MSCI Scraps Plan To Exclude Digital Asset Treasury Firms, Signals Major Rethink
In a stunning reversal, global index giant MSCI has pulled a controversial proposal that would have pushed crypto-native companies off its benchmarks. The move signals a seismic shift in how traditional finance views digital assets.
The Backtrack Heard 'Round the World
Forget the quiet, back-office memo. This was a full-throated admission that the old playbook is broken. MSCI's initial plan—to exclude firms holding crypto on their balance sheets from key indexes—drew immediate fire. Critics called it archaic, a relic from a time when Bitcoin was a niche experiment, not a trillion-dollar asset class.
The reversal isn't just procedural; it's philosophical. It acknowledges that corporate treasuries aren't just holding 'magic internet money' for speculation. They're deploying it as a strategic reserve asset, a hedge, and a new operational tool. Trying to filter them out now would be like creating a tech index but excluding companies that use cloud computing.
What the U-Turn Really Means
This is a green light for institutional adoption. Fund managers tracking MSCI indexes can now confidently invest in companies like MicroStrategy or Tesla without worrying about them getting delisted on a technicality. It validates the 'digital asset treasury' as a legitimate corporate finance strategy, moving it from the fringe to the mainstream playbook.
It also exposes the growing tension in traditional finance. On one side, you have legacy institutions clinging to clean, simple categories. On the other, a messy, hybrid reality where a gaming company can be a major NFT marketplace, and a software firm can be one of the world's largest Bitcoin holders. MSCI just sided with reality.
The New Calculus for Corporates
The message to CFOs is clear: your digital asset strategy won't automatically land you in a financial penalty box. The risk of being excluded from major indexes—a death knell for liquidity and institutional ownership—has just diminished. Expect more blue-chip names to openly explore adding Bitcoin or Ethereum to their balance sheets, now that a major roadblock has been removed.
Of course, this being finance, the cynics will note that index providers make money by tracking assets, not by ignoring them. Excluding a fast-growing, volatile sector is bad for business—especially when your clients are demanding exposure. Sometimes, progress is just capitalism finding a new fee stream.
MSCI's climbdown is more than a policy change. It's a capitulation to the future. The walls between traditional finance and the digital asset ecosystem aren't just crumbling; the gatekeepers are starting to dismantle them, brick by brick. The era of crypto exclusion is over. The era of integration has begun.
MSCI Seeks Clearer Criteria For Companies Holding Crypto Assets
MSCI said it heard from investors who worry that some DATCOs look and behave like investment funds, which generally do not qualify for inclusion in its equity benchmarks.
“Distinguishing between investment companies and other companies that hold non-operating assets, such as digital assets, as part of their Core operations rather than for investment purposes requires further research and consultation with market participants,” MSCI said.
The firm added that it may need new yardsticks to judge eligibility, including measures based on financial statements and other indicators, as it broadens the review beyond crypto treasury names.
Index Methodology Rethink Buys Time For Digital Asset Treasury Firms
The rethink matters because index rules can force hands. When MSCI first floated the exclusion idea in late 2025, analysts and market participants warned it could trigger $10B to $15B of selling across dozens of listed crypto treasury firms, depending on how much passive capital tracks the affected benchmarks.
Strategy pushed back hard. In a Dec. 10 letter signed by executive chairman Michael Saylor and chief executive Phong Le, the company called the proposal “misguided” and warned it could have “profoundly harmful consequences” for capital markets and US digital asset leadership.
Wall Street analysts had also tried to quantify the hit. JPMorgan previously estimated that passive outflows tied to MSCI alone could reach about $2.8B for Strategy if MSCI forced index trackers to divest.
MSCI had originally planned to publish conclusions from its consultation by mid Jan. 2026, with any changes landing in the Feb. 2026 index review.
Tuesday’s reversal keeps the status quo in place while the firm opens a broader conversation about non operating company classifications.
