The post Strategy Pushes Back Against MSCI Over Bitcoin Treasury Exclusion Proposal appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Bitcoin A dispute has emerged between Strategy and index giant MSCI over how companies with large Bitcoin positions should be treated inside major equity benchmarks. According to Strategy, the index provider’s latest consultation risks damaging market integrity and mischaracterizing how corporates use digital assets. Key Takeaways Strategy says MSCI’s digital asset exclusion logic misunderstands how corporate Bitcoin treasuries function. The firm argues the proposed threshold would destabilize indexes due to asset price volatility and inconsistent accounting. Strategy claims the policy would undermine national efforts to advance digital asset adoption.  Strategy said it chose to respond publicly because it believes MSCI has conflated Bitcoin treasuries with dedicated investment vehicles. The firm stressed that the Bitcoin on its balance sheet is not a passive stash but an extension of its business model — tied to liquidity management, product innovation, and long-term positioning. This argument echoes comments made in recent months by Michael Saylor, who has repeatedly described Bitcoin as a strategic corporate reserve rather than a speculative sideline. Strategy reinforced that message in its letter, underscoring that the company remains an operating software and analytics enterprise, not merely a digital asset accumulator. Volatility-Based Inclusion Rules Seen as Destabilizing At the center of Strategy’s challenge is MSCI’s proposal to exclude firms whose balance sheets exceed 50% exposure to digital assets. Strategy called the threshold “without technical basis,” suggesting it would cause indexes to behave erratically because crypto prices move at a pace traditional accounting systems are not built to absorb. If applied, Strategy argued, index composition could change suddenly as asset prices swing — forcing investors to adjust holdings rapidly and arbitrarily. The firm warned that such instability would contradict MSCI’s stated principles around transparent and predictable index construction. Disagreement Extends to Policy Direction Beyond mechanics, Strategy positioned the consultation as being at… The post Strategy Pushes Back Against MSCI Over Bitcoin Treasury Exclusion Proposal appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Bitcoin A dispute has emerged between Strategy and index giant MSCI over how companies with large Bitcoin positions should be treated inside major equity benchmarks. According to Strategy, the index provider’s latest consultation risks damaging market integrity and mischaracterizing how corporates use digital assets. Key Takeaways Strategy says MSCI’s digital asset exclusion logic misunderstands how corporate Bitcoin treasuries function. The firm argues the proposed threshold would destabilize indexes due to asset price volatility and inconsistent accounting. Strategy claims the policy would undermine national efforts to advance digital asset adoption.  Strategy said it chose to respond publicly because it believes MSCI has conflated Bitcoin treasuries with dedicated investment vehicles. The firm stressed that the Bitcoin on its balance sheet is not a passive stash but an extension of its business model — tied to liquidity management, product innovation, and long-term positioning. This argument echoes comments made in recent months by Michael Saylor, who has repeatedly described Bitcoin as a strategic corporate reserve rather than a speculative sideline. Strategy reinforced that message in its letter, underscoring that the company remains an operating software and analytics enterprise, not merely a digital asset accumulator. Volatility-Based Inclusion Rules Seen as Destabilizing At the center of Strategy’s challenge is MSCI’s proposal to exclude firms whose balance sheets exceed 50% exposure to digital assets. Strategy called the threshold “without technical basis,” suggesting it would cause indexes to behave erratically because crypto prices move at a pace traditional accounting systems are not built to absorb. If applied, Strategy argued, index composition could change suddenly as asset prices swing — forcing investors to adjust holdings rapidly and arbitrarily. The firm warned that such instability would contradict MSCI’s stated principles around transparent and predictable index construction. Disagreement Extends to Policy Direction Beyond mechanics, Strategy positioned the consultation as being at…

Strategy Pushes Back Against MSCI Over Bitcoin Treasury Exclusion Proposal

2025/12/11 14:05
Bitcoin

A dispute has emerged between Strategy and index giant MSCI over how companies with large Bitcoin positions should be treated inside major equity benchmarks.

According to Strategy, the index provider’s latest consultation risks damaging market integrity and mischaracterizing how corporates use digital assets.

Key Takeaways

  • Strategy says MSCI’s digital asset exclusion logic misunderstands how corporate Bitcoin treasuries function.
  • The firm argues the proposed threshold would destabilize indexes due to asset price volatility and inconsistent accounting.
  • Strategy claims the policy would undermine national efforts to advance digital asset adoption. 

Strategy said it chose to respond publicly because it believes MSCI has conflated Bitcoin treasuries with dedicated investment vehicles. The firm stressed that the Bitcoin on its balance sheet is not a passive stash but an extension of its business model — tied to liquidity management, product innovation, and long-term positioning.

This argument echoes comments made in recent months by Michael Saylor, who has repeatedly described Bitcoin as a strategic corporate reserve rather than a speculative sideline. Strategy reinforced that message in its letter, underscoring that the company remains an operating software and analytics enterprise, not merely a digital asset accumulator.

Volatility-Based Inclusion Rules Seen as Destabilizing

At the center of Strategy’s challenge is MSCI’s proposal to exclude firms whose balance sheets exceed 50% exposure to digital assets. Strategy called the threshold “without technical basis,” suggesting it would cause indexes to behave erratically because crypto prices move at a pace traditional accounting systems are not built to absorb.

If applied, Strategy argued, index composition could change suddenly as asset prices swing — forcing investors to adjust holdings rapidly and arbitrarily. The firm warned that such instability would contradict MSCI’s stated principles around transparent and predictable index construction.

Disagreement Extends to Policy Direction

Beyond mechanics, Strategy positioned the consultation as being at odds with regulatory currents. It pointed to federal initiatives encouraging digital asset experimentation, indicating that MSCI’s exclusion logic could undercut national priorities around innovation and market integration.

With U.S. authorities pushing for clearer digital asset frameworks and encouraging corporate adoption, Strategy suggested that MSCI’s approach risks sending the opposite signal — particularly to companies exploring Bitcoin as a treasury asset.

Industry Eyes Outcome as Index Firms Adapt to Crypto

The exchange marks one of the more visible confrontations between a Bitcoin-heavy corporation and an index services provider. While MSCI has not finalized its decision, Strategy’s firm language highlights growing tension over how traditional finance tools accommodate companies holding digital assets.

Analysts expect close industry attention on MSCI’s next actions, as its benchmarks influence how trillions of dollars are allocated across global markets.


The information provided in this article is for educational purposes only and does not constitute financial, investment, or trading advice. Coindoo.com does not endorse or recommend any specific investment strategy or cryptocurrency. Always conduct your own research and consult with a licensed financial advisor before making any investment decisions.

Author

Alexander Zdravkov is a person who always looks for the logic behind things. He has more than 3 years of experience in the crypto space, where he skillfully identifies new trends in the world of digital currencies. Whether providing in-depth analysis or daily reports on all topics, his deep understanding and enthusiasm for what he does make him a valuable member of the team.

Related stories

Next article

Source: https://coindoo.com/strategy-pushes-back-against-msci-over-bitcoin-treasury-exclusion-proposal/

Disclaimer: The articles reposted on this site are sourced from public platforms and are provided for informational purposes only. They do not necessarily reflect the views of MEXC. All rights remain with the original authors. If you believe any content infringes on third-party rights, please contact [email protected] for removal. MEXC makes no guarantees regarding the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of the content and is not responsible for any actions taken based on the information provided. The content does not constitute financial, legal, or other professional advice, nor should it be considered a recommendation or endorsement by MEXC.

You May Also Like

3 Paradoxes of Altcoin Season in September

3 Paradoxes of Altcoin Season in September

The post 3 Paradoxes of Altcoin Season in September appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Analyses and data indicate that the crypto market is experiencing its most active altcoin season since early 2025, with many altcoins outperforming Bitcoin. However, behind this excitement lies a paradox. Most retail investors remain uneasy as their portfolios show little to no profit. This article outlines the main reasons behind this situation. Altcoin Market Cap Rises but Dominance Shrinks Sponsored TradingView data shows that the TOTAL3 market cap (excluding BTC and ETH) reached a new high of over $1.1 trillion in September. Yet the share of OTHERS (excluding the top 10) has declined since 2022, now standing at just 8%. OTHERS Dominance And TOTAL3 Capitalization. Source: TradingView. In past cycles, such as 2017 and 2021, TOTAL3 and OTHERS.D rose together. That trend reflected capital flowing not only into large-cap altcoins but also into mid-cap and low-cap ones. The current divergence shows that capital is concentrated in stablecoins and a handful of top-10 altcoins such as SOL, XRP, BNB, DOG, HYPE, and LINK. Smaller altcoins receive far less liquidity, making it hard for their prices to return to levels where investors previously bought. This creates a situation where only a few win while most face losses. Retail investors also tend to diversify across many coins instead of adding size to top altcoins. That explains why many portfolios remain stagnant despite a broader market rally. Sponsored “Position sizing is everything. Many people hold 25–30 tokens at once. A 100x on a token that makes up only 1% of your portfolio won’t meaningfully change your life. It’s better to make a few high-conviction bets than to overdiversify,” analyst The DeFi Investor said. Altcoin Index Surges but Investor Sentiment Remains Cautious The Altcoin Season Index from Blockchain Center now stands at 80 points. This indicates that over 80% of the top 50 altcoins outperformed…
Share
BitcoinEthereumNews2025/09/18 01:43