Gracy Chen measures Bitget's odds of recovering $388 million against Bybit's 3.5%
Bitget CEO Gracy Chen expects to recover little of the $388 million stolen from the exchange, citing Bybit's 3.5% freeze rate. On that benchmark about $13.6 million is frozen within a year and roughly $374 million stays with whoever carries the loss.
The Investor · Invest desk
What happened
- Bitget first reported a $352 million loss after last Thursday's attack, and Chen later raised the figure to $388 million after a fuller count of transfers.
- Freezes tied to the attack total about $818,000 so far: roughly $500,000 held by NEAR Intents and $318,013 in stablecoins blacklisted by Tether and Circle.
- Drift Foundation's September 30 update restated its aim to reclaim roughly $295.4 million taken on April 1 through freezes, a bounty or other means, with little returned.
Why it matters
- What doesn't add up contradiction Chen picked the low end of her own example: Bybit's totals imply 5.3%, and the gap between the two benchmarks is worth about $7 million on Bitget's loss.
- What it costs cost Bitget's 5% bounty on frozen and recovered funds would cost it roughly $680,000 at Chen's rate and about $1 million at Bybit's own figures.
- What it limits constraint The $3.9 million in ZEC that linked wallets moved into Zcash's Ironwood shielded pool is out of reach of the issuer blacklists and router blocks behind every Bitget freeze so far.
- Who's exposed exposure Whether Bitget users bear any of this turns on whether the exchange absorbs the loss, and Cryptopolitan's report does not say whether it has covered their balances.
Next story · Invest · Oct 3
Issuers and protocols have frozen about 0.2% of the $387 million taken from BitgetConfirmed3 publishers
Chen said on September 29 that she was not very optimistic, because a year or so after Bybit's hack it had been able to freeze only about 3.5% of the total stolen funds, and she called Bybit's February 2025 theft a "good reference point" [8][7]. Her percentage is smaller than her example. Bybit's $80 million recovered or frozen, set against $1.5 billion taken, is 5.3% [18]. At 3.5%, the figure would be about $52.5 million [19]. Cryptopolitan, which reported the remarks, notes that freezing is not the same as recovery [17], and the gap between the two numbers may be that distinction.
Applied to Bitget's $388 million, the two rates give about $13.6 million [27] or $20.7 million [28]. Freezes reported so far, according to Cryptopolitan, come to about 0.2% of the loss [20].
Drift shows what the first six months look like. Its loss was pegged at $285 million, more than half the protocol's total value [13], while the foundation's latest update cites $295.4 million [12], a $10.4 million difference [24]. The attackers spent about six months posing as a quantitative trading firm, met Drift contributors face to face and deposited over $1 million before the theft [14]. The money sat largely untouched through the spring. Then a wallet tagged "Drift Exploiter 4" sent 23,095.1 ETH, about $44.4 million, to Tornado Cash on July 23 and 24 [15]. That was roughly 15% of the stolen total, 113 days after the hack [22][25]. ZachXBT has stopped tracking the funds; he said the task was "difficult for a team and not feasible for a single person" [16]. At Bybit, chief executive Ben Zhou said almost 28% of the money, about $420 million, had gone dark by April 2025 through mixers and cross-chain bridges [10][23].
Bitget could still beat both benchmarks. NEAR Intents blocked over $50 million linked to the attack [4], or 12.9% of the loss [21]. If that money turns out to be held and claimable, Bitget's early rate is already more than twice Bybit's 5.3% [26]. The other route is a court. Bybit sued North Korea, its Reconnaissance General Bureau and the Lazarus Group in US federal court and won a preliminary injunction to freeze identified assets [11].
I'd expect Bitget's frozen total a year from now to sit nearer Chen's $13.6 million than NEAR's $50 million. Drift's funds reached a mixer in under four months, and a popular independent investigator has since stopped following them [25][16]. The counter-case is speed: a NEAR team and two stablecoin issuers acted against Bitget-linked funds within about a week of the attack [2][4][5]. The view is wrong if confirmed freezes pass $20.7 million, the top of the range Bybit's own figures allow [28].
What to watch
- What happens to the $50 million-plus NEAR Intents blocked: returned to Bitget, held under a freeze, or simply turned away.
- Whether Bitget follows Bybit into US federal court to seek an injunction against identified assets.
Information, not investment advice. This story is general information about companies and markets, drawn from cited reporting. It is not a recommendation to buy, sell or hold any security; check the cited sources before acting.
Clarity's read
What the record supports and how the coverage leans. The claims behind it follow.
Reality
- Evidence55
- Adoption
- Not scored
- Hype gap+15
- Incentives40
- Confidence50
Claim ledger
Ranked by verification strength, evidence, and original report placement.
- [1]
Bitget CEO Gracy Chen has said she does not believe the $388 million stolen from her company will be recovered.
- [2]
Bitget reported an initial $352 million loss after last Thursday's incident; Chen later stated the actual amount was $388 million after a fuller accounting of transfers.
- [3]
Bitget placed a bounty of 5% of frozen and recovered funds.
- [4]
The NEAR Intents team blocked over $50 million linked to the Bitget incident and froze about $500,000.
- [5]
Tether and Circle blacklisted a wallet linked to the Bitget attack holding $318,013 in stablecoins.
- [6]
Wallets linked to the Bitget hack have moved around $3.9 million in ZEC into Zcash's Ironwood shielded pool.
- [7]
On Tuesday, September 29, Chen said the February 2025 Bybit incident would be used as a "good reference point" for Bitget's loss.
- [8]
"I'm actually not very optimistic because after a year or so of Bybit's hack, they've only [been able to freeze] about 3.5% of the total stolen funds,"
- [9]
Hackers took $1.5 billion in Ether from Bybit in February 2025; Bybit has recovered or frozen a total of $80 million.
- [10]
Bybit CEO Ben Zhou reported that almost 28% of the stolen money had gone dark by April 2025 after passing through mixers and cross-chain bridges.
- [11]
Bybit sued North Korea, its Reconnaissance General Bureau and the Lazarus Group in a US federal court, which granted a preliminary injunction to freeze identified assets.
- [12]
Drift Foundation's September 30 update on X reiterated its commitment to reclaiming roughly $295.4 million stolen from users on April 1 via freezes, a bounty or other methods; little has been returned.
- [13]
Drift's loss was pegged at $285 million and made up over 50% of Drift's total value; the hack is North Korea-linked.
- [14]
The Drift scheme ran about six months; the scammers presented themselves as a quantitative trading firm, met Drift contributors face to face and deposited over $1 million before the theft.
- [15]
Drift's stolen funds stayed largely untouched through the spring; a wallet tagged "Drift Exploiter 4" sent 23,095.1 ETH, about $44.4 million, to Tornado Cash on July 23 and 24.
- [16]
Investigator ZachXBT stopped tracking the Drift funds, saying the task was "difficult for a team and not feasible for a single person."
- [17]
Cryptopolitan notes that freezing stolen funds is not the same as recovering them.
- [18]
Bybit's $80 million recovered or frozen is about 5.3% of the $1.5 billion stolen.
- [19]
3.5% of Bybit's $1.5 billion loss is about $52.5 million.
- [20]
Bitget-linked freezes so far total about $818,013, roughly 0.2% of the $388 million loss.
- [21]
The more than $50 million NEAR Intents blocked is about 12.9% of Bitget's $388 million loss.
- [22]
The $44.4 million sent to Tornado Cash is roughly 15% of Drift's $295.4 million stolen total.
- [23]
Almost 28% of Bybit's $1.5 billion is about $420 million gone dark.
- [24]
Drift's two loss figures differ by $10.4 million.
- [25]
Drift's funds reached Tornado Cash 113 days after the April 1 hack, under four months.
- [26]
A 12.9% early rate would be more than twice Bybit's implied 5.3%.
- [27]
Applying Chen's 3.5% to Bitget's $388 million gives about $13.6 million frozen.
- [28]
Applying Bybit's implied 5.3% to Bitget's $388 million gives about $20.7 million.
- [29]
Bitget's 5% bounty would cost about $680,000 at a 3.5% freeze rate and about $1 million at Bybit's implied 5.3%.
- [30]
At a 3.5% freeze rate, about $374 million of Bitget's $388 million loss is never frozen.
- [31]
The gap between the 5.3% and 3.5% benchmarks is about $7.1 million on Bitget's loss.
Sources
2 independent publishers whose own reporting we read for this story.
- cointelegraph.comBitget ‘gradually back to usual’ as protection fund reaches $309M
1 article · September 30, 2026
- cryptopolitan.comDrift's recovery update shows why Gracy Chen isn't optimistic about Bitget's $388M
1 article · September 30, 2026
Topics and entities
Topics
- Crypto exchange hacks
- Stolen crypto recovery
- Crypto mixers and privacy pools