Bitget Hack Leaves CEO Doubtful About Recovering $388M
Bitget CEO Gracy Chen said she is not optimistic that the exchange can fully freeze or recover the $388 million lost in last week’s Bitget hack. She cited the 2025 Bybit hack as a reference point: Bybit reportedly froze or recovered about $80 million from approximately $1.5 billion in stolen Ether, with only around 3.5% frozen after roughly a year.
Bitget launched a bounty programme offering 5% of funds frozen and another 5% of funds recovered. NEAR Intents said it blocked more than $50 million linked to the attack and froze about $500,000. Tether and Circle also blacklisted an exploit-related wallet, freezing $318,013 in USDT and USDC.
The Bitget hack is among the largest crypto security incidents of 2026. The exchange initially estimated losses at $352 million before revising the figure to $388 million after reviewing additional transfers. Withdrawals have resumed in stages, beginning with Bitcoin on Monday and Ether on Tuesday.
Chen said preliminary evidence pointed to North Korea-linked attackers, although Bitget has not completely ruled out an insider role. The incident highlights ongoing exchange security risks, weak recovery prospects after major crypto hacks and potential short-term pressure on user confidence and affected assets.
Bearish
The expected market impact is bearish because the Bitget hack involves a reported $388 million loss and the exchange’s CEO has expressed limited confidence in recovering the funds. Large exchange breaches can trigger short-term withdrawals, risk reduction and selling pressure, particularly if users fear insolvency, frozen accounts or further asset movements by attackers.
The incident may also weigh on sentiment across the exchange sector. Bybit’s 2025 hack provides a relevant comparison: only a small share of the stolen funds was frozen or recovered after about a year. That history suggests recovery efforts may have limited immediate effect on market confidence. Stablecoin issuers freezing linked wallets and NEAR Intents blocking assets could reduce the amount attackers can liquidate, which may contain direct market pressure.
Short-term traders may monitor Bitget withdrawals, wallet activity, exchange outflows, affected token prices and any evidence of additional fund freezes. If withdrawals continue normally and recovery efforts improve, the broader impact could fade. However, further transfers, operational disruptions or evidence of an insider attack could intensify exchange counterparty concerns.
Longer term, the event is likely to increase demand for self-custody, proof-of-reserves transparency, stronger wallet controls and stricter exchange security standards. It is negative for confidence in centralized crypto platforms, but the article does not indicate systemic contagion or a broad liquidation event. The bearish classification therefore reflects elevated risk sentiment and possible localized selling pressure rather than a guaranteed market-wide collapse.