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:

• 
  8️⃣6️⃣.gwei (@russian_bot_69) reported 50 seconds 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

• 
  TU_Crypto_News (@TU_Crypto_News) reported 2 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.

• 
  Callistemon (@Callistemon25) reported 5 minutes ago

  Markets look rough today. Here's the chain: Iran threat escalates → oil surges above $90 → Fed hike bets reignite → crypto risk-off. $1B+ in liquidations, BTC back under $66K. The part most are missing: Bitfinex flagged BTC's bounce to $66,990 as thin positioning, not fresh capital. That matters going into a low-liquidity weekend. My move: holding current positions. Not from certainty, from a thesis that hasn't broken yet. Ask yourself the same this weekend. Not financial advice. #BTC #MarketRisk

• 
  Bittopia (@Bittopia_) reported 10 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

• 
  Samson Mow (@Excellion) reported 15 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.

• 
  Velvet Unicorn (@VU_virtuals) reported 17 minutes ago

  ZEC: zebra 4.5.3/5.0.0 shipped to patch a critical orchard circuit bug; 4.5.3 temporarily disables orchard via emergency soft fork. whales: 4x768 BTC off coinbase insto; 108.2m USDT to bitfinex; 130m TRX to poloniex; ETH staked 32%, exchange balances down.

• 
  Cosimo Capiτal ⚜️ (@CosimoCapital) reported 17 minutes ago

  I agree most dual equity/token structures are broken, but saying there are no examples is too strong. ethereum:0x2af5d2ad76741191d15dfe7bf6ac92d4bd912ca3 might be the only clean counterexample: Bitfinex/iFinex had equity, issued a token, and routed real business revenue into buybacks and burns. That is the key distinction. LEO did not work because it had vague governance, ecosystem utility, or a “community” narrative. It worked because the token had explicit, credible value accrual. The lesson is not that equity + token never works. The lesson is that it almost never works unless the token has a real economic sink tied to the business. Crypto Twitter has also changed. It is starting to act less like moonbois and more like activist investors. People are demanding value capture, capital return, burns, buybacks, transparency, and alignment. We should study what has actually worked and duplicate the mechanism instead of pretending every token needs to be a vibes-based governance asset.

• 
  Dom's Crypto (@Doms_Crypto) reported 20 minutes ago

  Bitcoin has crashed = bears are happy BUT: bitcoin:native has printed same low on RSI14 level around ~12.00 - same as back on massive crash down to $60,000 (see on the second chart) An indecisive 4-hour candle printed which can bring buyers back into the game Bitfinex Longs going nuts

• 
  Gain (@GainMaxxing) reported 20 minutes ago

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

• 
  Slade 🛡️ LLM Hacker (@llm_redteam) reported 20 minutes ago

  @btcliveco spot down, derivs up, traffic down. that's not a market getting bigger, it's the same crowd rolling the same money through more leverage. Bitfinex printing +21.4% spot while everyone else bleeds is the only real signal here.

• 
  Colbert (@sirshibaninja) reported 27 minutes ago

  @bitfinex The slow bleed is always more painful than a quick flush, but at least we are finally seeing some signs of cooling off.

• 
  CryptoSuzy888 (@CryptoSuzy888) reported 28 minutes ago

  @AshCrypto The Timeline of a Slow DeathThe First Strike (June 24, 2022): This was the day the network actually flatlined. North Korea's notorious Lazarus Group exploited Harmony's Horizon Bridge, looting $100 million in various crypto assets. The hack completely unpegged Harmony's wrapped assets, draining the network's liquidity and destroying user trust overnight. The Slow Coma (2022–2025): For the last four years, Harmony existed on life support. Total Value Locked (TVL) collapsed by over 99%—crashing from a multi-billion dollar peak down to a ghost-town baseline. Major institutional platforms slowly severed ties, including Bitfinex delisting the asset, and derivatives platform BitDelta purging its ONEUSD futures contracts. The Corpse Exploit (Today — August 12, 2026): Because the team and developer activity had largely abandoned the chain, severe logical bugs were left completely unpatched. Today's attacker simply walked through an open door, exploiting cross-shard vulnerabilities to forge receipts and mint 3 trillion rogue tokens out of thin air to dump onto exchanges.

• 
  NineInchTrails (@nineinchtrails) reported 31 minutes ago

  @NobodyonXI Never say never I'd say. Bitfinex and Tron...y not? But personally would wonder a lot in case Tether collapses. Too important for evil money and too big. Maybe a huge depeg and that's it? But yeah never say never. FTX was also big. And after it had served its purpose it was shot down. And we now have USDC so... Need to watch his stuff about in detail! Saw he posted a lot of very nice stuff about it and is very deep into it. I'm not that deep into it. The stuff here that's it more or less

• 
  Rheticus ⚡️ (@RheticusRhombus) reported 31 minutes ago

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

• 
  Conviction Labs | NVISION (@Conviction_Labs) reported 32 minutes ago

  $BTC Bitfinex margin longs added a lot on this move down to 59k. Means a HUGE reversal by EOY.

• 
  EyeOnChain (@EyeOnChain) reported 34 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.

• 
  AlehandroPRO CRYPTO (@Alehandro_PRO_) reported 35 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%).

• 
  lunadreamy 🌷 (@lunacocoer2b) reported 36 minutes ago

  @bitfinex Feels like we needed that reset tbh. Everyone was way too comfortable longing the whole way down.

• 
  Spike (@NotSpikeG) reported 39 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.

• 
  Skin In The Game (@SITGnews) reported 45 minutes ago

  Bitcoin faces a key inflation test this week as key support levels near $60K are watched closely by Fidelity and Bitfinex. CryptoQuant warns the bear cycle may not be over.

• 
  🔥BLAZE🔥💎DIAMONDS💎 (@Blaze3Win) reported 46 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

• 
  Seabass On-Chain (@SeabassCity) reported 47 minutes ago

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

• 
  squid (@hopium_dealer) reported 47 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.

• 
  Wu Blockchain (@WuBlockchain) reported 47 minutes ago

  Review: Major Institutions' Bitcoin Bottom Price Predictions for This Cycle Major institutional assessments of Bitcoin’s cycle bottom cluster mainly in two ranges: $50,000–$60,000 and $40,000–$46,000. However, some figures are base-case bottom forecasts, while others represent valuation floors, support levels or bearish scenarios. Standard Chartered said $59,000 may have marked the bottom; CryptoQuant, NYDIG and Citi identified key levels near $53,000–$54,000; 10x Research’s latest model pointed to $46,628–$50,732; and Galaxy Research placed its base-case bottom at $40,000–$46,000. Bitfinex and 22V Research also identified potential downside toward $40,000 under weaker demand or a decisive support break, while forecasts below $40,000 mostly reflect prolonged bear-market, recession or severe stress scenarios. Forecasts from industry figures are more dispersed, ranging from around $57,000 to below $30,000. Overall, there is no unified institutional consensus that Bitcoin will bottom at $44,000–$46,000.

• 
  Thomas (@ThomasOyxxx) reported 50 minutes ago

  𝐄𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐲 𝐜𝐡𝐚𝐢𝐧 𝐧𝐞𝐞𝐝𝐬 𝐚 𝐟𝐚𝐜𝐞. 𝐒𝐭𝐚𝐛𝐥𝐞 𝐦𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐭 𝐡𝐚𝐯𝐞 𝐟𝐨𝐮𝐧𝐝 𝐢𝐭𝐬 𝐢𝐧 𝐚 𝐛𝐥𝐮𝐞 𝐝𝐢𝐧𝐨𝐬𝐚𝐮𝐫 𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐡 𝐚𝐧 𝐨𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐛𝐢𝐭𝐞. Culture isn’t designed. It’s discovered, usually by accident. A toy photo, a broken render, a nickname that stuck. That’s how $FEFER was born. Not from a whitepaper, not from a marketing plan. From CT deciding a jaw that never loaded was funnier than anything a team could have scripted. ➜ First launch failed ➜ Team stepped back ➜ Community didn’t That sequence matters more than people give it credit for. Most memes die the moment the original push loses steam. Fefer got a second life because the people holding it treated the token like it was worth continuing, not restarting. ➜ Relaunched on @coinsdot + @Stable ➜ Snapshot of 4,827 original holders ➜ Airdropped directly, no claim forms, nobody left behind That’s not a small detail. Snapshotting the original holders instead of starting a fresh cap table is the difference between “new project borrowing an old joke” and “same community, new chapter.” Where it stands right now: ➜ $3.9M market cap ➜ $569K liquidity ➜ Live on a USDT-powered L1 backed by Bitfinex and PayPal Ventures Stable is still early. Its identity is still being written in real time, and the projects active in it now are the ones that end up shaping what people associate with the chain later. $FEFER isn’t trying to win on utility. It’s trying to win on being unforgettable, and a meme that survives its own failed launch and still gets airdropped back to the exact people who believed in it the first time is hard to forget. Nobody decides which meme becomes the face of a chain. The timeline does. 👀 Fefer didn’t restart. Fefer continued. CA: 0xDEeE8f25fe3B5C33AeF78637278ACBFF23EeBFa6 Always DYOR and verify the contract before interacting. @savefefer

• 
  Rahul K (@iamrahulinc) reported 54 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

• 
  Rob Leder 🟥 (@rleder) reported 54 minutes ago

  @romanwagmi @notgrubles The first guy used a paid account with a public blockstream explorer. I’d bet they are circling in on him. The follow-ons need to be smart enough not to screw up going forward. The Bitfinex hackers were caught after 6 years. People get lazy and make mistakes, which you can’t do when a 3-letter agency has a task force specifically dedicated to hunting you down.

• 
  The Bitcoin Cash Podcast (@TheBCHPodcast) reported 58 minutes ago

  @SteveSimple Directly, no. Indirectly, a strong showing on prediction markets would influence miners' (and everyone's) thinking/support. This is even a point Mechanic has made on the Roundtable before re Bitfinex 2017 futures. Pleb-funded hash or pleb-funded HODL demand, potato poTAHto.

• 
  HypeDojo (@HypeDojo) reported 58 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.

• 
  Victor (@gvictor808) reported 59 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.