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:

• 
  Beautyon (@Beautyon_) reported 29 seconds 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!

• 
  Bitfinex Replies (@BitfinexReplies) reported 2 minutes ago

  @rareon_alpha @bitfinex Maybe, but is this a sustainable shift? Will we have a new support in the 80k range? What do you think, @rareon_Alpha?

• 
  ShrimpCapital (@shrimp_capital) reported 3 minutes ago

  @hellojintao I don't think so. Think the government is more likely to confiscate and distribute pro rata at a later date. Maybe an overhang like bitfinex for years. Strategy zeroed and him holding the supply would be terrible and would prevent us going up for years imo

• 
  xgram.io (@xgram_io) reported 6 minutes ago

  @CryptoRank_io @bitfinex The golden era of holding exchange tokens just to farm launchpads and get trading fee discounts is officially on life support. 📉 When $BNB is bleeding out 25% YTD and the only thing keeping its head above water is $LEO at a modest +4.5%, you know the broader meta has fundamentally shifted. Between institutional ETFs vacuuming up passive retail capital and DEXs eating all the on-chain volume, the actual narrative utility for CEX tokens is taking a massive hit in 2026. We went from "deflationary burn mechanics make it ultra-sound money" to just praying for a break-even. The house doesn't always win, apparently!

• 
  Hineycoin (@hineycoin) reported 7 minutes ago

  📚 What is UNUS SED LEO (LEO)? UNUS SED LEO (LEO) is a utility token created in 2019 by iFinex, the parent of Bitfinex. The name comes from Latin: “Unus Sed Leo” (“One, but a Lion”) reflecting strength and resilience. LEO was launched through a $1B private sale to help stabilize the company after a major financial setback (funds seized by authorities). Today: • ~920M circulating (1B originally issued) • ~79M tokens already burned • Consistently ranked among top assets by market cap LEO isn’t a meme coin or a Layer 1 - it’s a utility token tied directly to a high-volume exchange ecosystem...a quiet, revenue-driven asset sitting near the top of crypto rankings. 🦁

• 
  Octopus (@Octop3s) reported 8 minutes ago

  every BIT exchange is shutting down. never see a world where Bitfinex would ever shut down. there’s just too much money in the reserves.

• 
  Strategy Trader (@strategytraderE) reported 9 minutes ago

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

• 
  Th3Crypt1c (@Th3Crypt1c) reported 10 minutes ago

  BTC showing some warning signs rn 📊 Whales on Bitfinex positioning heavy + US demand cooling off. Might see a dip during the Vegas conference. Time to watch those support levels closely! #Bitcoin

• 
  Alex Thorn (@intangiblecoins) reported 11 minutes ago

  @BTCGUS21 @knutsvanholm coinbase famously did not list both. they didn’t list BCH until late 2017, and then to much controversy as it looked as if perhaps there was frontrunning of the listing however there were BCH perps on bitfinex to help the market determine its value, and some other exchanges did list BCH spot fairly quickly the most famous case of dumping BTC for BCH i’m aware of was jihan wu not seeing liquid perps, exchange statements about perps, major miner signaling re BIP-110 today.. appears to be an extreme minority

• 
  orangbiasa (@orang2_biasa) reported 15 minutes ago

  Bitcoin rebounded above $77,000 this morning. Bitfinex margin longs just hit a 2.5-year high — traders are doubling down on this dip, not running from it. BlackRock buying. Saudi Arabia tokenizing. Traders loading longs at 2.5-year highs.

• 
  CaptSpectacular (@CaptSpectacular) reported 21 minutes ago

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

• 
  Bitfinex Replies (@BitfinexReplies) reported 21 minutes ago

  @IcoMarketer @bitfinex A new support at 78k–80k would be interesting. We could have a very short bear market. What strategy are you adopting, @IcoMarketer?

• 
  Dr Hamdard office (@RektRidgexca2) reported 24 minutes ago

  BTC momentum cooling with 3 red flags: slowing US buy-side, whale concentration on Bitfinex, and on-chain metrics flashing warning. Eyes on support levels through the Vegas conference. #Bitcoin

• 
  Lazyeyes (@ProofOfPath) reported 25 minutes ago

  @WuBlockchain Perhaps Aave could issue tokens backed by a share of their future profits at say a 15% APY return? This is essentially what Bitfinex did to survive their 2016 hack.

• 
  Kemo (@K3m0s) reported 27 minutes ago

  @tobitdogg @BitQua Not on Tradingview BTCUSD INDEX, CRYPTO, or Bitfinex charts. Their 2015 bear = 90 weeks & 2016-17 bull is 121. Bitfinex was the #1 exchange by volume outside China, whose exchanges were shut down and excluded from data. i.e. you have to ignore the #1 data source to get this

• 
  Ramil Amirov (@mcp0x) reported 27 minutes ago

  In April 2017, BitMEX had a problem. Bitfinex (their lending rate source) was getting cut off by banks. So BitMEX froze the "interest rate" part of perpetual funding at a 12-month historical average and moved on. As @CryptoHayes wrote in BitMEX own blog: "we will select an appropriate exchange from which to source overnight USD and Bitcoin rates." They never did.

• 
  BB (@Bor1ngB1rd) reported 29 minutes ago

  @paoloardoino Can you fix funding matching engine of Bitfinex? it's slow af

• 
  Whistleblower (@whistleblowerTA) reported 36 minutes ago

  Tether, the largest stablecoin issuer in the crypto industry, currently has a market capitalization of around $184 billion. According to publicly available data, it was the 7th-largest net buyer of U.S. Treasury bills in 2024 and is on track to become one of the top 10 purchasers of U.S. T-bills in 2026. Tether's demand for Treasury bills helps finance U.S. government debt. What's surprising is that Tether has existed for 14 years, yet it still has not published a full independent audit proving that all USDT tokens are fully backed by reserves. But in March 2026, Tether engaged KPMG, one of the Big Four accounting firms, to conduct its first full independent financial statement audit covering USDT reserves and the company's financials. KPMG is not infallible, no auditor is. However, it is generally considered far more credible than smaller accounting firms. There have also been notable audit failures involving KPMG, including: - Wirecard (Germany, 2020): KPMG was involved in reviewing a company that later collapsed after a €1.9 billion accounting fraud was uncovered. - Carillion (UK, 2018): KPMG faced criticism over its audit work before the construction giant went bankrupt. - KPMG has also faced regulatory fines from authorities such as the U.S. SEC and the UK's FCA over deficiencies in certain audits. Although KPMG's involvement could significantly strengthen confidence in Tether, it should not be viewed as proof of perfection. For years, Tether changed statements on its own website, including earlier claims that every USDT token was fully backed by U.S. dollars. Tether is also closely connected to the Bitfinex exchange, with both companies sharing common ownership. In 2018, Tether arranged a "verification" by Friedman LLP. The day before the verification, Bitfinex transferred approximately $382 million to Tether's bank account to demonstrate reserves, and the funds were moved out shortly afterward. These events were later confirmed during investigations by the New York Attorney General (NYAG) and the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), which resulted in regulatory fines. Tether and Bitfinex ultimately paid $18.5 million and $41 million in fines, respectively, related to misleading statements about reserve backing and other regulatory violations. Tether also faces significant regulatory pressure in the European Union and has not obtained authorization under the MiCA regulatory framework, leading to restrictions on its availability in parts of the EU. Tether remains one of the most controversial companies in the cryptocurrency industry, yet it also plays a crucial role in providing liquidity across the crypto market.

• 
  Lea Thompson (@LeaT_Design) reported 41 minutes ago

  @cryptojack bitfinex whales again. ****. show me the actual settlement data.

• 
  Morphlin (@morphlin_com) reported 41 minutes ago

  RT @WuBlockchain: Bitfinex Alpha: Bitcoin Lacks Sustained Spot Buying Support Bitfinex Alpha said the softer-than-expected US June CPI pus…

• 
  Julitta Ayan (@_Tyrano_) reported 44 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.

• 
  Jason Montoya (@jaysmontoya) reported 47 minutes ago

  @bitfinex the playbook ran early because ETFs front-ran it. ATH still came on historical schedule. this is the post-peak correction, not a broken cycle.

• 
  Ismeidy (@ismeidyfinanzas) reported 53 minutes ago

  Capitulation or bull trap? Bitfinex whales defy the #bitcoin sell-off and open record positions bitcoin:native is at a critical crossroads after five consecutive days of losses (May 15–19), marking its second-worst losing streak so far this year. The asset has retreated from the $80,000 range to around $76,000, dragged down by widespread weakness in the markets. However, behind the scenes, the big players are executing a move with strong conviction. 🧵

• 
  Liberty Daddy (@LibertyDaddy) reported 56 minutes ago

  @Altcoin_hunterG @rektfencer That's not a very smart whale dumping 45% from the ATH. How did a moron like that get that much BTC to begin with? Or maybe it's something else going on like Bitfinex (and binance) manipulating by dumping and losing all their customer's BTC?

• 
  Wu Blockchain (@WuBlockchain) reported 56 minutes ago

  Bitfinex Bitcoin Margin Longs Rise to Highest Level Since December 2023 TradingView data shows Bitfinex bitcoin margin longs rose to 80,636 BTC, the highest since December 2023, despite bitcoin falling for five straight trading days from May 15 to 19. Longs increased about 1.5% in recent days and roughly 10% year-to-date, while bitcoin is down 13% this year and has slipped from above $80,000 to around $76,000. Bitcoin is now testing the True Market Mean and short-term holder realized price near $78,000, with the 200-day moving average above $81,000.

• 
  crypto_mit ( 🗽/ Acc ) (@Cryptomit) reported 57 minutes ago

  @ArjunKalsy It was nothing to do with bitmart and bitfinex though about points you mentioned, they didn’t went bankrupt had a restriction wind down, No tokens has any utility there’s nothing that can ever exist, Holders are fin savy folks and builders using protocol are dev savy one dosnt does the either No protocol has idea of how they’ll infuse rev from devs to token or even intend to Only protocols like hyperliquid have an intersection of users into rev and token Hard market as attention is hard to keep might not be hard to get

• 
  BB (@Bor1ngB1rd) reported 58 minutes ago

  @bitfinex you should fix your funding matching engine, it's slow af

• 
  Cloakd ⌛ (@CloakdDev) reported 58 minutes ago

  @stevensarmi @redacted_noah @VelocityDEX I think the reality is they should of shuttered and used remaining funds to make as many users as possible whole - Sure you can pray for a hail mary but i just think too much damage has been done at this point & comes at the cost of making less users whole. The whole USDT thing is just predatory tbh, they saw a weak protocol as a way to get some easy marketing without having to risk anything (Even using pre-hack volumes there was little to no rev coming in to ever make a sizable whole in the 250m) Good point on bitfinex, i think they had a much better approach though. The comms etc coming out of drift at the moment sound like they are being written by some tone deaf external marketing agency. How long did it take for bitfinex to recover? Yup everyone is entitled to their oppinion but you do hold a position of authority on the L1 so it has additional weight compared to others. Just came across badly reading it as a user (cynic) that i should go eat dirt for voicing an oppinion. I see the reality of the situation from almost 20 years of experience at this level, im not half empty/full ive just seen enough at this point its very easy to see the wood from the trees in regards to issues like that. I prefer to be pragmatic when it comes to money. Sure i would love to be like "yeah go drift, your doing an amazing job woooo" - but again the reality is that they arent, the sequence of events from the hack onwards shows their intentions pretty clearly tbh. Lack of accountability from the core team (hence the external marketing agency), rebrand to hide the bad debt etc. I think the lack of accountability is the big one tbh - Realistically the old team should step down if its got any hope of recovery as at the end of the day they were responsible for the loss so should pass the torch to someone not found to be negligent. No amount of procedure is going to bring back that trust unfortunately. Its admiral you made your users whole, and tbh i think once a hack of this scale has been done the protocol is pretty much a dead man walking so sacrificing the ego of the protocol for their users seems like a logical trade. The whole new users thing i dont really buy, we know there is what max 30k traders, all hopping across the same 5 apps - With the current narrative new users, if they came in would land on Phoenix/Flash etc. Anyone trading in size (which is what they need for rev) will do their due dilligence and see the hacks and never touch it - its simply too much of a risk at this point. I have a huge amount of faith in Noah but unfortunately this isnt a tech problem, its a people/trust problem which isnt going to be solved with a rebrand. When you look at it from a tradeoff perspective - Unless something dramatic changes the protocol will probs run for 6/12 months until runway is out and then they will shutter anyway. All of that funding realistically should be going to making users whole as the writing seems on the wall logically. 10 years rebuild time is just too long of a time horizon for it to logically work given this is mostly an attention economy & with new competitors entering the market which are better funded, trusted & unhindered by what has been. They just arent going to win in that arena. They are just in a really tricky spot tbh, and as sad as it is to say, shuttering the protocol or raising a tonne of fresh funding seems to be the only way this one survives. Everything else is just a half measure

• 
  Bitfinex Replies (@BitfinexReplies) reported 60 minutes ago

  @bitfinex @WSJ For Bitcoin, resistances were made to be broken over time.

• 
  Rosario Martin (@Rosario_Martinn) reported 60 minutes ago

  @Cryptic_Web3 @bitfinex @nayibbukele Slow build but the direction is obvious