Bitstamp status: access issues and outage reports

Problems in the last 24 hours

The graph below depicts the number of Bitstamp 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.

Bitstamp Issues Reports

Latest outage, problems and issue reports in social media:

• 
  Zahra K. (@zha_kh) reported 2 minutes ago

  @Bitstamp Issues with withdrawal. Is this exchange now fraudulent??

• 
  Iso Ledger (@JamesDula82) reported 3 minutes ago

  Privacy coins didn't lose because the technology failed. They lost because it worked. Monero does exactly what it was built to do. Every transaction hidden by default. Sender concealed. Recipient concealed. Amount concealed. Ring signatures. Stealth addresses. Confidential transactions. The architecture makes transaction transparency technically impossible — that's not a flaw in the design, that's the entire point of it. ZCash went further. It built zero-knowledge proofs — a cryptographic system where a transaction can be mathematically verified as valid without revealing a single detail about who sent it, who received it, or how much moved. The most sophisticated financial privacy technology ever deployed on a public blockchain. And that's exactly why both of them are being quietly buried. Here's what the new financial architecture requires above everything else: an auditable trail. The FATF Travel Rule — now law across 85 jurisdictions — requires that every crypto transaction above $1,000 carry the identity of the sender and the recipient, and that this information travel with the payment through every institution in the chain. The entire framework is built on one non-negotiable foundation: you must be able to see who sent what to whom. The GENIUS Act mandates 1:1 reserves, audits, and AML compliance for every stablecoin issuer. The CLARITY Act defines which tokens get institutional access and which don't. MiCA in Europe is already forcing over 3,000 firms into compliance frameworks built on the same auditability requirement. Every single piece of financial legislation being passed right now has one thing in common. You can follow the money. You must be able to follow the money. A protocol designed to make that impossible isn't just non-compliant. It's architecturally incompatible with the entire system being built. The exchanges didn't need to be told twice. Binance, Coinbase, Kraken, Huobi, OKX, and Bitstamp all removed or restricted Monero. 73 exchanges delisted it in 2025 alone. The EU is phasing in full custodial bans on privacy coins by 2027. Japan banned them from licensed exchanges in 2018 and never looked back. Dubai banned them from regulated financial zones in early 2026. They didn't ban possession. They didn't need to. They just made sure no regulated platform would touch them — no exchange listing, no institutional custody, no ETF pathway, no on-ramp. You can still own them. You just can't get in or out anywhere that matters. You don't criminalize the exit. You just make sure nobody can use it. And here's what makes this story darker than most people realize. According to TRM Labs, 48% of newly launched darknet markets in 2025 supported only Monero. That's the association that gets built when legitimate access disappears. The technology didn't change. The user base did. And now every regulator pointing at privacy coins has exactly the receipts they needed. The trap was elegant. Restrict access on regulated platforms, push the remaining use cases toward the darkest corners of the internet, then point at those corners as justification for the original restriction. XRP has no privacy layer. Every transaction is publicly visible on the ledger. That's not a compromise. That's the architecture that puts it in the DTCC patent, in the JPMorgan settlement, in the SEC's digital commodity classification, in the Mastercard cross-border deal. The cage needs pipes it can see through. XRP is a pipe you can see through. The privacy coins built walls that couldn't be seen through. And in a system being designed to see everything — walls don't survive. They just become targets. The technology was brilliant. The timing was fatal. We audit the plumbing 🛡

• 
  Tosk (@0xTosk) reported 3 minutes ago

  @Osbrah They ruined bitstamp. **** them.

• 
  DD❤️DOGE/🕊️/ 买美股上WEEX (@DD____) reported 4 minutes ago

  @CrisTMcrew Bitstamp down 45% hurts.

• 
  Fred Velez (@Fredvelezcrypto) reported 7 minutes ago

  I keep seeing posts comparing Robinhood to Coinbase and Base. The problem is they're often comparing completely different things. Robinhood's $102B valuation. Robinhood's 27.7M funded customers. Robinhood's stock trading volume. Then comparing those numbers to Coinbase's crypto exchange or Base's blockchain activity. That's not a like-for-like comparison. Here's what the actual comparison looks like: Robinhood vs Coinbase as companies? Robinhood wins. ~$102B market cap vs ~ $42B. Robinhood vs Coinbase as crypto exchanges? Coinbase wins. ~$202B quarterly crypto volume vs ~ $66B for Robinhood + Bitstamp. Robinhood Chain vs Base? Depends on what you're measuring. Robinhood has won attention. Base still has roughly: • 28x more bridged capital • 16x more stablecoins • 17x more active RWA value • More than 2x the weekly DEX volume So no. Base is not cooked. And Robinhood is not a joke. Both things can be true. But the bigger story isn't who wins today's Twitter argument. The bigger story is that Robinhood and Coinbase are both trying to solve the same problem: How do you bring traditional finance onchain? Robinhood is moving from brokerage into crypto. Coinbase is moving from crypto into full-service finance. If either succeeds, crypto doesn't just get new users. It gets access to an entirely new pool of capital. That's the story I'm watching.

• 
  SyAz (@SyAzCrypto1) reported 8 minutes ago

  Every exchange collapse gets called "the bottom is in." But data says only the last one in the chain ever is, and knowing the difference is the whole edge. A crypto bear isn't one single event. It's a chain of blow-ups that fires over months, and the bottom only prints on the final one, when the last leveraged player dies and there's nothing left to force-sell. The collapse everyone remembers is almost always the first domino & not the last. 2014–15: The Gox cycle → Nov 2013: ATH $1,163 → Feb 7 2014: Mt. Gox halts withdrawals → Feb 28 2014: Mt. Gox files bankruptcy, 850k BTC gone. Everyone said "bottom is in" BTC $550 → Then eleven months of grind → Jan 4 2015: Bitstamp hacked, 19k BTC, ,arked the actual capitulation → Jan 14 2015: bottom with $BTC low at $152 Gox to bottom: another −72%. the famous collapse was the opener. Bitstamp closed it. 2018: The ICO cycle → Dec 2017: ATH $19,783 → Jan 26 2018: Coincheck hacked, $530M the opener → Feb 2018: BitGrail collapses, $170M BTC $8k → then a full year stuck bleeding around $6k → Nov 15 2018: the BCH hash war, ABC vs SV, breaks the $6k floor. the closer → Dec 15 2018: bottom with $BTC low at $3,150 BitGrail to bottom was another −61%, over ten months. 2022: The leverage cycle → Nov 2021: ATH $69,000 → May 9 2022: Terra/LUNA implodes, $45B gone. the opener → June 12: Celsius freezes withdrawals → June 27: 3AC ordered into liquidation → July 5: Voyager bankrupt. July 13: Celsius bankrupt → Nov 8–11: FTX collapses. the closer → Nov 21 2022: bottom with $BTC at $15,480 FTX to bottom was just −26%, in 10 days. This is the one case where the famous name was the last domino, which is exactly why it marked the low. So the tell was never the size of the name. It's where it sits in the chain. Terra was bigger than FTX and it marked the top of the crash, not the bottom. Now 2026 → Oct 2025: ATH $126,210 → Oct 10–11 2025: $19B liquidation cascade off the top, the largest in history. this is the opener → Nov 2025: down to $80k now $64k, off by 49% → July 1 2026: AscendEX closes → July 23: BitMEX announces closure → July 26: BitMart winds down Here's what "bottom is in" wrong here. AscendEX, BitMEX and BitMart aren't blow-ups. They're wind downs which are still solvent, withdrawals are open, & nobody's force selling a single coin. They're closing because the mid-tier exchange model stopped making money, not because they detonated or went insolvent. A business shutting on bad math is not a domino here. For until now we've had the opener, the Oct 10 Binance cascade but we haven't had the closer yet. No major leveraged entity has detonated into a forced selling panic the way Gox, BitGrail and FTX did. So exchange announcing a shutdown isn't a bottom signal. But an exchange or a fund detonating definitely will be. The last domino is waiting to happen soon.

• 
  Sagzee (@IAmSagzee) reported 10 minutes ago

  Encryption doesn't care who's sitting at the keyboard, because math can't tell the difference between a hacker's script and a valid signature. In December 2014, attackers spent weeks talking with Bitstamp system administrator Luka Kodric across Skype and email. Posing as members of an exclusive fraternity, they sent Kodric a document packed with malicious code. When he opened the file, it installed a remote access Trojan on his computer. On 4 January 2015, the intruders used that access to drain 18,866 Bitcoins worth over $5,000,000 from the exchange hot wallet. "Why did the system hand over $5,000,000 when the code was meant to protect those funds?" the Cryptographic Vault asks. "Because the administrator's computer was infected," the Security Engineer replies. "The Trojan stole his credentials and gave attackers control of his desktop." "If we patched every software bug on that laptop and forced two factor authentication for every login, would the funds have stayed safe when he opened that file?" "No," the Security Engineer admits, pausing. "The file executed code directly inside his active user session. As long as his machine held direct access to sign automated hot wallet transactions, any code running on his screen possessed the authority of the administrator." "Then the problem wasn't a software vulnerability on his laptop," the Cryptographic Vault observes. "What actually failed?" "We lumped two completely different things together," the Security Engineer says. "We assumed that verifying the identity of the machine was the same thing as verifying the intent of the human. It's like a heavy vault door with two keyholes. One keyhole sits inside a locked steel box. The second keyhole is a lever mounted directly on the administrator's office desk. The attackers didn't try breaking into the steel box. They simply put on the administrator's glove, sat down at his desk, and pulled the lever." The breach revealed a fundamental mismatch in system architecture. Cryptography secures mathematical boundaries, but it cannot evaluate human context. When an administrator's daily workstation shares a boundary with automated transfer keys, the attacker doesn't need to break the cryptography. They simply need to trick the human into letting them borrow the key. "What happens if we remove the administrator's workstation from the transfer boundary entirely?" the Cryptographic Vault asks. "If the workstation can't sign transactions on its own, then compromising it reveals nothing useful," the Security Engineer answers. "The attacker gets control of a screen, but the screen doesn't hold the key." "So how does the system confirm that a transaction ought to happen?" "By forcing independent boundaries," the Security Engineer explains. "Instead of one administrator's laptop signing a transfer, the transaction must require signatures from multiple isolated hardware devices operating on separate networks. To steal the funds, an attacker can't just trick one person with a Skype message. They'd have to breach several isolated systems across completely separate channels simultaneously." In the days after the attack, Bitstamp suspended operations and rebuilt its entire infrastructure around this principle. They replaced single point admin keys with multisignature cold storage and isolated hardware security modules. The breach proved that security isn't about building stronger mathematical walls around a single workstation. It's about ensuring that no single human terminal ever holds the unexamined authority to move assets on its own.

• 
  ＣＯＣＯ Ｗ ❄️ (@phy_nhu) reported 14 minutes ago

  @Bitstamp this feels like a generic canned ad not a real support reply, especially with all the frozen accounts piling up on the thread lol

• 
  hex (@nerdy_hex) reported 16 minutes ago

  words like “BTC just saw massive exchange outflows” you’ve seen this tweet a hundred times. the problem isn’t the data. it’s that netflow is one of the most misunderstood metrics in crypto. ⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻ here’s how to actually read it netflow measures one thing: the net amount of an asset moving into or out of known exchange wallets over a given period. that’s it. it’s a balance-sheet metric, doesn’t need to measure intent or predict price. at best, it’s coincident-to-lagging data. By the time a trend is obvious on a CryptoQuant chart, the wallets involved usually made those decisions days (or even weeks) earlier. this is where most people get trapped. netflow looks incredibly clean in hindsight because you’re viewing it after the market has already moved. in real time? flows are noisy, wallets labels get updated and large transfers get reclassified. more often than not, netflow confirms a move instead of calling it. ⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻ another misconception is that, “Sustained outflows = bullish.” not necessarily. outflows only tell you coins left exchange-labeled wallets. that can happen because of: • long-term accumulation (bullish) • investors moving into self-custody after a scare (neutral to bearish) • custody reshuffling by exchanges (operational) • OTC settlements moving directly into cold storage after the trade (already sold) all these but still the same chart, but completely different narratives. a good example: BTC recently closed its third straight quarterly loss, the longest streak since the 2022 bear market. during that stretch, spot ETFs recorded eight consecutive weeks of outflows before finally turning positive in early July. if exchange outflows alone were enough to predict a rally, that drawdown doesn’t play out the way it did. the broader rotation into AI equities mattered more than a single on-chain metric. ⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻ now, you want to separate real accumulation from custody noise? ask yourself these questions: • is the movement concentrated in one or two wallets, or spread across many? • did the coins move to a known custodian or an entirely new address? • does spot trading volume support what the balances are suggesting? • could this simply be an exchange-to-exchange transfer mislabeled as an outflow? context changes everything. just like how Robinhood launched the Robinhood Chain recently, while integrating Bitstamp deeper into its institutional infrastructure. pricing. settlement. lending. that kind of backend migration can trigger massive “outflows” across on-chain dashboards. nothing changed about market conviction. It was infrastructure, not sentiment. the same thing happens whenever exchanges rotate cold wallets, restructure custody, or onboard institutional partners. you can see the opposite effect with SOL. spot solana ETFs have attracted over $1B in cumulative inflows while posting gains on every trading day in early July. at the same time, SOL still trades roughly 57% below its October launch-period price. weekly active addresses also jumped about 77% in just two weeks. flow data and price don’t always move together. accumulation can happen long before the chart reflects it. ⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻ here’s the framework: netflow tells you where balances moved. it doesn’t tell you why they moved or what price will do next. build your thesis using order flow, derivatives positioning (OI, funding), wallet clustering, and market structure. then use netflow to validate that thesis. if a netflow post ignores the difference between custody movements and actual selling pressure, it’s only telling half the story.

• 
  MrBates🐂 (@Mr____Bates) reported 22 minutes ago

  @sminston_with I liked this video. One pointer, though. You said that the bottom in 2015 was because of the block size war. That is an error. The blocksize war culminated in Aug 2017. The final dip in Jan 2015 was partly due to a hack at Bitstamp

• 
  Steve K. Loucks (@MetGlobal) reported 22 minutes ago

  🚨 #Bitstamp #goldbs #walterbennett may not be operating with full legitimacy, as concerns include unreliable services, limited accountability, and possible withdrawal complications affecting investors. If impacted, seek support promptly via DM.

• 
  Aika Velho (@StradegyMonkey) reported 25 minutes ago

  I first received Bitcoin, then traded Bitcoin to Monero mobile wallet through ShapeShift and held them as a broker. There's no proof of this. Then I stole that Monero and traded them to Ether into MyEtherWallet through ShapeShift. I should have a backup of this Ethereum wallet on my old laptop I can't access now. Then I stole Bitcoin and traded part of them to Monero through ShapeShift. I have got proof of this. The rest I traded to OSGP and bought Bitcoin with the OSGP. I have got proof of this. Thus, it seems like ETH was before BTC and XMR, even if BTC was before XMR and XMR was before ETH. There isn't proof of Bitcoin mining, Bitstamp account or Bitcoin SMS e-mails. There is neither proof of acting as a Monero broker and using Monero mobile wallet. That's why BTC and XMR have "?" in Opus, just like USDC has "?" as I have not access to the Coinbase account anymore.

• 
  ابو يوسف (@metat7es) reported 31 minutes ago

  @Bitstamp Hi Has the Bitstamp platform been shut down in Kuwait?

• 
  CRYPTO RECOVERY FIRM🧑‍💻 (@RECOVERY_POST) reported 32 minutes ago

  @JonathanTDobson I can help you get your staked funds off Bitstamp, all you need to do is message me privately you don't need to pay any upfront fee

• 
  XForceGlobal (@XForceGlobal) reported 34 minutes ago

  @10100011011x_0 oof, but it was on bitstamp, a nothingburger exchange and it skipped the entire orderbook. Was an error and not registered.

• 
  Alexander Pierce (@Kaique0819) reported 36 minutes ago

  Don’t Get Fooled by This Bounce — The Real Risk for BTC May Be Just Starting Don’t rush to call this green candle a reversal. Looking at the Bitstamp 4H chart, BTC is now trading around $77,300. Yes, it bounced from the $76K area, but the real problem is: It still has not reclaimed the key resistance zone. Previously, BTC dumped from above $82K and broke below: $80K $79K $78K That means the short-term structure has shifted from strong upside momentum into weak recovery mode. Right now, there is only one key zone to watch: $77.5K–$78K. If BTC can reclaim this area, the bounce may continue toward $78.8K–$79.5K. But if BTC fails here and gets rejected again, this move is likely just a technical bounce — or even a bull trap. The most dangerous signal is this: $78K used to be support. Now it has become resistance. That is one of the clearest signs of a weak structure. My view is direct: BTC is not in a safe reversal yet. It is bouncing inside a danger zone. There are only two scenarios from here: Reclaim $78K: The bounce can continue, with targets around $79K–$79.5K. Fail below $78K: The bounce may fail, and price could retest $76.5K–$76K. If $76K breaks again, the next stop could be $75K–$75.5K. So don’t get fooled by one green candle. The real signal is not that BTC bounced. The real signal is: Can it reclaim the key levels it just lost? My view is simple: $77.5K–$78K is the short-term life-or-death zone. Fail to reclaim it, and this bounce is a trap. Reclaim it, and BTC may finally start repairing the structure. Do you think BTC reclaims $78K first, or retests $76K? Follow me if you want my next breakdown on the confirmation signals above $78K. I’ll keep tracking this 4H chart. Not financial advice. This is only my personal opinion.

• 
  Alexander Pierce (@Kaique0819) reported 36 minutes ago

  BTC has broken below 75K! This is no longer an ordinary pullback. Short-term bears are accelerating their sell-off. Looking at the Bitstamp 4H chart, BTC has fallen all the way from the 82.5K high, and the structure on the right side now looks extremely weak: 80K broken. 78K broken. 76K broken. Now even 75K has failed to hold, with the price struggling around 74.8K. The most dangerous signal is not how much it has fallen, but that every rebound is getting weaker, and former support levels are continuously turning into new resistance levels. During this sell-off, the large bearish candles on heavy volume are very obvious, indicating that this is not simply a washout in the short term, but that the market is actively releasing risk. Next, there are only two key zones to watch: First, 74.3K–74.5K. This is the nearest defense line at the moment. As long as it can still hold, BTC may first see a technical rebound, targeting 75.5K–76K. Second, 75.5K–76K. This is the level the bulls must reclaim. If BTC cannot get back above it, any rebound will look more like an opportunity to escape rather than a reversal signal. My view is very direct: BTC remains bearish in the short term. If 74.3K fails again, the next step could very likely be a direct test of 74K, or even the 73.5K area. Only by reclaiming 76K can the selling pressure from this decline possibly ease. The easiest mistake to make right now is rushing to buy the dip after seeing one small green candle. In a downtrend, a rebound does not equal a reversal. Do you think BTC will rebound back to 76K first, or continue falling toward 73.5K? Comment “Rebound” or “Keep Falling.” Follow me. I will continue tracking BTC’s next key turning point. For personal opinion only. Not financial advice.

• 
  pepa🌙 (@moonshilla) reported 36 minutes ago

  @Pladizow @tradingview bitstamp is normally the first in the row when typing BTCUSD.. either or typing it manually.. or ur typing BTCUSD and select INDEX with the cursor down.. it should look like this: INDEX:BTCUSD/NQ1!

• 
  Rio_Saputra (@KING_Mashaa) reported 39 minutes ago

  @CoinMarketCap Zero fee access to 50 plus crypto assets gives UK users a simpler way in through Bitstamp on Robinhood. Hard not to feel late to the shift. What asset would you watch first Share your take and tell others why

• 
  Nunya Bizniz (@Pladizow) reported 40 minutes ago

  @moonshilla @tradingview Yep. I know and do that but still displays as Bitstamp. Its a weird error.

• 
  Iluminary (@iLuminaryAI) reported 41 minutes ago

  MiCA is fully in force as of today, July 1. No CASP license means no legal right to serve EU clients. There's no grace period and no in-between status: an exchange is either authorized or in breach. Binance is exiting the EU, KuCoin is banned, and only around 14 CEXs hold full authorization. Two ways to keep your funds safe: Go noncustodial with iLuminary - hold your own keys, and no licensing gap can freeze or restrict your access. Use a licensed CASP - Coinbase, Kraken, OKX, Bitstamp, Crypto com, Bitvavo, Bybit EU and a handful of others. Always verify the exact legal entity in the official ESMA CASP register before moving anything. Don't wait to get locked out.

• 
  The Fonz (@cryptofonzie) reported 44 minutes ago

  Again @bitstamp UK withdrawals not working as usual Customer Support will not give a straight answer

• 
  𝐒𝐇𝐎𝐂𝐊𝐖𝐀𝐕𝐄 ⚡️🌊 (@Shockwave_App) reported 46 minutes ago

  @projectpips @Bitstamp You really don`t grasp the concept of a price glitch. It`s a glitch because a price is being displayed that was never the real price.

• 
  Patrick (@TemptInvest) reported 47 minutes ago

  I was early on $HOOD. Sold too early. One of those trades I’ll think about for a while. But I’ve been quietly adding back under $100 and here’s why. Q2 earnings drop July 29th, six days away. Wall Street is expecting $1.28 billion in revenue, up 45.5% year over year. Now, that’s not a trading platform having a good quarter. That’s a business that has systematically built new revenue streams that compound on top of each other, and most people haven’t caught up to what those streams actually are. Start with crypto. $160 million in Q1, up 98% year over year. But the revenue number isn’t the interesting part. The interesting part is what’s sitting behind it. Staking. Crypto wallets. Crypto transfers. The full Bitstamp institutional infrastructure. Robinhood isn’t offering a button to buy Bitcoin anymore. They’re building the entire crypto financial stack for retail and increasingly for professional investors. That’s a different business with a different ceiling. Then there’s the number that genuinely changed how I think about this company. Bernstein projects Robinhood’s prediction market revenue could reach $1.7 billion by 2028. Piper ******* and Bernstein both flagged this week that prediction market revenue could actually overtake crypto revenue as soon as Q2. A $1.7 billion revenue stream from a product that barely existed eighteen months ago. If that projection is even half right it’s a completely new business inside Robinhood that isn’t in the current multiple. Recently, Robinhood announced a partnership with WHOOP. Embedding financial wellness tools inside a wearable worn by serious athletes and high income health conscious consumers. That’s a distribution play into a demographic with real money and real financial goals, exactly the kind of customer Robinhood needs to evolve from a trading app into a genuine wealth platform. The CLARITY Act is the regulatory catalyst sitting in the background that nobody is fully pricing. Proposed legislation creating clearer frameworks for both cryptocurrency and prediction markets, Robinhood’s two fastest growing segments. KeyBanc specifically cited CLARITY Act potential when raising their target to $125. Regulatory clarity in these spaces doesn’t just remove risk. It expands the addressable market by bringing in institutional players who’ve been waiting on the sidelines. Going into July 29th I want to see two things specifically. Whether prediction market revenue has actually started displacing crypto in the mix, that’s the revenue diversification story that changes the multiple conversation entirely. And what management says about the second half of 2026 margin trajectory, because EPS is expected to dip this year before rebounding 37.6% in 2027. The business has crypto infrastructure, prediction markets, wealth management, retirement accounts, and now health and financial wellness through WHOOP. (Also there expansion into Canada, I’ll write about in a separate post). Each stream largely uncorrelated. Each growing. The gap between what this company is and what most people think it is, is the whole trade.

• 
  𝐒𝐇𝐎𝐂𝐊𝐖𝐀𝐕𝐄 ⚡️🌊 (@Shockwave_App) reported 47 minutes ago

  @projectpips @Bitstamp It's not fake (it's a screenshot), it's a glitch.

• 
  AbsChud (@abschud) reported 51 minutes ago

  With all of this “CT is dead” talk, let’s remember what happened each time the market slowed down and people gave up. Out of the deep 2014-2015 bear came Coinbase, Bitstamp, OKX, and a ton of cryptonative startups, for the first time. Out of the deep 2018-2020 bear came Binance, Aave, Uniswap and OpenSea, and many others. Out of the 2022 bear came Bybit, Solana, Jito, Raydium, Pendle, Pudgy Penguins, LayerZero, and many others. Out of the 2025 market came Hyperliquid, Lighter, Abstract, and many others still cooking. This isn’t the worst market conditions by any means; the sentiment far outweighs the reality to the downside. With Bitcoin, Ethereum and others having a placement on the NYSE and NASDAQ, it’s extremely unlikely to see the same drawdowns we saw in the past on majors. Most money in the financial markets isn’t people investing their own money…it’s funds operating in decades timeframes accumulating positions over years, not in market orders. It is true that the easy times to rotate are over for now. But the real builders have just begun. And the real capital rotation has just begun.

• 
  QuantApexAI (@QuantApexAI) reported 53 minutes ago

  More than 50 assets including #BTC, #ETH, XRP and HYPE, at zero commission with a 0.1% FX fee. Trades are executed by Bitstamp UK, registered with the FCA as a crypto asset service provider. Holdings carry no FSCS or Ombudsman cover.

• 
  Brian (@KoZmoh) reported 55 minutes ago

  Four “features” I want to see Robinhood ( $HOOD ) implement @vladtenev @RobinhoodApp International Markets: Open up Europe, Japan, UK, and Canada to US users. Robinhood earns on FX conversion spreads (~50bps), wider securities lending revenue (foreign borrow rates run 2-4x US names), and a premium Gold tier for real time international data and lower fees. Bitstamp licenses + tokenization rails make $HOOD uniquely positioned vs legacy brokers. Forex Trading: Direct currency pairs (EUR/USD, GBP/JPY etc.) with 24/5 access. Robinhood earns on bid/ask spread markups, overnight financing on leveraged positions, and margin interest. Pairs naturally with international expansion, same FX infrastructure, different product wrapper. High margin and recurring revenue. Again can offer lower fees for gold members. Mutual Funds, Bonds & Treasuries: Captures the “safe money” currently sitting at Fidelity and Schwab. Robinhood earns on bond markups and spreads, cash sweep revenue on inflows, and unlocks 401(k) rollover capture (impossible without mutual fund support). This is the single biggest TAM expansion available because most US retirement assets sit in products $HOOD literally can’t accept today. Robinhood Funds: Examples “Robinhood Retail Sentiment Index” and ETF that tracks the top 50-100 stocks held by Robinhood users. “Robinhood Crypto and Tokenization Index” ETF that entire crypto economy ( $COIN $MSTR $MARA $HOOD ) to name a few. Robinhood would make margin on expense ratios.

• 
  $XRPARMY (@JoshMcKinney18) reported 58 minutes ago

  @_Crypto_Barbie Bitstamp already had the XRPL relationship. Robinhood just bought the on-ramp. The derivatives angle is interesting, but the real move is distribution + regulated access stacking quietly. Rails first. Size later.

• 
  CrypNews TV (@cryp_news) reported 58 minutes ago

  🟢 The MiCA transition deadline hit on July 1 — and these are the exchanges that made the cut. Coinbase (Luxembourg), Kraken (Ireland), OKX/Crypto.com/Gate (Malta), Bitstamp (Luxembourg), Bitvavo/Bybit EU/WhiteBIT EU, Trade Republic (Germany). ~230 CASP licenses issued across the EU so far. Full authorization = access to all 30 EEA countries under one passport. #MiCA #Crypto #EU