Centralized exchange AscendEX is facing mounting scrutiny after users reported prolonged withdrawal delays, missing transaction hashes and unresponsive support, prompting on-chain investigator ZachXBT to flag potential liquidity issues. The combination of user grievances and blockchain data has raised questions about the platform’s solvency and operational resilience.
ZachXBT issued a community alert stating he observed multiple reports of withdrawals stuck for days or weeks, or not processed at all. He subsequently reviewed AscendEX’s known hot wallets using analysis tools Arkham and TRM, and found the wallets appeared to lack substantial holdings of major tokens such as ETH, USDT, USDC and SOL — assets he would expect in a functioning exchange’s working capital.
User complaints describe withdrawals remaining in an “initiating” state with no blockchain transaction ID, even after funds have been removed from the available balance. In one instance, a user claimed a withdrawal had been frozen for over a week without a TXID. Another reported a PAXG withdrawal delayed for approximately ten days, coinciding with thin trading activity in the relevant market.
AscendEX, formerly BitMax, has not issued a public response to the liquidity concerns. The exchange, founded in 2018, offers spot, margin, futures and staking products. It was breached in December 2021 for roughly $78 million in a hack later attributed to the Lazarus Group, and in May 2026 it temporarily suspended two stablecoin markets following abnormal token minting. Its help center acknowledges that deposits and withdrawals may be postponed due to wallet maintenance, blockchain network issues or compliance reviews, but none of these explanations directly address the current scale of complaints.
Withdrawal delays are particularly sensitive in the crypto industry, as similar patterns have preceded exchange collapses. Even unverified reports can erode user confidence, especially for mid-sized platforms competing against larger venues with deeper liquidity and greater transparency. Scammers have already begun targeting affected users with fake “recovery” services demanding upfront fees.
ZachXBT stopped short of declaring insolvency, noting that thin hot wallet balances alone do not prove a liquidity crisis because most exchanges keep the bulk of their assets in cold storage. However, the volume of user reports and the lack of public communication intensify concerns. The situation remains a confidence test rather than a confirmed liquidity event.
