Bitfinex status: access issues and outage reports
No problems detected
If you are having issues, please submit a report below.
Full Outage Map
Bitfinex is a crypto-currency exchange trading and currency-storage platform based out of Taiwan, owned and operated by iFinex Inc. Since 2014, it has been the largest Bitcoin exchange platform, with over 10% of the exchange's trading.
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.
At the moment, we haven't detected any problems at Bitfinex. Are you experiencing issues or an outage? Leave a message in the comments section!
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:
-
Jacob King (@JacobKinge) reportedBitcoin is the most centralized asset ever, marketed as “decentralized.” If you understand how the Bitcoin blockchain actually works, it becomes obvious that it is not immutable or untouchable. The code can be changed, and the chain can be controlled through coordination. For those who don’t know, Bitcoin runs on a single public blockchain, and control of that chain comes from who produces the blocks. Today, block production is dominated by only 4 mining pools: Foundry USA (30%), AntPool (18%), ViaBTC (11%), and F2Pool (10%). Together, the top pools routinely control over 65% of total hash power, and the top 5 over 75%. Officially, these pools are “separate” on paper, but they all work together. They share the exact same private funding, have same aligned incentives, and overlapping miners. This creates a de facto centralization where a single group influences block production, censors transactions, or pushes protocol changes at will. In reality, fewer than 10 people control most of Bitcoin through the top mining pools and core developers. Revealed from the Epstein files, Israel also funded much of this early development, covering over 60% of the core developers’ salaries. “Decentralized” is purely marketing. Stablecoins give this same cabal another lever over Bitcoin. They want prices up? Easy. They print unbacked Tether or USDC out of thin air and inject it into exchanges they control or influence, like FTX (before it collapsed), Binance, Bitfinex, Coinbase, and others. They want prices down? Just pretend to burn the coins, trigger panic, and the market enters a bear phase. These mechanisms make Bitcoin’s price highly manipulable despite its “free market” image. When a small group produces most of the blocks, transaction censorship, reordering, and enforced protocol changes are no longer hypothetical. Bitcoin is marketed as pseudo-anonymous and seizure-resistant, yet governments have seized millions of dollars in BTC with ease. Do you ever wonder how? The 2021 Colonial Pipeline ransomware payment was traced and recovered almost immediately by the FBI, which they later admitted they got access to the wallet’s private key (Very sus!). Similar seizures occurred with Silk Road, the Bitfinex hack funds, and multiple darknet and ransomware cases. This level of enforcement is incompatible with claims of true privacy or sovereignty. They clearly have backdoor access. Bitcoin functions like a Trojan horse. It was hyped as a financial miracle, sold to the masses, and accepted without skepticism. In reality, it is a speculative gambling chip, heavily surveilled and quietly managed by insiders. Strip away the mythology and it is no more valuable than a digital beanie baby with better marketing.
-
squid (@hopium_dealer) reportedamount 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.
-
CryptoSavingExpert ® (@CryptoSavingExp) reportedBITFINEX SECURITIES COMPLETES RECORD $50M TOKENIZED CAPITAL RAISE Bitfinex Securities has completed its largest-ever tokenized capital raise, securing $50 million for metals company Alkemya through the ALKN token. ALKN represents fractional interests in a Luxembourg partnership holding around 7 million metres of 99.99% pure nickel wire, independently valued at approximately $1.64 billion. The funds will help Alkemya commercialise engineered nickel products for industries including semiconductors, aerospace and defence. This is another major example of real-world assets moving onchain. Tokenisation is moving far beyond Bitcoin and stablecoins. Stocks, Treasuries, commodities and other traditional assets are increasingly being represented on blockchain networks. And $50M is now the largest capital raise completed through Bitfinex Securities. The race to bring traditional financial assets onchain is accelerating.
-
ddadybayo (@ddadybayo) reportedThis 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.
-
NineInchTrails (@nineinchtrails) reported@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
-
Hovermere (@Hovermere) reported4/10 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.
-
Cryptocrat (@Cryptocratico) reported🚨 $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.
-
Calkob (@Hodl8333) reported@lukedewolf I think a market for Bip110 coin would have settled this even before the fork, similer to Bitfinex did around bcash split. I was there for UASF in 2017 and Bip110 had not even 10% of the support that that got. Back then everyone i know was willing to sell their bcash day one.
-
Exo (@ExoTricks) reported@bitfinex That’s a big shift. $73.5K turning from resistance into support would be a really solid sign for BTC.
-
ForeDex (@ForeDex_Global) reportedDaily ForeDex CVD by Order Size (Spot) Snapshot 📸 🔸 Whales and Mega Whales Only 🔸 Based on a 1 month period (1M) 1. Binance : Decreased 📉 2. Bybit : No Change ➖ 3. Bitfinex (USD) : No Change ➖ 4. Bitfinex (USDT) : No Change ➖ ✅ Summary: A gradual step-down was seen on Binance, with no change across Bybit, Bitfinex USD, and Bitfinex USDT. [07-16-2026]
-
waffles (@WaffleHouseGuy1) reported@bitfinex Will you support Luke coin?
-
Ratih (@Ratih94357237) reported@bitfinex @WDK_tether @utexocom Any WDK wallet can access RGB issuance on Bitcoin and payments on Lightning without building the stack. It is painful to see how much infrastructure still needs to ship, but progress matters. What will you build next? 😔⚡
-
Beautyon (@Beautyon_) reported"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!
-
Sheryl | Simple Crypto Advice (@syedaliakber2) reported🚨SOMEONE JUST OPENED A $16,000,000 $XRP LONG. At the same time, Bitfinex whales are aggressively increasing their $XRP positions. Wtf is going on???
-
Erik (@ero_crypto) reportedCENTRALIZED 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.
-
Coca Cola Kid (@CocaColaKid_OG) reportedBitfinex 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%
-
Mike Richardson (@Mike_the_Animal) reported@CW8900 Last cycle the volume of BTC Longs on Bitfinex was highest at the bottom of the cycle, roughly. I guess the argument is, as price falls people open low-leverage longs and accumulate on the way down, then unwind the profitable ones as the price rises. Whether that is true or not, who knows. Also, on the weekly chart, they are still accumulating.
-
Jason Montoya (@jaysmontoya) reported@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.
-
ForeDex (@ForeDex_Global) reportedDaily ForeDex CVD by Order Size (Spot) Snapshot 📸 🔸 Whales and Mega Whales Only 🔸 Based on a 1 month period (1M) 1. Binance: Decreased 📉 2. Bybit: No Change ➖ 3. Bitfinex (USD): No Change ➖ 4. Bitfinex (USDT): No Change ➖ ✅ Summary: Unlike yesterday’s slight decline, Binance showed a more distinct step down today. The other three exchanges showed no change. [07-28-2026]
-
Mandelbrot (@Wild_Randomness) reported@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…
-
whits (@whits23) reported@SaniExp have not heard from you lately. Bitfinex had 30000 bitcoin but just shut down with only 3600? Any explanation or truth? @w_s_bitcoin @Pledditor
-
Bitcoin Consultants (@BTCConsultantNL) reported@ChrisFromAT @AquaBitcoin What do you mean? Can’t you send it without sideshift? Trade on HodlHodl, Peach Bitcoin, Bitfinex? They all support liquid network?
-
Brutal Crypto Brief (@BrutalDegenX) reported475K $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
-
Rahul K (@iamrahulinc) reported🚨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
-
Bitcoin Regime (@BitPrintzz) reported@bitfinex @PositiveCrypto It’s cold card issue reshuffle nothing than that. Look into URPD instead
-
Steven (っ♡◡♡)っ (@stevensarmi) reported@CloakdDev @redacted_noah @VelocityDEX >If you lost 250m+ of your users money, then spent a **** tonne on talent aquisition & rebranding how can you not see that as a kick in the teeth compared to making your users whole. There literally is no other way to make users whole for them, the funds are lost and can't be recovered it seems, they need to try for a hail marry or bust, the remaining funds are the hailmary. Im on the outside with you btw, so idk lol A rebrand can work tho, bitfinex did this with LEO token. theres precedence to it working out for users. More USDT coming to Solana would be great too for everyone. Just seems like a good idea. >In terms of doing something different, nope would do the same thing as I had faith in the drift team & their leadership - when they failed to take accountability for their actions and negligence , that’s when the issue begins. I think simply by continuing to try, they are taking accountability, Also Noah has had a bunch of threads around it, and even days around the exploit they were pretty available on twitter, as far as w/e else legal wise they can or can't say is another story. Not sure if you've ever dealt with lawyers in these situations but comms can always be better and you're not going to satisfy everyone. Theres nuance to what you can say. They are trying more than other protocols i've seen. >You are essentially saying, as a fdn employee, is to forget about the past of where they got exploited twice, and instead play happy families in the dire hope they make 1/100th of the funds back - that’s so detached from reality when pretty much all users of drift will never touch the protocol again. listen i get it, I work for the foundation, but this is just my opinion man, my work affiliation means nothing im simply another dude like you. >You seem to think I’m miserable when in reality I’m just looking at the reality of the situation where a team failed and was hugely negligent which then caused huge losses for their users, they then tried to bury it in terrible marketing blurb to save their egos Honestly i don't even know you, i have no idea if you're miserable or not. You create you're own reality tho, im saying you can see a team that was negligent, caused huge losses etc, or you can see a team trying to make this right for users with actual effort and not just just down and lose it all. Im a glass half full guy, no glass half empty. >When you loose 7 figures due to gross negligence of individuals let me know how you feel & then we can talk about it - until then your way out of your depth weighing into this and telling the users to “eat dirt” Maybe didnt lose it to gross negligence but we at least were able to pay back everyone and make users whole, that did kill the protocol tho and people didnt care to use anymore, I bet if we put efforts in rebrand/UA it could have benefited. It's one reason i think the rebrand actually is beneficial. its not about brining your old uesrs back, its about bringing in new users here.
-
Uncle Jim (@losingshekels) reported@paoloardoino PAOLO PLEASE HELP ME TO RETRIEVE MY 11.5 ETH THAT IS STUCK IN WEB3 WITH MY BITFINEX ETH WALLET ADDRESS USED AS OWNER
-
The Bitcoin Cash Podcast (@TheBCHPodcast) reported@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.
-
Mrbankstips Parody (@Mrbvnkstips) reportedEvery crypto CEX shutting down like Bitfinex and others have one thing in common they bought ETH and over leveraged simple
-
CaptSpectacular (@CaptSpectacular) reported@bitcoinmunger @bitfinex @tradingview Just another avenue for capitulation. Now we got etfs, saylor ponzi and this. ****.