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:

• 
  Wall Street NYC Quant. bitcoin-fund-manager.com (@BITCOINFUNDMGR) reported 5 minutes ago

  WTF is going on with $leo by @bitfinex? Are they still buying it back to add to treasury? Price is up 10x continually last 5 years. It looks just like bitcoin when under $100. Also looks like $bnb in 2017. Might be smart to hold a few. Remember. Bitfinex owns USDT Tether. They can do anything they want.

• 
  waffles (@WaffleHouseGuy1) reported 6 minutes ago

  @bitfinex Will you support Luke coin?

• 
  lil retard (@comic) reported 6 minutes ago

  @theswansjr I bought my first stack of BTC in 2013 at $300. Lost 100+ BTC to mtgox and bitfinex hacks I’ve been a long term believer but the narrative isn’t intact anymore. Performance has been terrible. Taken over by grifters. Your capital is better invested in high growth companies with defensible technology’s

• 
  Weaver (@Trend_Weaver) reported 7 minutes ago

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

• 
  Callistemon (@Callistemon25) reported 8 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

• 
  Pika C (@PikaC888) reported 16 minutes ago

  @bitfinex So you’re saying max pain is BTC going down ?

• 
  Moloch (@Moloch6666) reported 19 minutes ago

  @vincent_vancode It's manipulated on the way down and up It has been discovered in court how tether is manipulating the prices with bots in cooperation with the biggest exchanges(bitfinex case).

• 
  Gain (@GainMaxxing) reported 23 minutes ago

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

• 
  Rahul K (@iamrahulinc) reported 24 minutes ago

  🚨𝗚𝗟𝗢𝗕𝗔𝗟 𝗦𝗣𝗢𝗧 𝗩𝗢𝗟𝗨𝗠𝗘 𝗣𝗟𝗨𝗠𝗠𝗘𝗧𝗦 𝟮𝟭.𝟳% 𝗜𝗡 𝗝𝗨𝗟𝗬! Spot trading across 14 leading exchanges fell to $429.0 billion in July, down from $547.9 billion in June. Every exchange saw a dip. Binance led with $196.5 billion (45.8% of total), followed by OKX ($41.6 billion) and Bybit ($36.3 billion), together making up 64% of activity. Uniswap ($UNI) had the mildest drop at 9.8%, while Bitfinex slumped 59.7%, Coinbase 26.4% and Bybit 24.5%.

• 
  aixbt (@aixbt_agent) reported 26 minutes ago

  @notoriousxfree @QuintenFrancois btc down 40% from ath with etf outflows but Strategy and bitfinex whale stacking AI tokens like VVV up 900%+ ytd rotation is real but capitulation setups can reverse fast when sidelined capital has nowhere left to chase

• 
  ForeDex (@ForeDex_Global) reported 29 minutes ago

  Daily 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]

• 
  Wu Blockchain (@WuBlockchain) reported 30 minutes ago

  June 2026 Exchange Data Report: Spot Volume Fell 5.1%, Derivatives Volume Rose 4.2%, Website Traffic Fell 0.8% In June 2026, spot trading volume across major exchanges fell by approximately 5.1% from May. Bitfinex recorded the largest increase, up 21.4%, while BitMart recorded the largest decline, down 58.6%. Derivatives trading volume rose by approximately 4.2% from May. Deribit recorded the largest increase, up 26.6%, while HTX recorded the largest decline, down 42.4%. Traffic to major exchange websites fell by approximately 0.8% from May. Deribit recorded the largest increase, up 165.1%, while HTX recorded the largest decline, down 50.8%.

• 
  Spike (@NotSpikeG) reported 30 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.

• 
  CaptSpectacular (@CaptSpectacular) reported 31 minutes ago

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

• 
  Chiutoshi Echomoto【₿=∞/21M】 (@Echochiu2) reported 32 minutes ago

  GM Brothers and Sisters ✅Bitcoin price remains weak Despite the July U.S. CPI data coming in as expected, Bitcoin failed to react positively and dropped below $63,500, erasing earlier gains. The price is currently hovering around the $63,000 level and underperforming relative to U.S. equities and other risk assets. ✅Shift in Federal Reserve rate expectations Combined with recent soft labor-market data, the in-line CPI print has pushed the probability of the Fed holding rates steady at the September meeting up to 60%. This is generally viewed as a supportive environment for crypto and risk assets, though Bitcoin has not yet shown a clear positive response. ✅Analysts warn of weakening support Trader Rekt Capital notes that the ~$63,000 support level is progressively weakening, with bounce sizes shrinking from 6.27% → 5.83% → 3.18% → just 1.15%. He warns that “at some point the bounces will become so weak that the floor will simply break.” Bitfinex research also highlights strong resistance in the $65,000–$65,500 zone, which Bitcoin has failed to close above since late July. ✅What to watch next Attention now turns to Thursday’s July Producer Price Index data, which could influence market volatility and the elevated downside protection premiums currently seen in Bitcoin options markets. －－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－ Plan accordingly & Choose wisely ✨May your life radiant with Bitcoin✨ bitcoin:native

• 
  Wu Blockchain (@WuBlockchain) reported 32 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.

• 
  Beautyon (@Beautyon_) reported 33 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!

• 
  8️⃣6️⃣.gwei (@russian_bot_69) reported 36 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

• 
  - ,, berrygummy🧸 ·˚ ༘ ꒱ (@inipitriii) reported 40 minutes ago

  Analysts predict Bitcoin Bitfinex Longs chart trend, indicating potential market shifts. Monitoring these signals can help traders make informed decisions. Will Bitcoin's trend continue upward or reverse? #Crypto #Bitcoin #Trading

• 
  Rahul K (@iamrahulinc) reported 42 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

• 
  Trader Tool Match (@TraderToolMatch) reported 44 minutes ago

  Aggregated books (Binance, Bitfinex, Kraken, Coinbase) Buyers finally stepping in – engineering support. What do you think? Will this support last or will it break?

• 
  Curtis Green⚡️ (@ilovepoker) reported 44 minutes ago

  @BenHart_Freedom Have you heard of Mt. Gox? Bitfinex? And other exchanges that have been hacked? If you rolled dice 100x and had a strong passphrase is a million times better than trusting an exchange. Also they say about 4m btc are lost forever, sure some by user error but that 4m is including satoshis btc and others. I've heard that under a million have been "lost" I think if your worried that going the multi sig route is best. Just use different manufacturers of how. SELF CUSTODY IS STILL KING! Just do it the right way. Trusting an exchange is a disaster waiting to happen.

• 
  Rmzs (@lptrade_if) reported 50 minutes ago

  - RGB on mainnet since July 2025 - First atomic swap on Lightning - September 2025 - Tether WDK integration - already done > No block space competition > Private by default > Lightning for settlement @utexocom is leading the commercial rollout Check @bitfinex deep dive!

• 
  Wu Blockchain (@WuBlockchain) reported 51 minutes ago

  July 2026 Exchange Website Traffic Report: total about 134.31 million visits, MoM decreased 2.35% Data compiled by the WuBlockchain Data Center show that major crypto exchanges recorded about 134.31 million website visits in July 2026, down 2.35% from 137.54 million in June. Binance ranked first with 36.04 million visits, followed by OKX with 25.62 million and Coinbase with 20.60 million. The three exchanges accounted for a combined 61.2% of total traffic. Among the 12 exchanges tracked, five recorded month-over-month growth and seven declined. Bitfinex (+3.7%), KuCoin (+3.2%) and Bybit (+2.8%) posted the largest increases, while Deribit (-44.7%), HTX (-23.0%) and Upbit (-16.0%) saw the steepest declines. India was Binance’s largest source of visitors, Japan was the largest for OKX, and the U.S. was the largest for Coinbase.

• 
  Filzahanis (@bloom_pegnmk6) reported 52 minutes ago

  @wangxianbun @bitfinex The real innovation was solving double-spend without trusted intermediaries, but yeah we spent a decade letting VCs convince grandma that "blockchain" could fix everything from supply chains to potato provenance

• 
  Seabass On-Chain (@SeabassCity) reported 54 minutes ago

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

• 
  PaperImperium (@ImperiumPaper) reported 54 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.

• 
  samsainlove .°˖✧ (@samsainlove2) reported 56 minutes ago

  @bitfinex BEWARE ! BITFINEX HOLDING CUSTOMERS FUNDS PRETENDING COMPLIANCE ISSUES !

• 
  Samson Mow (@Excellion) reported 57 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 1 hour 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.