In the world of institutional investment, another round of confrontation is brewing between traditional index providers and companies actively building up cryptocurrency reserves. This time, the spotlight is on Strategy, which has openly criticized MSCI's proposal to tighten the rules for including issuers in its indices. The company has called this move nothing less than "discriminatory and arbitrary."
The essence of MSCI's initiative is as follows: if less than half of a company's assets are not directly tied to its core business, the issuer may be subject to additional review. The result of such a review could well be exclusion from index baskets, which would automatically hit the liquidity and attractiveness of the securities for major funds.
The test scenario has already shown who is under threat
In a trial application of the new criteria, two companies known for their aggressive bitcoin accumulation strategy immediately fell under potential exclusion: Strategy itself and Japan's Metaplanet. SharpLink was also added to the watchlist. This is not a coincidence but a pattern: for such firms, a significant share of assets now consists of digital gold, which raises questions for MSCI.
It is telling that MSCI is accepting feedback from market participants until September 30, with a final decision expected to be announced no later than October 16. This leaves a narrow window for maneuver, and Strategy clearly intends to use it to the fullest.
From my point of view, this conflict goes far beyond formal procedures. MSCI is essentially trying to impose on the market an outdated notion of what constitutes a "core" asset. In an era when bitcoin is becoming a corporate reserve instrument, such criteria look like an attempt to slow down the inevitable. If the initiative is adopted, we could see a wave of exclusions that would distort the index landscape and deprive investors of access to fast-growing companies of the new economy.