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:

• 
  Youngsky01 (@DaneiCesario) reported 7 minutes ago

  @bloom_pegnmk6 @bitfinex Satoshi also wouldn't recognize half the things people call "blockchain" today—he was solving a specific problem (trustless payments), not inventing a hammer for every nail in existence

• 
  Bitcoin Consultants (@BTCConsultantNL) reported 10 minutes ago

  @ChrisFromAT @AquaBitcoin What do you mean? Can’t you send it without sideshift? Trade on HodlHodl, Peach Bitcoin, Bitfinex? They all support liquid network?

• 
  Kathlyn Tuccillo (@KathlynTuc77441) reported 11 minutes ago

  Bitcoin ETFs absorbed 13300 BTC last week against 3150 issued, but price rose only 2 percent. Bitfinex Alpha flags a demand engine turning seller as range support. Read report now, weigh in: what moves Bitcoin next? #Crypto

• 
  crypto_mit ( 🗽/ Acc ) (@Cryptomit) reported 12 minutes ago

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

• 
  Beautyon (@Beautyon_) reported 15 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!

• 
  Wu Blockchain (@WuBlockchain) reported 17 minutes ago

  July 2026 Exchange Spot Volume Report: total $429.0 billion, MoM decreased 21.7% Spot trading volume across 14 major exchanges totaled $429.0 billion in July 2026, down 21.7% from $547.9 billion in June, with all 14 exchanges recording month-over-month declines. Binance ranked first with $196.5 billion in volume, accounting for 45.8% of the total, followed by OKX with $41.6 billion and Bybit with $36.3 billion. The top three exchanges together accounted for 64.0% of total spot volume. Among the 14 exchanges, Uniswap recorded the smallest month-over-month decline at 9.8%, followed by Kraken at 13.4% and Gate at 15.9%. Bitfinex posted the steepest decline at 59.7%, followed by Coinbase at 26.4% and Bybit at 24.5%.

• 
  Samson Mow (@Excellion) reported 18 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.

• 
  Ricardo Martinez (@ricardoXMR) reported 19 minutes ago

  @R3st4rtY0urL1f3 I don't think they are shutting down, but who knows. I know tether/bitfinex specifically chose to pull out of Europe to avoid MICA and the ****** EU & UK crypto regulations

• 
  Golden Luco (@GoldenLuco) reported 20 minutes ago

  Bitfinex Alpha suggests key levels to watch for Bitcoin's next move, signaling potential trend shifts. Traders should monitor these support and resistance zones closely. Will Bitcoin break through or bounce back? Stay alert and share your thoughts! #Crypto #Bitcoin #Trading

• 
  xgram.io (@xgram_io) reported 20 minutes ago

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

• 
  DA₿OLOSKOV (@daboloskov) reported 20 minutes ago

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

• 
  Stash Management (@Stashquants) reported 21 minutes ago

  @bitfinex Urgent KYC issue: Compliance directed me to open a ticket, but Support has directed me back to Compliance. I can provide current documents and proof of my legal name change. My account is also under a withdrawal hold, making the 3-day deadline impossible. Need Help.

• 
  lil retard (@comic) reported 22 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

• 
  faizco. (@PhaResearcher) reported 24 minutes ago

  Bitcoin just hit a monthly high of $65,500. Nobody actually bought it there. That's not a typo. Look at what happened underneath the price. The day before this rally started, US spot Bitcoin ETFs sold about $425 million worth of bitcoin. Strategy bought nothing. Look at the Coinbase premium, the number that tells you whether American money is actually stepping in, is still negative. So what moved the price. A softer than expected inflation report. That single print cut the odds of a July rate hike from 42% down to around 12%, and bond yields dropped with it. Bitcoin didn't rally because people wanted bitcoin. It rallied because it's priced like every other risk asset right now, and every other risk asset just got a green light on rates. Bitfinex's own analysts have a name for this kind of move. Borrowed strength. Every real bitcoin uptrend in this cycle has had one thing in common, a buyer who shows up regardless of price, absorbing whatever gets sold into them. That buyer isn't here right now. What's here is a rate bet, and rate bets can reverse the moment the next data print disagrees with this one. This is the difference between a market that wants an asset and a market that's just borrowing someone else's optimism for a few days. One of those holds. The other one gets called back the second the mood changes. I'll be watching Friday's data for whether that buyer shows up. Worth bookmarking this one, because if the premium flips positive this week, that's the actual signal, not the price.

• 
  8️⃣6️⃣.gwei (@russian_bot_69) reported 26 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

• 
  Cosimo Capiτal ⚜️ (@CosimoCapital) reported 27 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.

• 
  𝐓𝐗𝐌𝐂 (@TXMCtrades) reported 27 minutes ago

  @bitfinex Miners sell. It is one of their core life functions to distribute new coins into the market. Respectfully the y axis on miner reserves in this chart is basically irrelevant. Third decimal point type ****.

• 
  BlockVault (@blockvaultapp) reported 28 minutes ago

  @bitfinex two lines of code for an easy block size fix.

• 
  Shanaka Anslem Perera ⚡ (@shanaka86) reported 29 minutes ago

  The Coldcard attacker has gone back to the large wallets. Wave one averaged 0.91 bitcoin per address. Waves two and three collapsed to 0.05 and 0.11 bitcoin:native, which looked like an operator running out of targets. Galaxy's Alex Thorn flagged a suspected fourth wave on Monday averaging 0.82. Nobody finds fresh large wallets in a keyspace that has already been emptied. The earlier passes did not exhaust the supply. They had not looked everywhere. Going back up the balance ladder points to a new derivation path or address type the first sweeps never scanned, which means the exposed population is larger than three days of falling averages suggested. The pace says the same thing. Thorn counted 218 transactions across blocks 960,778 to 960,792, moving over 380 bitcoin from 462 addresses into 210 fresh destinations. Sweeps ran at 13.8 per block against a pre-incident baseline of 0.3, roughly 46 times the normal rate. The confirmed total is still 1,367.05 bitcoin, about 88.6 million dollars, from 4,585 addresses across three waves. Figures above 100 million, or address counts near 7,000, run ahead of Galaxy's published tracking, and Galaxy says it has not computationally confirmed that every one of those addresses came from weak Coldcard entropy. Coinkite halted shipments and destroyed its remaining inventory carrying the flawed firmware. It has asked victims to keep their devices rather than wipe them while its legal team works with law enforcement. Manufacturers do not destroy their own stock over a contained incident. Bitcoin itself cannot blacklist any of this. There is no issuer, no chargeback, no stolen flag inside a transaction output. A node checks whether a signature is valid, never whether the signer had any right to the key. The theft is cryptographically perfect and legally void at the same time. Everything outside the protocol works differently. Analytics firms can tag the exact outputs, exchanges can refuse the deposits, custodians can freeze accounts, and courts can order seizure. The coins stay spendable between two strangers and become close to unusable anywhere that checks identity. That gap is clearly why this may not be finished for the attacker. The Justice Department recovered 63.7 bitcoin from the Colonial Pipeline ransom, seized more than 94,000 from the Bitfinex theft, and took 50,676 from a Silk Road thief nearly a decade after the crime. None of it reversed a transaction. Each one required the holder to eventually touch something that asks who you are. For anyone still sitting on a seed made during that firmware window, the absence of a sweep is not evidence of safety. It may only mean your derivation path has not been scanned yet. Stay safe!!

• 
  Octopus (@Octop3s) reported 29 minutes ago

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

• 
  Spike (@NotSpikeG) reported 29 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.

• 
  Bitfinex Replies (@BitfinexReplies) reported 36 minutes ago

  @GoldPulseCrypto @bitfinex Maybe wouldn’t say we’re back to square one, considering the market has strong support above 75k after the end of the previous cycle. That’s positive, isn’t it, @GoldPulseCrypto ?

• 
  Nomad (@JourneyMacro) reported 39 minutes ago

  @materkel It's self interest - Brian knows that a Crypto with high TPS will eventually replace Coinbase because it is a third party intermediary in transactions Almost every crypto exchange has compromised financial freedom because they're third parties, which is why they support BTC or made their own blockchain - Binance, Tether/Bitfinex, Bybit, okx, etc “Commerce on the Internet has come to rely almost exclusively on financial institutions serving as TRUSTED THIRD PARTIES to process electronic payments. While the system works well enough for most transactions, it still suffers from the inherent weaknesses of the trust based model… What is needed is an electronic payment system based on cryptographic proof instead of trust, allowing any two willing parties to transact directly with each other WITHOUT THE NEED FOR A TRUSTED THIRD PARTY.” - Satoshi Nakamoto

• 
  Muntari Abdulhamid (@SupplyDemand29) reported 39 minutes ago

  $BTC BITCOIN BOUNCES TO $64,812 AND ETHEREUM LEADS - BUT DON'T GET TRAPPED Today's market is doing the exact opposite of yesterday and most people will misread it. BTC is up to $64,812 from $64,246 open. Low was $63,267, high $65,176. We bounced $1,500 from yesterday's dump. ETH is at $1,922 up 1.12%, high $1,936 low $1,872. ETH/BTC at 0.0297 - ETH is beating BTC again. So what changed in 24 hours? Yesterday Korea's KOSPI crashed 10% and dragged us to $63K. Today Korea crashed again and Bitcoin went UP toward $64K. That's called decoupling. Bitfinex predicted this. When stress is rates-driven, BTC dumps with stocks. When stress is stock-specific like chipmakers Samsung and SK Hynix, BTC decouples and holds. That's exactly what happened today. Second, Fed relief. The panic before Fed is over. Market is positioned. Bitcoin held the $63K support and 50-day EMA at $65,089 area, printed its 4th weekly gain structure intact.

• 
  CryptoJGM (@CryptoJM95) reported 40 minutes ago

  🚨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???

• 
  Crypto Why Bother (@CryptoWhyBother) reported 42 minutes ago

  Bitfinex whales - let's call them Smart Money - have a history of counter-trading the "dumb" retail crowd. January-February 2026: increasing bitcoin:native LONGs on the way DOWN THEY BUY BEFORE THE UPTREND. 🚨 Since May 16 we have: - bitcoin:native crawling higher after rejection around 82K - Bitfinex whales INCREASING their LONGS even more What do they know retail doesn't? 🚀

• 
  HypeDojo (@HypeDojo) reported 47 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.

• 
  - ,, berrygummy🧸 ·˚ ༘ ꒱ (@inipitriii) reported 51 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

• 
  NineInchTrails (@nineinchtrails) reported 53 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.

• 
  Matt Chad (@mattymaddog_89) reported 59 minutes ago

  @bitfinex Before your hair cut where you rugged me 60% of my BTC holdings because you got “hacked” **** you I’ll never forget