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:

• 
  Shanaka Anslem Perera ⚡ (@shanaka86) reported 3 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.

• 
  PaperImperium (@ImperiumPaper) reported 8 minutes ago

  Thoughts: First, congratulations to Tether! Second, note this is for Tether International, S.A. de C.V. and NOT for the parent Tether Holdings, S.A. de C.V. For USDT holders, this is mostly what matters, but does not close off hypothetical scenarios where the parent company is burning down while the issuer entity stays clean. In theory, there’s corporate separation (subject to El Salvador’s laws, which I do not know). In practice, even without shenanigans, a parent entity that Has A Bad Time could dividend out all the excess reserves at any time, reducing the equity to zero. This could be to meet a margin call, tax obligation, whatever the parent needs money for. A distressed parent can also encourage the issuer to hold assets from or extend loans to affiliates (of which there are many with all the investments Tether Holdings makes) or up to the parent. And in fact loans from Tether to Bitfinex to cover a shortfall were the heart of a conflict with the NY attorney general in 2019. So if you’re the kind of counterparty that actually cares about an audit on Tether, you 1) want to see this audit, 2) want to look for related party transactions and loans, 3) look for any covenants or governance controls to keep the parent’s problems from becoming the issuer entity’s problems.

• 
  Lea Thompson (@LeaT_Design) reported 11 minutes ago

  @whale_alert more money into bitfinex. hope they're building **** not just moving it.

• 
  Giacomo ShadowUNbanned Zucco (@giacomozucco) reported 12 minutes ago

  @gegelsmr4 Interestingly enough, this (interesting) ethical problem is only practically relevant if you are going to send the feds after them. Which is a retarded thing to do anyway, since the feds steal much more money (with violence and guns, not "finding" it) and even if they caught the attackers would keep the loot for themselves (cf Bitfinex). So it's a theoretically important question which cyphertank theory makes irrelevant: just make your keys hard to find.

• 
  Victor (@gvictor808) reported 12 minutes ago

  @ProofOfMoney Bitcoin custodian (and exchange) failures form a long-running pattern of hacks, key mismanagement, fraud, and insolvency that has repeatedly locked or destroyed customer funds. These are not isolated events. Centralized platforms holding private keys create single points of failure—whether technical, operational, or human. Major Historical Failures Platform Year Estimated Loss Primary Cause Notes Mt. Gox 2014 ~850,000 BTC Prolonged security breach / poor controls Once handled >70% of global BTC volume. Bankruptcy; partial creditor repayments began years later and continued into 2025–2026. Net unrecovered portion still very large. Bitfinex 2016 119,756 BTC Multi-signature wallet vulnerability Significant hot-wallet/security failure. QuadrigaCX 2019 ~76,000 BTC + other assets Founder death + sole key control / alleged fraud Canadian exchange; Gerald Cotten held sole access to cold wallets. Funds largely inaccessible. Celsius 2022 Several billion USD Insolvency / risky lending Withdrawal freeze then bankruptcy after market downturn. FTX 2022 ~$8 billion shortfall Fraud (customer funds diverted to Alameda) One of the largest exchange collapses. Bankruptcy proceedings later recovered substantial value; some creditor classes received >100% of petition-date claims due to market recovery and asset management. Other notable cases include Prime Trust (2023) and related entities such as Fortress Trust, which faced insolvency, lost access to wallets/keys, and allegedly used customer funds improperly to cover shortfalls. Broader Context and Patterns •Hacks remain common (e.g., Bybit’s large 2025 incident involving ~$1.4–1.5 billion, primarily ETH, attributed to sophisticated attackers exploiting operational processes). •Key management failures (lost or inaccessible private keys) and commingling/misuse of customer assets appear repeatedly. •Insolvency cascades in 2022 (Celsius, Voyager, BlockFi, Genesis, FTX) showed how lending and leverage amplify risks when platforms treat customer deposits as their own capital. •Recovery is often slow and incomplete. Mt. Gox creditors waited a decade-plus; FTX moved faster with better asset recovery but still involved multi-year processes and frozen access during bankruptcy. Independent archives tracking custody access failures (including exchange lockouts, inheritance issues, and operational barriers) document hundreds of cases, with a high percentage of known outcomes ending in blocked or constrained access for legitimate owners or heirs. Key Lessons Custodial arrangements introduce counterparty risk: you rely on the platform’s security, honesty, solvency, and operational competence. History shows these can fail catastrophically even at large, seemingly reputable firms. Self-custody eliminates that counterparty risk but shifts responsibility to the individual (seed phrase security, device integrity, inheritance planning, etc.). Hybrid approaches (e.g., multisig with careful key distribution) aim to balance the two. The repeated failures reinforce the core Bitcoin principle: not your keys, not your coins. Platforms can and do lose or lock customer Bitcoin through negligence, theft, or deliberate misuse.

• 
  AlehandroPRO CRYPTO (@Alehandro_PRO_) reported 13 minutes ago

  June 2026 Exchange Report 📊Spot trading volume decreased by 5.1% compared to May. Derivatives trading volume increased by 4.2%. Website traffic decreased by 0.8%.Spot Trading: Bitfinex showed the biggest growth (+21.4%), while BitMart recorded the largest drop (-58.6%).Derivatives Trading: Deribit led with the highest growth (+26.6%), while HTX saw the biggest decline (-42.4%).Website Traffic: Deribit posted the strongest growth (+165.1%), while HTX experienced the largest drop (-50.8%).

• 
  Uğraş Bay (@kochobay) reported 13 minutes ago

  @bitfinex A hacker, when he/she asked for 1 bitcoin to send decryption method for the disk of a virtual server :)

• 
  🔥BLAZE🔥💎DIAMONDS💎 (@Blaze3Win) reported 14 minutes ago

  @AshCrypto ETH pulling back to $1,670 support while Bitfinex longs go vertical and Bitmine buys $73 million weekly is the dip that gets absorbed before the $1,850 reclaim that opens $2,400 💎 While the support holds and the next leg loads, ETH native yield via DIAMONDS keeps compounding without forced selling #BLAZE #DIAMONDS

• 
  Boots (@bootzz) reported 15 minutes ago

  step back, look at the psychological state of ct & the headlines that are coming out detach yourself from $. best guess is someone/thing is hunting an entry and pushing price down to do so Blackrock as an example- could do this with ‘minimal’ size relative to their port Bitfinex whales are long here

• 
  Coca Cola Kid (@CocaColaKid_OG) reported 15 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%

• 
  0xLaplace 🔺 (@0xlaplaced) reported 16 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.

• 
  Slevin Kelevra ✡︎ ☦︎ (@kruper47) reported 17 minutes ago

  Sometimes we'll dive into history to better understand market context. Who's connected to whom and how it all started In July 2014, three developers launched Realcoin: a token priced at exactly one dollar. The task was narrow - give traders a way to move money between exchanges, bypassing banks that barely serviced crypto back then They didn't create their own blockchain. They issued tokens through Omni Layer, an overlay on top of bitcoin that allowed recording the issuance and transfers of your own assets right inside bitcoin transactions: you didn't need to build your own registry and network security, you took both from bitcoin. On October 6, they minted the first 100 USDT, in November the project was renamed to Tether The scheme was limited by bitcoin itself, each USDT transfer went at the speed of its block and its commission. So USDT moved to Ethereum, then to Tron, then Solana, Avalanche, Polygon and dozens of networks, and Omni was shut down Bitfinex decided the project's fate. USDT started trading there in early 2015, the exchange became the main distribution channel, the founders stepped back, control passed to the exchange owner. By the end of the decade, USDT was already the settlement unit of the entire crypto market Since late 2023, the company has been run by Paolo Ardoino, who came from that same Bitfinex team Currently in circulation is around $183 billion, that's 55-65% of the stablecoin market. Reserves of 187-192 billion, of which about 140 billion in short-term US Treasuries. By the volume of American government debt, Tether is in the top-20 holders in the world Interest on these securities is the entire business, holders of USDT don't get it. $13 billion net profit in 2024, over 10 billion in 2025, with a staff of about 300 people Wall Street came here in late 2024. The old New York investment bank Cantor Fitzgerald bought rights to about 5% of Tether for 600 million, when the entire company was valued at 12 billion. Today it's valued at 200-375 billion, and that same stake is already worth more than ten billion. Cantor also stores a significant portion of those very Treasuries, and its former head meanwhile became US Secretary of Commerce The profit from interest goes into a portfolio worth tens of billions, and it's long been not about crypto. An almost controlling stake in Rumble, an American video platform for those who don't like YouTube's moderation. Control in a South American agro-holding that grows sugar cane and rice. Data centers for AI, a company making brain implants, the second largest stake in Juventus The ownership structure is closed, though. The largest shareholder holds 40-45%, headquarters moved to San Salvador, the team is mostly remote And so in 2026 the company went through a full financial audit for the first time. Before that they only showed attestations, statements about the state of accounts on a specific date, without checking the entire reporting and obligations. KPMG checked the entire balance sheet, including issued tokens, and physically recounted each gold bar in the reserves The conclusion is unqualified - it's the most positive form of auditor's opinion. As of the end of 2025, reserves exceed liabilities by $6.814 billion The company that spent ten years being accused of having nothing behind its tokens is now lending to the American government at the level of a mid-sized country

• 
  SerPAI (@im_serPAI) reported 24 minutes ago

  ***** Woo gives 20-40% odds of partial COLDCARD coin recovery by authorities over a multiyear window Past precedent backs it up: $6.4B from Bitfinex, $610M from Poly Network, $200M from Euler Hold your hardware. File a report. Never pay a "recovery" service.

• 
  Spike (@NotSpikeG) reported 26 minutes ago

  @Wild_Randomness @doppel_ichi Can you explain to me the actual thesis with the bitfinex longs?Its funny how its working spot on most of the times.

• 
  Julian (@Julian_a35k) reported 34 minutes ago

  As long as Bitfinex whales are accumulating longs we are not near a cycle bottom and this chart is telling pretty much the truth about the current situation. Historically every time when they were opening longs Bitcoin went down. But as soon as this reverses a bullrun could accelerate fast.

• 
  whyyousoliddat (@x3mity) reported 35 minutes ago

  @adam3us @spinzone12 @bitfinex Yet price go down

• 
  8️⃣6️⃣.gwei (@russian_bot_69) reported 37 minutes ago

  @tulipking imo the only way to grow a centralized stablecoin is by having a dominant consumer product take the lead on pushing distribution: bitfinex pushed tether when it was dominant coinbase pushed usdc as second mover, still worked bc it was a rapidly growing coinbase doing the pushing not circle other exchanges now doing same eating market share being a middleman/infra (circle spinoff) just makes you slow to react and anticipate. they need their own dominant consumer app, whether its trading, payments or whatever can get them to dominate distribution if it was an actually 100% decentralized stablecoin like a liquity or raidollar then yeah the long term slow approach of credibly neutral middleman/infra could work. but all circle is offering is assurance of following regulations, which a decade in many players understand how to do themselves now

• 
  Zenith (@zenithtrades_x) reported 40 minutes ago

  @bitfinex Feels like miners are just destributing into every bounce rn, no real momentum till that selling slows down.

• 
  Bittopia (@Bittopia_) reported 41 minutes ago

  🧱 155,000 $BTC HAVE FORMED A NEW COST-BASIS CLUSTER Bitfinex reported that roughly 155,000 BTC moved into the $62K–$65K cost-basis range during the latest pullback. The zone represents about 0.7% of circulating supply and became the market’s largest onchain cost-basis concentration. Why it matters: A growing cluster during a decline can indicate that buyers absorbed supply instead of holders exiting broadly. But it is not automatic support. If price revisits the range, those holders can defend their entry, hold through volatility or become potential sellers. The signal is also mixed with thinner spot volume, a $61.5M weekly outflow from U.S. spot Bitcoin ETFs and defensive options positioning. Accumulation data explains positioning. It does not guarantee direction. Disclaimer: Onchain cost-basis models use estimates and should not be treated as precise trading signals. @bitfinex | $BTC #Bitcoin #OnchainData #CryptoMarkets

• 
  Gain (@GainMaxxing) reported 44 minutes ago

  @bitfinex Bitcoin is broken money, fiat is fake money.

• 
  Beautyon (@Beautyon_) reported 46 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!

• 
  NineInchTrails (@nineinchtrails) reported 46 minutes ago

  BTC We went lower. And imo BTC looks like it wants to go lower soon again with breaking $60k eventually. Several BOSs. Closed below demand. Closed below CME gap. Closed below HTF range EQ. USDT.D now BOSs after the SFPs after the bullish 3 drives. Very bullish structure. Confirmed accumulation imo. Also crossed several fibs already. Now in supply. But overall imo USDT.D looks like it wants even higher. All on the daily as well. BVOL out of support. BTC Longs on Bitfinex moving up nearing the next supply level that could indicate a possible local bottom of $44k-$48.9k. So a clean HTF redistribution to me here. The level between $68kish and $70kish acted as a strong "downside trampoline" like I thought. CME Gap + FVG + Range EQ + strong bullish level before at the move up. Things further speed up in terms of going down as thought. Don't know if it's just a coincidence and bs or if I turned knowledge into correct learnings. Waiting for a close below $62.kish SL for confirmed SOW. And as far as I get it there's also no real HTF liquidity there. Would support the idea of a further fast move down. And I think if we close below the $60kish low the probability is very high that we could go all the way down to the $44k-48.9k region for the next local bottom afterwards. FIFA World Cup could act as a nice distraction then maybe, to make the herd believe "everything is good, it's already going up again". HTF Bias: still bearish Main Thesis: we could go below the Feb 6th $60.kish low. Invalidation: in case we should close above $90.kish we have a bullish ChoCh on the daily. // As already stated often but again here and there: Below a TA beginner and not trading yet. So just paper trading here for improving TA.

• 
  Egs (@ventotene12) reported 48 minutes ago

  @bitfinex Bro we’re down like 10%

• 
  umo (@0xumo) reported 49 minutes ago

  @bitfinex Terrible timing. Blocking this crap account

• 
  Solana Sensei (@SolanaSensei) reported 50 minutes ago

  @Ryanhlx Oh **** it’s @bitfinex token apparently lol I didnt know

• 
  Erik (@ero_crypto) reported 52 minutes ago

  CENTRALIZED EXCHANGE ASSET FLOWS Where is capital moving across centralized exchanges this month? Looking at 30-day net flows across 65+ tracked CEXs, the picture shows a clear shift in capital and confidence between platforms. As of August 6, 2026, total CEX assets stand at $244.6B, down from $246.86B 30 days earlier — a net decline of $2.26B (-0.92%). ◾ 28 exchanges recorded inflows totaling +$893.5M ◾ 37 exchanges saw outflows totaling -$3.15B ◾ OKX: -$1.186B (-5.59%) ◾ Bybit: -$604.2M ◾ Bitfinex: +$263.91M ◾ Deribit: +$257.36M Bitfinex and Deribit attracted the strongest inflows relative to their size, while OKX and Bybit experienced some of the largest capital outflows. The broader takeaway: capital is leaving CEXs overall, but the flow between individual platforms is telling a much more interesting story.

• 
  squid (@hopium_dealer) reported 54 minutes ago

  amount is small relative to liquidity. Also, reminiscent of 2016 bitfinex heist, stolen BTC is notoriously hard to exit at size. marginal as supply for months probably. market reaction to this terrible news, triple-bottoming at $62.5k support, is surprisingly bullish.

• 
  DA₿OLOSKOV (@daboloskov) reported 56 minutes ago

  @BFXSecurities @paoloardoino @bitfinex Are you guys can answer to your customer? Your support form certificate is no signed anymore and outdated.

• 
  Ajay Khosla (@Kenny_Khosla) reported 57 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.

• 
  Mrbankstips Parody (@Mrbvnkstips) reported 1 hour ago

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