is the product being tested.

• 
  Ajay Khosla (@Kenny_Khosla) reported 44 minutes ago

  Bitcoin: $63.7K. This week's rally to $65K was a macro trade, not a crypto one — per Bitfinex, driven by the CPI-triggered Fed repricing (hike odds 42%→12%), not fresh BTC demand. Evidence: ETFs sold $425M right before CPI, Strategy bought nothing, and the Coinbase premium's still negative. Meanwhile, the real story today is AI stocks — the semiconductor ETF (SOXX) is down 17.6% since July 1, with Micron, SanDisk, Intel all down 4-8% just today. Bitcoin's pullback looks tame by comparison.

• 
  Crypto Noob (@cryptonoobini) reported 45 minutes ago

  @bitfinex capital settling in utility says more than a meme spike slow money sticking around is the real tell

• 
  Lain on the Blockchain (@CryptoCyberia) reported 46 minutes ago

  @colludingnode @satorinakamoto @0xCursr Kek cope It it public knowledge the feds pushed coinbase binance bitfinex etc to delist and Kracken told them ti **** off and they went to court against Kracken, as did EEA, UK and other feds. Really makes you wonder why theyre fine with zcash kek

• 
  Samson Mow (@Excellion) reported 48 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.

• 
  ~dorsen-witnes (@fazzam_eth) reported 49 minutes ago

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

• 
  EyeOnChain (@EyeOnChain) reported 53 minutes ago

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

• 
  Shanaka Anslem Perera ⚡ (@shanaka86) reported 57 minutes ago

  The Coldcard attacker has gone back to the large wallets. Wave one averaged 0.91 bitcoin per address. Waves two and three collapsed to 0.05 and 0.11 bitcoin:native, which looked like an operator running out of targets. Galaxy's Alex Thorn flagged a suspected fourth wave on Monday averaging 0.82. Nobody finds fresh large wallets in a keyspace that has already been emptied. The earlier passes did not exhaust the supply. They had not looked everywhere. Going back up the balance ladder points to a new derivation path or address type the first sweeps never scanned, which means the exposed population is larger than three days of falling averages suggested. The pace says the same thing. Thorn counted 218 transactions across blocks 960,778 to 960,792, moving over 380 bitcoin from 462 addresses into 210 fresh destinations. Sweeps ran at 13.8 per block against a pre-incident baseline of 0.3, roughly 46 times the normal rate. The confirmed total is still 1,367.05 bitcoin, about 88.6 million dollars, from 4,585 addresses across three waves. Figures above 100 million, or address counts near 7,000, run ahead of Galaxy's published tracking, and Galaxy says it has not computationally confirmed that every one of those addresses came from weak Coldcard entropy. Coinkite halted shipments and destroyed its remaining inventory carrying the flawed firmware. It has asked victims to keep their devices rather than wipe them while its legal team works with law enforcement. Manufacturers do not destroy their own stock over a contained incident. Bitcoin itself cannot blacklist any of this. There is no issuer, no chargeback, no stolen flag inside a transaction output. A node checks whether a signature is valid, never whether the signer had any right to the key. The theft is cryptographically perfect and legally void at the same time. Everything outside the protocol works differently. Analytics firms can tag the exact outputs, exchanges can refuse the deposits, custodians can freeze accounts, and courts can order seizure. The coins stay spendable between two strangers and become close to unusable anywhere that checks identity. That gap is clearly why this may not be finished for the attacker. The Justice Department recovered 63.7 bitcoin from the Colonial Pipeline ransom, seized more than 94,000 from the Bitfinex theft, and took 50,676 from a Silk Road thief nearly a decade after the crime. None of it reversed a transaction. Each one required the holder to eventually touch something that asks who you are. For anyone still sitting on a seed made during that firmware window, the absence of a sweep is not evidence of safety. It may only mean your derivation path has not been scanned yet. Stay safe!!

• 
  Rahul K (@iamrahulinc) reported 60 minutes ago

  🚨𝗔𝗥𝗚𝗘𝗡𝗧𝗜𝗡𝗘 𝗝𝗨𝗗𝗚𝗘 𝗙𝗥𝗘𝗘𝗭𝗘𝗦 𝟮𝟱 𝗟𝗜𝗕𝗥𝗔‑𝗥𝗘𝗟𝗔𝗧𝗘𝗗 𝗔𝗖𝗖𝗢𝗨𝗡𝗧𝗦! Federal judge Marcelo Martínez de Giorgi ordered the seizure of 25 crypto wallets linked to the LIBRA investigation. He instructed Binance, Bybit, OKX, CoinEx, FixedFloat and Bitfinex to provide user KYC, IP login data, associated bank accounts and complete transaction histories. Police report that the money flowed from “Team Libra Wallets” across several blockchains and centralized exchanges, using split transfers to mask its path. $BTC