Recherche vérifiée par sources: Kraken

Verified source facts

1. Kraken scheduled Prime WebSocket and FIX API maintenance for September 17, 2026. 2. The maintenance notice described a short connectivity interruption for the affected APIs. 3. Separate status incidents described delayed funding or deposits not yet credited to account balances. 4. A component-specific status incident does not prove that unrelated exchange components are unavailable.

Comparison at a glance

1. Compare component on the same job

A platform comparison becomes useful only when both venues are measured against one job. For component, that job concerns API or funding gateway. Marketing pages frequently describe broad capability while the actual decision lives in a specific pair, contract, network, entity, or account tier. Build two evidence rows from the same timestamp, then name exactly. Until that check is complete, neither venue earns the point.

The comparison should distinguish a published ceiling from an executable outcome. A fee table does not reveal slippage; a product menu does not prove regional eligibility; a security feature page does not prove the control is enabled on the reader's account. Record the route from public statement to authenticated evidence. The unresolved variable is scope confusion, so the scorecard must preserve that blank instead of awarding a speculative advantage.

For component, connect the finding to the reader's actual order plan rather than the other nine rows in the abstract. Document how API or funding gateway changes the entry, exit, monitoring, or fallback decision, and make the operator name exactly. The remaining uncertainty—scope confusion—belongs in the dated scorecard. That produces a job-specific preference instead of a permanent winner.

2. Compare event type on the same job

For event type, that job concerns scheduled or incident. Build two evidence rows from the same timestamp, then classify state.

The unresolved variable is wrong urgency, so the scorecard must preserve that blank instead of awarding a speculative advantage.

For event type, connect the finding to the reader's actual order plan rather than the other nine rows in the abstract. Document how scheduled or incident changes the entry, exit, monitoring, or fallback decision, and make the operator classify state. The remaining uncertainty—wrong urgency—belongs in the dated scorecard.

3. Compare start time on the same job

For start time, that job concerns UTC timestamp. Build two evidence rows from the same timestamp, then convert locally.

The unresolved variable is missed window, so the scorecard must preserve that blank instead of awarding a speculative advantage.

For start time, connect the finding to the reader's actual order plan rather than the other nine rows in the abstract. Document how UTC timestamp changes the entry, exit, monitoring, or fallback decision, and make the operator convert locally. The remaining uncertainty—missed window—belongs in the dated scorecard.

4. Compare api effect on the same job

For api effect, that job concerns connectivity interruption. Build two evidence rows from the same timestamp, then pause automation.

The unresolved variable is duplicate order, so the scorecard must preserve that blank instead of awarding a speculative advantage.

For api effect, connect the finding to the reader's actual order plan rather than the other nine rows in the abstract. Document how connectivity interruption changes the entry, exit, monitoring, or fallback decision, and make the operator pause automation. The remaining uncertainty—duplicate order—belongs in the dated scorecard.

5. Compare funding effect on the same job

For funding effect, that job concerns credit or transfer delay. Build two evidence rows from the same timestamp, then retain transaction ID.

The unresolved variable is balance mismatch, so the scorecard must preserve that blank instead of awarding a speculative advantage.

For funding effect, connect the finding to the reader's actual order plan rather than the other nine rows in the abstract. Document how credit or transfer delay changes the entry, exit, monitoring, or fallback decision, and make the operator retain transaction ID. The remaining uncertainty—balance mismatch—belongs in the dated scorecard.

6. Compare asset scope on the same job

For asset scope, that job concerns named networks. Build two evidence rows from the same timestamp, then match asset.

The unresolved variable is overgeneralization, so the scorecard must preserve that blank instead of awarding a speculative advantage.

For asset scope, connect the finding to the reader's actual order plan rather than the other nine rows in the abstract. Document how named networks changes the entry, exit, monitoring, or fallback decision, and make the operator match asset. The remaining uncertainty—overgeneralization—belongs in the dated scorecard.

7. Compare trading ui on the same job

For trading ui, that job concerns may remain available. Build two evidence rows from the same timestamp, then verify separately.

The unresolved variable is false health signal, so the scorecard must preserve that blank instead of awarding a speculative advantage.

For trading ui, connect the finding to the reader's actual order plan rather than the other nine rows in the abstract. Document how may remain available changes the entry, exit, monitoring, or fallback decision, and make the operator verify separately. The remaining uncertainty—false health signal—belongs in the dated scorecard.

8. Compare recovery on the same job

For recovery, that job concerns official completed or resolved state. Build two evidence rows from the same timestamp, then wait for update.

The unresolved variable is premature retry, so the scorecard must preserve that blank instead of awarding a speculative advantage.

For recovery, connect the finding to the reader's actual order plan rather than the other nine rows in the abstract. Document how official completed or resolved state changes the entry, exit, monitoring, or fallback decision, and make the operator wait for update. The remaining uncertainty—premature retry—belongs in the dated scorecard.

9. Compare reconciliation on the same job

For reconciliation, that job concerns orders and balances. Build two evidence rows from the same timestamp, then compare records.

The unresolved variable is orphan event, so the scorecard must preserve that blank instead of awarding a speculative advantage.

For reconciliation, connect the finding to the reader's actual order plan rather than the other nine rows in the abstract. Document how orders and balances changes the entry, exit, monitoring, or fallback decision, and make the operator compare records. The remaining uncertainty—orphan event—belongs in the dated scorecard.

10. Compare stop rule on the same job

For stop rule, that job concerns component state unclear. Build two evidence rows from the same timestamp, then do not resend blindly.

The unresolved variable is support ticket, so the scorecard must preserve that blank instead of awarding a speculative advantage.

For stop rule, connect the finding to the reader's actual order plan rather than the other nine rows in the abstract. Document how component state unclear changes the entry, exit, monitoring, or fallback decision, and make the operator do not resend blindly. The remaining uncertainty—support ticket—belongs in the dated scorecard.

Decision scenarios

Scenario 1: when component becomes decisive

Consider a reader whose main constraint is API or funding gateway. The correct response is not to infer a universal platform or product winner. It is to name exactly, retain the evidence, and define a stop condition before funds or permissions are committed. If the evidence changes, the decision must be reopened. This produces a repeatable operating rule rather than a one-time opinion.

Scenario 2: when event type becomes decisive

Consider a reader whose main constraint is scheduled or incident. It is to classify state, retain the evidence, and define a stop condition before funds or permissions are committed.

Scenario 3: when start time becomes decisive

Consider a reader whose main constraint is UTC timestamp. It is to convert locally, retain the evidence, and define a stop condition before funds or permissions are committed.

Scenario 4: when api effect becomes decisive

Consider a reader whose main constraint is connectivity interruption. It is to pause automation, retain the evidence, and define a stop condition before funds or permissions are committed.

Scenario 5: when funding effect becomes decisive

Consider a reader whose main constraint is credit or transfer delay. It is to retain transaction ID, retain the evidence, and define a stop condition before funds or permissions are committed.

Scenario 6: when asset scope becomes decisive

Consider a reader whose main constraint is named networks. It is to match asset, retain the evidence, and define a stop condition before funds or permissions are committed.

Sources and editorial method

• Current incidents and maintenance — Kraken Status
• API documentation — Kraken
• Crypto deposit guide — Kraken Support