Sam Bankman-Fried on Friday pushed back against the common view of FTX’s collapse, saying the exchange was not insolvent when it failed in November 2022.
According to a document posted on X on October 31, 2025, his team argues the company suffered a sudden liquidity run rather than a balance-sheet shortfall.
The filing claims there are roughly $14.6 billion in estate assets versus about $8 billion in customer claims.
Claims Of Solvency And Asset Totals
Bankman-Fried’s filing asserts that roughly $8 billion of customer liabilities never left the exchange’s estate. It says legal and advisory costs have been sizable — roughly $1 billion — but that large asset recoveries since 2022 mean creditors are in line for healthy payouts.
Reports have disclosed that 98% of creditors have already been repaid about 120% of their claims, and the filing projects final customer repayments could fall between 119% and 143%.
[SBF says:]
This is where the money went. https://t.co/HVRwEw5Z1k https://t.co/5DrA13L5YE pic.twitter.com/O6q77DvmTn
— SBF (@SBF_FTX) October 31, 2025
The document shifts blame in part to outside advisers and the emergency management team brought in after the collapse.
It names the law firm Sullivan & Cromwell and interim CEO John J. Ray III as having steered the bankruptcy process in ways that, the filing contends, made rescue or rapid resolution harder.
The tone is defensive, and the numbers are presented as evidence that the estate can cover claims.
Critics Challenge The Account
But not everyone accepts that account. Based on reports from on-chain investigators and others, critics say the figures don’t settle the key question: was FTX solvent at the moment customers tried to withdraw funds?
On-chain researcher ZachXBT and other analysts point out that the value of many recovered assets has risen since November 2022, and that using today’s prices to declare past solvency can mislead.
The distinction between having assets that can eventually pay people and having liquid cash at the height of a run is at the center of the disagreement.
Investigators, court filings and prior testimony in criminal proceedings highlighted governance failures and risky ties with Alameda Research.
Those findings remain part of the public record and complicate any simple claim that the business was merely a victim of timing.
Legal observers also note that bankruptcy costs and litigation risk can meaningfully reduce what is ultimately available to customers.
What This Means For Customers And The Industry
For former customers, the most immediate question is how repayments are calculated. Reports have disclosed that some sums will be based on November 2022 valuations rather than current market prices.
That approach can leave users short if asset prices later climbed. Even if the estate yields payouts above 100% of claims, the timing and basis of those payments matter to actual recoveries.
If Bankman-Fried’s portrayal gains traction, it would reframe parts of the story from one of clear insolvency to a debate about timing, liquidity and post-collapse management.
Regulators and creditors are watching closely. The legal and financial aftermath of FTX’s failure is still unfolding, and competing narratives about responsibility and recovery will shape how similar collapses are handled in the future.
Featured image from Tom Williams/Getty Images, chart from TradingView
Related Posts
