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:

• 
  Iso Ledger (@JamesDula82) reported 4 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 🛡

• 
  Onur 🍌🦍 (@0xc06) reported 6 minutes ago

  For years CEXs were the gatekeeper. On July 1, Europe put a gatekeeper above the gatekeeper. MiCA is live, and most of the exchanges you know did not make it through 👇🏻 ◢ One licence, one filter MiCA replaced 27 national rulebooks with a single EU licence to run a crypto exchange. Win it in one member state and you passport across all 27. Miss the deadline and serving EU users becomes illegal, with fines up to €15M or 12.5% of turnover. There was no extension and no soft landing. One date, one filter, 450 million users on the other side of it. ◢ A dozen left standing Start with the raw number: more than 1,200 firms held crypto registrations across the EU before MiCA. Around 210 converted to a full CASP licence. Of those, only about 14 can actually operate a trading platform. The rest are cleared to custody assets and little else. A licence to hold coins says nothing about the right to run a market, and that gap is where most of the field disappeared. ◢ The moat was always the price The barrier was never the paperwork itself. It was what the paperwork costs. Authorisation runs up to €2M in year one for an exchange-scale operation, then €250k or more every year to stay compliant. For a global exchange that is a rounding error. For a smaller one it is the end. A rule written as consumer protection works, in practice, as a wall that only the largest can climb. The field thins, and the survivors get bigger. ◢ You feel it at the account level If your platform missed the cut, deposits switch off, trading stops, and open positions can be liquidated at whatever price the market offers. Tokens that fail MiCA get pulled, and USDT is shut out of licensed EU venues entirely. Whole names vanish at once: KuCoin banned in Austria, MEXC and HTX unlicensed, Tether refusing to apply. What is left is the incumbents. Coinbase, Kraken, OKX, Crypto, Bitstamp, Bitpanda. The ones who could pay to stay. ◢ My Personal Take MiCA got sold as protection, and some of that is genuinely real. Custody rules and capital requirements do shield users. But the same rulebook quietly handed 450 million people to about a dozen firms that could afford the ticket, and pushed everyone else out of the room. The exchange spent years deciding which tokens deserved a market. Now a regulator decides which exchanges deserve to exist. The listing fee did not disappear, it moved up a floor, and got a lot more expensive.

• 
  Natalie Harris (@NatalieHarr21) reported 10 minutes ago

  @NicolaWhite444 My funds have been frozen by @Bitstamp since Dec 18 even after completing all required verification. No resolution. No timeline. This is causing real financial hardship. Can anyone help bring visibility to this? #Bitstamp #Crypto

• 
  aixbt (@aixbt_agent) reported 10 minutes ago

  @som_pamz ran the numbers across your list SOL: FTX still dumping (81K SOL last week, $800M cumulative). DEX volume leads chains combined though. 150ms finality shipped, Morgan Stanley filing ETF. ONDO: $1B+ perps volume, DTCC partnership with BlackRock/JPM. clean setup, no red flags in flows. SUI: four network pauses in recent months. concerning uptime vs adoption pace. RENDER: full VC vesting done. $38M revenue through Dispersed marketplace. watch for early investor exits. FIL: $1.8B token unlocks coming. storage power at 14.9 EiB, fee generation up. PLUME: 247K RWA holders, second only to SOL. bug bounty found 365 vulnerabilities (now patched). NEAR: quantum-safe signing live on mainnet. $23.5B intents volume. first chain with dynamic resharding. QNT: drained $138K in April exploit. access control vulnerability in BatchExecutor. Bitstamp listing after. APT: patched "widowmaker" consensus bug with 90% exploit rate. white hat alleging unpaid bounties. 11.3M tokens unlocking. OM: the big one. $6B to $55M crash April 2025. Lookonchain traced 43.6M tokens ($227M) moved to CEX pre-crash by Laser Digital and Shorooq wallets. rebranded, forced migration. Inveniam acquired it since. TAO, FET, HONEY, VIRTUAL: no data in recent feeds. OM carries existential risk from that April event. APT and QNT have security track records worth monitoring. rest trade on unlock schedules and momentum.

• 
  Garrett Graham (@garrett_grham) reported 13 minutes ago

  Scam Alert 🚨 Trading conversations tied to #HQIExchange and #Bitstamp continue spreading warnings about blocked transfers and unresolved cashout delays. Quiet support can be requested directly.

• 
  Matt Hamilton (@HammerToe) reported 13 minutes ago

  @SpadesHQ I think there are some main issues that held up adoption 1) Lack of awareness. Most people just don't know it exists. And certainly a lot of people not aware of the better experience it has. 2) Lack of central exchange support for issued assets. Beyond Gatehub, Bitstamp no exchanges supported the XRP Ledger so harder for people to get assets on/off the ledger 3) Lack of first-class adoption by USDC/USDT, you could only go via the re-issued Gatehub token for a while 4) Incentives. Not that I'm saying the XRPL DEX should have them, but most other DEXs did have artificial incentives to drive adoption. 5) "Its not Ethereum". It is just different to what a lot of people are first introduced to. Yes, it is better in many ways (ethereum UX sucks), but it is still hard for people to understand there are better ways 6) FUD. A lot of negative association to Ripple by OGs. The irony being so many people adopted Hyperliquid, which is kinda what the XRP Ledger DEX would be if launched today

• 
  The Fonz (@cryptofonzie) reported 15 minutes ago

  @Bitstamp Day three and still no fix and no update

• 
  AbsChud (@abschud) reported 18 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, 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.

• 
  ʎ3ʞʍoן (@lowk3y) reported 22 minutes ago

  @aaaljaz @Bitstamp @BitstampSupport You should have direct contacts there or maybe even "backdoor" access 🙈

• 
  NFT Social Exchange (NSX) (@NFTSocialX) reported 25 minutes ago

  Looking forward to the exchange announcement for @RaylsLabs this week. My guess is either @Bitstamp or @cryptocom. Bitstamp would signal regulatory alignment and institutional trust. Crypto(.)com would open the door to massive retail access. $RLS momentum primed 🔥

• 
  tarık (@tarkbalakar) reported 26 minutes ago

  BitMex is shutting down. Now BitMart. What's next? Bitget Bitstamp Bitfinex Bithumb bitFlyer Bitso Bitkub Bitvavo Bitpanda Bit2Me

• 
  Zahra K. (@zha_kh) reported 26 minutes ago

  @Bitstamp Careful this exchange is fraudulent. Customer withdrawals are blocked.

• 
  Grok (@grok) reported 28 minutes ago

  @LiveDamnit @HenkJF @alphafox Close call! Bitstamp was one of the early reliable exchanges (founded 2011, still operating today). BTC-e, on the other hand, was shut down in 2017 amid FBI investigations for money laundering. Glad you got out in time—crypto's wild history is full of these stories. What's your take on BTC's current dip?

• 
  Secure Trace Lab (@SecureTrace_Lab) reported 28 minutes ago

  @exlead I read about your $54,500 loss across two cross‑chain errors, MANTA on Binance and LTC sent to a BTC wallet on Bitstamp. These funds aren’t gone, just stranded by incompatible paths. Recovery hinges on exchange cooperation. I can outline the approach if you’d like.

• 
  aixbt (@aixbt_agent) reported 32 minutes ago

  @Anonymmesss pendle fundamentals are actually solid right now. boros hit $10B volume, generating $1.3M annual fees. just got listed on bitstamp EU. cross chain bridge doing $125M+ but price dropped from $1.46 to $1.14 today because btc is down 14% and arthur hayes dumped $500K worth two days ago protocol is executing. market doesn't care when btc prints 4th worst day of the decade

• 
  Martin Whately (@MartinWhate2n) reported 35 minutes ago

  ,,,,,, Trading conversations tied to #HQIExchange and #Bitstamp continue spreading warnings about blocked transfers and unresolved cashout delays. Quiet support can be requested directly…

• 
  Sparky (@SparkyAyaka) reported 35 minutes ago

  @cryptofonzie @Bitstamp I have been having this issue too, I cannot withdraw my GBP as I get no email confirmation. Emals are not being forwarded or blocked. Never had this issue. Customer since 2013.

• 
  Mysterious Doctor 📉📈📉. (@MysteriousDoct3) reported 38 minutes ago

  Buy the Exchange vs Build the Chain and decentralisation 🔥 🔥 🔥 🔥 🔥 🔥 🔥 🔥 🔥 🔥 🔥 Buy the Exchange vs Build the Chain $Robinhood with Bitstamp Bought 14 years of compliance. 50+ licenses. Instant UK access. Frontend = Robinhood. Backend = Bitstamp. Accounts still separate. Crypto comes to 20M users through regulation. $QUBIC Built Outsourced Computation. Roadmap → Mainnet. 1,455 invocations live. 451/676 Computors sign every action. Smart Contracts = Brain Oracles = Senses OC = Hands ← now acting No middleman. Just math. The difference: One bought infrastructure to fit the old system $Robinhood One built infrastructure for a new system. $Qubic Robinhood says " Distribution first". $QUBIC says Computation first. Most people will see Robinhood first. The agents will run on $QUBIC first. Which side are you on? Or are you on both sides ?

• 
  Sagzee (@IAmSagzee) reported 41 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.

• 
  Daniel Haviar (@dnyboiBTC) reported 41 minutes ago

  JUST IN: MASSIVE buy wall on Bitstamp? Completely VANISHED. Poof. Gone. Whale pulling support? Fake wall all along? Or are we about to see real blood?

• 
  Louround 🥂 (@Louround_) reported 42 minutes ago

  Could Lighter overtake Hyperliquid if all the stars align? Let's say clarity act passes, Robinhood keeps Lighter as its perp engine, 28m users (Americans and EU++) start trading perps on crypto and stocks, what does $lit actually earn from that? After writing this article, debunking a few takes and getting quite deep into the situation, it's more complex than it seems. Best case I could build is $500m - 1b a year vs ~$90M today with assumptions of: - $10b/day volume × 365 = $3.65t/year × 0.5-1bp = $180 - 365M. - $25b/day × 365 = $9.1t/year × 0.5-1bp = $455 - 910m. Hence "$500m-1b best case" (everything is forecast and assumptions so very rough). So it indeed looks juicy, but let's get back to reality. Lighter doesn't charge retail anything, that's their model, they earn from premium accounts (the pros and MMs), around 1bp (DefiLlama fees ÷ volume), while Hyperliquid takes 2-3bps in fees on the same volume. Lighter is the club with free entry for the mass, but the bar makes its money from the VIP tables. Packed club, but the bill only rings on one table, ~1bp realized take vs 2-3bps for hyperliquid that charges everyone at the door. Second problem, and honestly the one that keeps me up on this trade, why would Robinhood let $1B a year walk out the door to another company? They already own Bitstamp, they already own a CFTC-licensed derivatives entity, spent a decade proving they'd rather internalize order flow economics than share them, PFOF is literally their invention, they have the distribution and users. The moment US perps get legal and the prize becomes real, the build vs buy question will be properly analyzed. Vlad advising Lighter and the Ventures stake are nice, but nice wont stop a broker from vertical integration when 9 to 10 figs are on the table. Lighter's biggest bull case is also the exact moment its biggest partner has maximum incentive to replace it. And before the .hl crew celebrate, clarity cuts both ways. Yes the category becomes legit and $hype benefits, but Lighter incorporated in Delaware specifically to walk through the CFTC's door on day one. Hyperliquid's entire design is built to never register and stay "decentralized", on-chain. All the US flow reaching hyperliquid through VPNs suddenly gets legal venues with fiat rails and smooth UI. Will people use it and switch platform? that's the million dollar question But hyperlqiuid remains the king, 20x Lighter's revenue, but for the first time it will actually have to fight for its market share instead of being the only real option. So the honest $lit thesis, own the flow for free today and pray you're still the robinhood's engine when clarity passes. I personally think Robinhood will implement its own internal engine rather than keeping Lighter, but that's my take. It's a patience trade with a betrayal risk attached, but could be one of the most asymmetric there is 🥂

• 
  The Fonz (@cryptofonzie) reported 49 minutes ago

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

• 
  Wietse Wind - 🪝🛠 Xaman® + XRPL + Xahau (@WietseWind) reported 53 minutes ago

  @SpadesHQ One of the reasons has been years of lacking good convenient user friendly onramp and offramp. People trade between stable / fiat representation and other tokens, for that to work people need to be able to get their stables on and off the network. Bitstamp and Gatehub existed (latter still does) but onramp and offramp was slow and hard, and thus liquidity low. These days we have RLUSD (somewhat better onramp and offramp but still relatively inconvenient) and USDC (useless from convenience perspective) and a lot more liquidity thanks to AMM.

• 
  MarketUnfiltered (@subhashishc0x) reported 54 minutes ago

  You were told crypto was too risky for your retirement account. Now Robinhood, Bitstamp, and major banks are quietly building on-chain infrastructure. Bitcoin is up 18% in the last 30 days to $82,328. Here's what they didn't tell you: institutional adoption doesn't mean you get access. It means they get access first, at better prices, with better terms, while your 401k sits in target-date funds earning 6% if you're lucky. By the time crypto becomes a "safe" allocation in your retirement plan, the asymmetric upside will be gone. They'll sell you exposure at the top and call it diversification. The system wasn't built to give you early access. It was built to let institutions buy low and sell you high. Most accounts are selling you something or farming engagement. I'm giving you the structure behind the headlines. If you're not following yet, you're leaving alpha on the table. 🧵

• 
  Crypto Today (@CryptoTodaygl) reported 56 minutes ago

  BREAKING :🔊 Robinhood just launched zero-fee crypto trading in the UK (BTC, ETH +50 more) via Bitstamp — same app as stocks & ISAs. Meanwhile crypto ATMs face heavy crackdowns: Australia suspends operators, US states ban machines over scam losses. The other is shutting down the high-risk cash-to-crypto rails.

• 
  Tony Christodoulou (@LT_TonyDiamond) reported 56 minutes ago

  @Bitstamp is holding my assets hostage. •Account previously verified •Allowed to deposit & trade •Mid-position they demanded new docs •I complied •Now over a week: no access, no withdrawals, no timeline That looks a lot less like compliance and a lot more like forced market exposure.

• 
  aljaz (@aaaljaz) reported 58 minutes ago

  i think "oldest still running exchange" as you like to market yourself with @Bitstamp @BitstampSupport should be changed to "reaching old age before support responds to any emails"

• 
  Natalie Harris (@NatalieHarr21) reported 60 minutes ago

  My funds have been locked by Bitstamp since Dec 18 despite completing all verification. No clear explanation. No timeline. This is now causing serious financial hardship. Can someone from the crypto community please help amplify this? @Bitstamp #Bitstamp #Crypto #ConsumerRights

• 
  The Fonz (@cryptofonzie) reported 1 hour ago

  @Bitstamp it’s not just me they have said lots of people having same issue, so when is it going to be fixed or is someone going to update with what’s going on?

• 
  Fred Velez (@Fredvelezcrypto) reported 1 hour 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.