Strategy Pushes Back Against MSCI’s Proposed Cryptocurrency Treasury Exclusion

A New Screen Threatens Cryptocurrency Treasuries

Index provider MSCI has proposed fresh eligibility criteria targeting what it calls “non-operating companies.” The initiative flags firms whose operating assets fall short of half their total assets, requiring them to pass a screening process involving five financial metrics: operating asset intensity, expense ratios, cash flow characteristics, fair-value volatility, and external financing dependence. Companies triggering four of these five criteria would become ineligible for MSCI’s Global Investable Market Indexes, with existing members required to fail the screen in two consecutive annual reviews before removal.

Strategy Contests the Initiative as Discriminatory

Strategy, the publicly traded Bitcoin treasury company, has formally objected to the proposal, with Executive Chairman Michael Saylor and CEO Phong Le requesting withdrawal of the measure. In a statement released Monday, they characterized the proposal as “discriminatory, arbitrary, and misguided,” alleging it functions as a mechanism to eliminate firms holding significant cryptocurrency positions. They contend the screen resurrects concepts from a 50% crypto-holdings threshold that MSCI rejected in January.

If implemented in November, Strategy would face the steepest consequences. With a float-adjusted market capitalization of $23.93 billion, it represents roughly 87% of the total market value affected across all six flagged companies. Two other firms would face outright deletion: Yellow Cake, a uranium-focused enterprise at $1.81 billion, and Japan’s Metaplanet at $654 million. Three additional crypto-related firms—including Ethereum treasury operator SharpLink—would land on a monitoring watchlist.

Strategy’s challenge emphasizes its accounting treatment of Bitcoin holdings. The company classifies its cryptocurrency treasury as a distinct operating segment and records Bitcoin fair-value adjustments within operating expenses, treatment it argues means the company would not trigger two of the five proposed flags. Leadership frames index removal as damaging primarily to MSCI’s credibility as an impartial benchmark provider rather than to Strategy’s operations.

Broader Stakes for Digital Asset Adoption

The dispute reflects mounting tension over how to classify corporate treasuries holding digital assets within traditional indexing frameworks. Funds tracking MSCI’s Global Investable Market Indexes currently hold approximately 3.1% of Strategy’s basic shares, indicating material investor exposure through passive vehicles tracking these benchmarks.

Index exclusion carries outsized symbolic weight regardless of direct financial impact. Removal often influences trading liquidity and valuations through signaling effects to asset managers and passive investors. As more corporations adopt cryptocurrency treasury strategies, index providers face a consequential choice: adapt methodologies to accommodate evolving corporate finance practices, or entrench conventional operating-company definitions. MSCI’s decision may establish a precedent for whether digital asset treasuries—and by extension, cryptocurrency as a legitimate corporate store of value—can gain acceptance within mainstream institutional investment structures. This benchmark battle could ultimately determine whether cryptocurrency finds its place in institutional portfolios or remains confined to the periphery of traditional finance.

Source: MSCI, via Decrypt. Not financial advice.